Interesting. So basically a state driven economy?
Check out the fraction of GDP controlled by government. That train has left the station a long while ago, in all countries.
Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
21–30 of 55 posts
Re: Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
#22Sigh, these always read like such PR department unclear jargony press releases. "...The 5G Challenge would leverage the innovative capabilities of the software development and telecommunications technology communities to enable more open implementations of 5G systems, including end-user equipment, the radio access network, and the core network, with a focus on the 5G protocol stack software. " How about: "We want to…
Or you can read this as: We are behind in the game and we don't have anyone capable in this sphere. Nokia, Erikson, Huawey, and Samsung have all the market now and we need american presence there. We can't create a state company, so we will try to break the leaders either by sanctions or by diminishing the value of their IP through open standards until the moment when the standards are open enough to favorite our pro…
[flagged]
Re: Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
#23in 2020 US AG[1] floated the idea of buying shares in Nokia or Ericsson to be able to have a say in this space (talking about "controlling the means of production" lol). For natsec this isn't enough which seems to be also the conclusion of DoD.
Having worked in this space, a company bidding here will not be able to do this without spending billions on implementing and being part of the non-military commercial market (and paying commercial rates for engineers to build it). It took commercial vendors nearly a decade to build 5G and the only reason they were so "fast" was because they had already experienced engineers on their payroll who understood the basics of 3G/4G.
if they accept bids it would be more realistic to just focus on a MIL spec equivalent documents of 3GPP specs and then have the Nokia or Ericsson sites in the US build it for them. Even they do this there is still the "Outsourced elephant in the room":
"5G: The outsourced elephant in the room" https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/5g-elephant-in-the-room/
If they're really serious about natsec the only way forward would be a complete isolation for the military network.
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/1aa61918-48fc-11ea-aeb3-955839e06...
Re: Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or you can read this as: We are behind in the game and we don't have anyone capable in this sphere. Nokia, Erikson, Huawey, and Samsung have all the market now and we need american presence there. We can't create a state company, so we will try to break the leaders either by sanctions or by diminishing the value of their IP through open standards until the moment when the standards are open enough to favorite our pro…
[flagged]
Aham, so, why don't they break Oracle, if licenses are such an evil? I admire your patriotism, but the rest of us are not bound by it. At least I think that the nice thing about liberal democracy is that it is easy for one to defend it when they are also the one who has entitled themselves to define what it is.
TBH, I'm okay with open 5G and even more, I'm just pointing that the sudden desire of the US government to create it is not from the purity of their hearts. The bad thing will be if they try to shape the openness in such a way that it will favoritize the US companies and hinder anyone else.
Re: Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or you can read this as: We are behind in the game and we don't have anyone capable in this sphere. Nokia, Erikson, Huawey, and Samsung have all the market now and we need american presence there. We can't create a state company, so we will try to break the leaders either by sanctions or by diminishing the value of their IP through open standards until the moment when the standards are open enough to favorite our pro…
[flagged]
> Although its form is outside the legality of the Constitution, the core principles of America exceed that of any other nation.
BWAHAHAHHAHAHAHA... wow, just wow.
Re: Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
#26apt-get install 5G
Re: Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
#27[deleted]
Re: Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
#28If the U.S. DOD is involved, then no -- it will not be
'open'.
Americans always play weird games with the truth, what they think you'll allow them to get away with when they lie straight to your face.
Re: Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
#29If the U.S. DOD is involved, then no -- it will not be 'open'. Americans always play weird games with the truth, what they think you'll allow them to get away with when they lie straight to your face.
(Brought to you on the open internet which grew directly from a DoD project.)
Re: Department of Defense and Department of Commerce to Develop Open 5G Systems
#30Sigh, these always read like such PR department unclear jargony press releases. "...The 5G Challenge would leverage the innovative capabilities of the software development and telecommunications technology communities to enable more open implementations of 5G systems, including end-user equipment, the radio access network, and the core network, with a focus on the 5G protocol stack software. " How about: "We want to…
Personally, I'll have the former style of business jargon over the latter. Sure, "leverage the innovative" doesn't mean anything, but at least it's not actively infantilizing.
Doesn't sound infantilizing to me. It reads like normal people talk. That's good.
Infantilizing is what 'Frondo refers to, "ninja rock stars" job descriptions. What they have in common with business jargon is using a lot of words to communicate near-zero actual content. They use language to press emotional buttons in the audience to create a desired atmosphere (importance and fun, respectively).
I think GP did a really good job, and I prefer their take.