Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security • Hacker News Board

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#221

Post by dang » Sat, May 09, 2020, 11:49 AM UTC

inetknght wrote: post #10

kryogen1c wrote: post #6

I don't understand this. Is the DoD not subject to FCC regulation? Are there multiple bands that different types of GPS signals use (civilian vs military)? My understanding of GPS was that it is used in _civilization critical_ applications like satellite synchronization and plane/ship navigation. How could any sane human approve an interference with this traffic?

> How could any sane human approve an interference with this traffic? I think your assumption that people in charge at the top of the United States are sane isn't a valid assumption.

Please keep this sort of flamebait off HN. Maybe you don't owe the people in charge better, but you owe this community better if you're posting here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#222

Post by ta17711771 » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:47 PM UTC

duskwuff wrote: post #134

grawprog wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I dislike how the conspiracy nonsense has kind of covered up the actual criticisms of 5g that existed prior to suddenly everyone thinking it's a great idea and if you don't, you're a conspiracy theorist. I seem to recall this revolved around, questionable tangible benefits vs cost of deployment, poor penetration of 5g signals through structures, a lack of devices or internet plans to take advantage of 5g,…

One has to wonder if some of the nonsense criticisms of 5G (causes disease, government conspiracy, etc) have been deliberately amplified to drown out legitimate technical concerns.

Bingo...

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#223

Post by finnthehuman » Sat, May 09, 2020, 3:21 PM UTC

beams_of_light wrote: post #157

While sometimes considered controversial for decisions made on intangible things like net neutrality, I expect the FCC would have a much better understanding of the electromagnetic spectrum than the military, and having all of them approve this tells me they see no threat to GPS from Ligado's spectrum use. Makes me wonder what the politics are behind this, especially when I see someone like Jim Inhofe involved.

>I expect the FCC would have a much better understanding of the electromagnetic spectrum than the military

Why? The FCC is concerned with coordinating peaceful use of commercial RF products (and experimentation that could lead to new commercial products). The military operates in hostile RF environments, conducts Signals Intelligence, and has to mitigate signal intelligence conducted against them. The demand for the absolute cutting edge of RF expertise is all on the military side.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#224

Post by omneity » Sat, May 09, 2020, 9:09 PM UTC

johnbrodie wrote: post #142

omneity wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What experience is 5G, assuming you actually have access to it, going to improve? Remotely operated robotics due to the much lower latency. Think near instant reaction times while operating a drone with VR goggles, and all the implication this could have. Also many other use cases become more feasible: - Self driving cars with human fallbacks - Safer car racing - Actually smart delivery, where a single person can m…

I'll bite, can you expand just a smidge on "safer car racing"? I'm trying to figure out how 5G enables that and failing.

Yeah what @Talanes said in a sibling thread. If drivers are not physically present in the racing car then not only they're safer physically but cars could be designed without a human driver in mind (lighter, higher acceleration etc)

There's a relative to this already with first person view drone racing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZLimUDUJTA