Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 433 posts

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#291

Post by corodra »

chvid wrote: post #162
delecti wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously sentiments like "640 KB is enough for everyone" hilariously failed to predict the value of faster and more powerful computers. At the same time, most people's personal use of computers hasn't kept up with the capabilities of the high-end of consumer grade products. Lots of people only really use a web browser, and even an ad-infested website will run fine on most 10-20 year old computers. You can say "we do…

> You can say "we don't need to frantically rush to deploy 5G" without also saying "nobody will ever benefit from 5G". Sure. But that just means that the products exploiting this technology won't be developed in your neighbourhood but instead in Korea or China.

How would and how many lives will be made better with 5g? Will it help people with debt? Will it increase housing supply to lower home ownership/renting costs? Will it help people stop overdosing? Maybe cool the climate a little?

No. Itll help people watch someone on youtube play Fortnite.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#292

Post by llukas »

wongarsu wrote: post #145
chvid wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how people even on a tech website seems to be stuck at "640 KB is enough for everyone". When technology gets a lot cheaper, a lot more powerful, a lot less power consuming, the magic of the market creates completely new categories of use that unlock new demand at consumers. Right now your phone has a sim-card. There might be one in your tablet or your car too. But there is not one in your TV or the lights in yo…

> But there is not one in your TV or the lights in your bathroom. But at some point telecommunications technology is going to be so cheap that drawing a wire to connect a button to a light is going to be the expensive option. For stationary objects like TVs and lights we already have wifi, and a range of simpler low-power options used by IoT basestations. What does 5G bring to the table here?

Manufacturer can bypass any user firewall.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#293

Post by corodra »

asdff wrote: post #249
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> at best it's just... faster internet Counterpoint: streaming audio and video were singularly enabled by faster internet. That is restructuring multibillion-dollar industries. The iPhone, one could argue, and through it real-time social media, are products of mobile internet. There are legitimate new capabilities that will likely erupt from cheaper, faster mobile internet. If the playground is in Shenzhen versus Sil…

It's a real shame internet is controlled by telecoms

To be fair though... are you willing to pay to run miles upon miles upon miles of copper or fiber? For free? Someone has to do it. And they really dont feel like doing and flip burgers too.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#294

Post by rayiner »

It’s very weird to see so many tech people siding with NIMBYs and hypochondriacs against technological advance.

This is just a microcosm if a larger problem: municipal governments hold back progress. Right now, my Maryland county is lobbying to get veto power over a much-needed expansion of bridge capacity between the western and eastern shores of the Chesapeake Bay. Folks are also lobbying hard to shut down already-built light rail stations in the county. Municipalities make it impossible to densify urban areas, demolish obsolete buildings, build transit, build fiber, etc. Remember when San Francisco used to stop fiber deployment because some people thought the fiber cabinets were ugly? 5G is just the latest in a long list of things where a minority of loud voices holds up progress for everyone.

Technologists are jealous of why places like Japan have such great infrastructure. They do because they don’t give local interests veto power over infrastructure. They don’t let environmental and historical preservation laws turn every attempt at infrastructure development into years to decades of litigation. Tokyo is criss-crossed with spiderwebs of fiber on utility poles. They don’t hold that up because some NIMBYs complained about the view. That’s how you make progress.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#295

Post by criddell »

chvid wrote: post #141
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> at best it's just... faster internet Counterpoint: streaming audio and video were singularly enabled by faster internet. That is restructuring multibillion-dollar industries. The iPhone, one could argue, and through it real-time social media, are products of mobile internet. There are legitimate new capabilities that will likely erupt from cheaper, faster mobile internet. If the playground is in Shenzhen versus Sil…

Funny how people even on a tech website seems to be stuck at "640 KB is enough for everyone". When technology gets a lot cheaper, a lot more powerful, a lot less power consuming, the magic of the market creates completely new categories of use that unlock new demand at consumers. Right now your phone has a sim-card. There might be one in your tablet or your car too. But there is not one in your TV or the lights in yo…

> Right now your phone has a sim-card. There might be one in your tablet or your car too. But there is not one in your TV or the lights in your bathroom. But at some point telecommunications technology is going to be so cheap that drawing a wire to connect a button to a light is going to be the expensive option.

Hopefully we don't get there before proper regulation of tech companies is put in place.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#296

Post by rayiner »

_bxg1 wrote: post #33

There's such weird marketing zealotry behind 5G. They're acting like it's going to completely reshape society, but at best it's just... faster internet. In places where the internet is already pretty fast. I can only assume it's a mixture of political and economic stakeholders that have their own reasons for really wanting it to succeed (looking competitive against China, selling new phones, etc.)

Among other things, 5G holds the promise of making traditional wired telecom regulation obsolete, by getting rid of the last mile problem, reducing the tendency toward natural monopoly, and enabling competition.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#297

Post by shshehe »

corodra wrote: post #291
chvid wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can say "we don't need to frantically rush to deploy 5G" without also saying "nobody will ever benefit from 5G". Sure. But that just means that the products exploiting this technology won't be developed in your neighbourhood but instead in Korea or China.

How would and how many lives will be made better with 5g? Will it help people with debt? Will it increase housing supply to lower home ownership/renting costs? Will it help people stop overdosing? Maybe cool the climate a little? No. Itll help people watch someone on youtube play Fortnite.

Man your view couldn't be more myopic and shortsighted if it tried.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#298

Post by merpnderp »

corodra wrote: post #291
chvid wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can say "we don't need to frantically rush to deploy 5G" without also saying "nobody will ever benefit from 5G". Sure. But that just means that the products exploiting this technology won't be developed in your neighbourhood but instead in Korea or China.

How would and how many lives will be made better with 5g? Will it help people with debt? Will it increase housing supply to lower home ownership/renting costs? Will it help people stop overdosing? Maybe cool the climate a little? No. Itll help people watch someone on youtube play Fortnite.

Just because you’re mostly correct doesn’t mean you’re correct. My watch is always asking me if I’ve fallen and need emergency services (I horse around a lot), but wearable connected medical devices are and will be a big thing. I have lots of friends and family who kill time taking online courses or watching educational videos.

This is the same argument badmouthing the Internet because of social media which ignores that the presocial media Internet is still there and just as vibrant.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#299

Post by jodrellblank »

inimino wrote: post #207
jodrellblank wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dismissing other people's information and sources without knowing what they are or where they're from, assuming your knowledge is automatically superior, laughing at them, is similarly just being arrogant. And then, after being pushed, admitting you have a vested interest in making them sound better and your job depends on it, isn't a good look.

Information is not equally likely to be valid regardless of the source it came from. This is the curse of being an expert (on anything) and engaging with kooks who think they are experts because they read something on the internet. If you had direct experiences and you share them, those shouldn't be ridiculed, but if you pass on information that is not from your direct experience and which people who have direct expe…

The point is not that information from all sources is equally valid, the point is the parent is dismissing information without knowing what the source even is. I don't know the original commenter, their knowledge, or their source. But as the replying person says "assumption that my knowledge is more" - that is an assumption. Why not check that assumption?

Then they go on to say "I mean my sources are the actual 5G Standards," - And it's never been the case that a standards document sounds great, but doesn't work well or is implemented badly? Or tries to address a problem but doesn't? "and on implementing electronics" - so not actual experience of trying it?

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#300

Post by ghaff »

michaelmrose wrote: post #216
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

360 video is not going to take off because it’s a sucky experience. “Real” VR with positional tracking makes you feel like you’re in another space, and has lots of potential for that reason. 360 video does not.

I'm not sure what 360 video even is. AR stands for Augmented reality, the overlay of information and artificial constructs over the real world in such a way as as one can both perceive the artificial constructs and interact with the real world simultaneously. Nobody will view this by holding their phone up and looking at the world through their phone screen. Real products in development use glasses. Science fiction d…

I'm certainly open to a future with a Google Glass that works well (or even Google Contacts?) and its users aren't widely viewed as "Glassholes." But, in the meantime, a lot of use cases can be explored with devices that many people already own and that aren't considered obtrusive in many contexts the way that computer eyewear is.
Post reply on HN