5G Is Likely to Put Weather Forecasting at Risk

Re:5G Is Likely to Put Weather Forecasting at Risk by pretendscholar on Tuesday April 16, 2019 @04:07PM (#19676836)

>I'm not saying it's imperative we go there. Only that that's where we're headed. For better of worse. Like it or not.

You're doing that thing where people say it isn't something only to reveal in a few extra sentences that you mean the opposite. "It's not imperative but its going to certainly happen."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:5G Is Likely to Put Weather Forecasting at Risk by chiefalchemist on Tuesday April 16, 2019 @04:31PM (#19677038)

No. Really. I wasn't :) I simply didn't want my analysis to be misinterpreted as an endorsement. Without that that disclaimer / clarification those reading will default to confirmation bias and have me casting a vote, so to speak, in favor of 5G.

Just the facts Jack :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:5G Is Likely to Put Weather Forecasting at Risk by thefifthsetpin on Tuesday April 16, 2019 @04:51PM (#19677184)

I love this accidental "does free will exist?" discussion.

pretendscholar is asserting that because it will happen, it must happen. You're arguing that it need not despite the fact that it will.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:5G Is Likely to Put Weather Forecasting at Risk by pretendscholar on Tuesday April 16, 2019 @05:10PM (#19677360)

Well I'm just quoting op and the incoherence of the first part as it relates to the second.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:5G Is Likely to Put Weather Forecasting at Risk by pbhjpbhj on Tuesday April 16, 2019 @06:10PM (#19677812)

They don't read as incoherent to me. Imperative doesn't mean "will happen" it means "must happen" (to achieve some end).

So the quoted comment to me says "it doesn't need to happen (not imperative) but it's what likely will happen (where it's going)". No internal inconsistency.

[ Parent | on HN ]