News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by chvid on Saturday August 24, 2019 @01:30PM (#20788449)
> 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.

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by jorblumesea on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:43PM (#20789589)
Right, which is exactly what this race is about. The first widespread 5G adoption creates numerous companies around the space, which will out compete companies as they have a leg up. When other companies adopt 5g, your companies sweep in, having the expertise and the know how from years of tinkering in domestic markets.

This is what the US did with 4G and is one of the main reasons for the US's web dominance in the past decade.

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by corodra on Saturday August 24, 2019 @03:47PM (#20789298)
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, ... by merpnderp on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:01PM (#20789374)
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, ... by wongarsu on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:24PM (#20789494)
> but wearable connected medical devices are and will be a big thing

And most are served perfectly by Bluetooth Low Energy, using a smartphone as local compute, storage and network uplink. The few cases where that's not ideal are so few that they may as well use a regular 4G uplink without much downside (it's not like they need the bandwidth or will create a high device density)

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by corodra on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:32PM (#20789531)
You can already stream online courses and watch educational videos with 4g... same with wireless medical devices. What does 5g offer that 4g already hasn't?
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by lozf on Sunday August 25, 2019 @09:05PM (#20796773)
5g has higher capacity, but shorter range, so cells will need to be closer together, i.e. greater density - therefore location tracking precision will appear to improve, so the big corporations will be better able to finely tune targeted ads in HD to a more specific demographic of consumers.

5G offers:-

- bigger numbers and promise of a brighter future for consumers that are impressed by that kind of thing and are happy to trade their privacy for perceived benefits / status.

- And probably some more tangible benefits for those who would attempt to track or advertise as much as possible to monetize the masses.

- And as you clearly understand, nothing particularly beneficial to the rest of us, but we'll join in when eventually forced to through one upgrade or another as usual.

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by labawi on Monday August 26, 2019 @06:19PM (#20804344)
There might be incidental location disclosure, but even with 2/3/4G the network operator has pretty good location information, typical precision being 10s of meters or even less.
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by esmi on Saturday August 24, 2019 @05:52PM (#20789945)
Lower latency
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by corodra on Sunday August 25, 2019 @10:15AM (#20793082)
Ok, everyone says this. But by how much? Half a second? I load a video on youtube now with maybe 3 out of 5 bars and it starts playing in one maybe two seconds. I need to buy a new phone for what now? I need to agree to higher taxes or cut community spending in my city for what now? So my video goes from a 1 second load to half a second?
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by esmi on Sunday August 25, 2019 @06:08PM (#20795923)
Time to video start is a bandwidth thing. Latency is the time it takes a packet to do a round trip. Typical 4G latency in the US is about 50mS and 5G is not yet faster because it’s still heavily reliant on the 4G infrastructure. It is expected to drop to 1mS as the rollout continues. This will have a significant impact on interactive content.

I think you’re conflating a few things though.

1) 5G spec improvements which do exist and are measurable today 2) your perceived value of those improvements 3) the FCC mandates in the US, which is currently being challenged

You might not want the improvements. Others may. The real issue, IMHO, is the FCC mandates. Although the challenge has a risk for technology too. If the courts agree that there is a possible health risk to RF I have no idea what kind of pandora’s box that opens.

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by Spooky23 on Saturday August 24, 2019 @11:29PM (#20791177)
The article is about opposition to small cell 5G pole mounted antenna, which are millimeter wave transmitters to replace legacy telephone and perhaps cable. These things will be used with fixed antennas, as they cannot penetrate buildings.

5G with traditional towers is completely different and not an issue.

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by shshehe on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:00PM (#20789368)
Man your view couldn't be more myopic and shortsighted if it tried.
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by corodra on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:24PM (#20789496)
That's fine.

Prove me wrong. That's the point to a discussion. You share points of view. But if I follow your path of discourse, I could just say you're a sheep that'll believe whatever silicon valley tells you.

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by xeromal on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:52PM (#20789635)
Hey man, I get what you're trying to do and it works on reddit and hackernews, but in real life, it sucks when talking with a person who always wants a debate (re: You saying that's the point of a discussion). Stupid people like me (maybe southern attitudes?) sometimes just encourage whatever someone is talking about. If they're talking about 5G and how it could improve society, you could help them think of ideas that would work in that system rather than just begging them to prove you wrong.
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by jjeaff on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:33PM (#20789541)
I think the point being made in this thread is that we don't know what improvement it might bring. But making it available will probably spur a lot of innovators to create something amazing and useful that could definitely make your life better.
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by corodra on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:38PM (#20789556)
Okay, that's a very fair statement I can agree to.

However, I mostly argue that the taxpayer cost doesn't justify the gains. It's expensive and most counties and cities have to foot the bill or heavily subsidize it. If the telecom company wants to foot the bill. Good on them. No arguement here. If the city has to, go fuck yourselves. Its diminishing returns to a ridiculous level.

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by esmi on Saturday August 24, 2019 @05:57PM (#20789976)
Some are saying ‘no’. I just hope the courts don’t overrule them. Personally I’m ok with also allowing some to say ‘yes’. 5G’s short range nature should allow this just fine. In low population density spots the economics of 5G probably won’t work out. It’s best to let communities and companies figure it out themselves rather than have the FCC blanket it everywhere.
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by greenhatman on Saturday August 24, 2019 @05:35PM (#20789851)
5G will probably drive AR and VR adoption. Enabling remote surgery, and other things like that. Who knows what else.

Really we have no idea of the the doors it could happen. In the 90s many people thought the internet was a gimmick or a fad. Today the most successful companies are built on it. It's very likely the same will be true for 5G enabled technologies and companies.

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by Dylan16807 on Sunday August 25, 2019 @04:33AM (#20791976)
AR in a few circumstances, maybe. VR has better connection options. Remote surgery is definitely not using a cell connection.

5G is not a revolutionary tech when we already have wifi and 4G.