Common Networks bets 5G will replace cable internet in your home
On 11/12/19 19:16, jim bell wrote:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/12/common-networks-bets-5g-will-replace-cable-i...
Doubtful. You will always be able to get more bandwidth out of wires than out of any wireless connection. The more I read about problems with 5G (health and radio astronomy related are the last ones I remember), the more I have doubts about it, and especially wild, far-flung predictions like this one. -- Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@rushpost.com> http://www.rantroulette.com http://www.skqrecordquest.com
On November 12, 2019 6:43:11 PM PST, "Shawn K. Quinn" <skquinn@rushpost.com> wrote:
On 11/12/19 19:16, jim bell wrote:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/12/common-networks-bets-5g-will-replace-cable-i...
Doubtful. You will always be able to get more bandwidth out of wires than out of any wireless connection.
The more I read about problems with 5G (health
Lower power, 5" wavelength, will operate at 4g almost all the time (because 2 watts at 240ghz most likely won't even make it the length of a football field and is entirely line-of-sight. Even at 2.4 ghz rain fog and dust interferes with signal strength.) What 'health problem'?
and radio astronomy
That was over YEARS ago. Don't EVEN blame that on 5g. It's microwave SMOG caused by PULSE CODE MODULATED SQUARE WAVES, not 5g specifically. The 'corner' of the square wave emits even order harmonics from DC to Daylight and always have since PCM was a brand new thing. Back when there WAS NO PUBLIC INTERNET (yeah... that long ago) the Astronomy mags were already reporting that the Radio Astronomy equipment was being moved to remote places like Hawaiian mountaintops (There's an ongoing battle with the natives in Hawaii about one right now https://www.space.com/thirty-meter-telescope-protests-close-observatories.ht.... One media outlet is whining 'Fuck the natives. We're losing valuable observation time.' Yeah... Fuck them too.) Rr Sent from my Androgyne dee-vice with K-9 Mail related are the last ones I remember),
the more I have doubts about it, and especially wild, far-flung predictions like this one.
On Wednesday, November 13, 2019, 07:27:37 AM PST, Razer <g2s@riseup.net> wrote: On November 12, 2019 6:43:11 PM PST, "Shawn K. Quinn" <skquinn@rushpost.com> wrote:
On 11/12/19 19:16, jim bell wrote:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/12/common-networks-bets-5g-will-replace-cable-i...
Doubtful. You will always be able to get more bandwidth out of wires than out of any wireless connection.
The more I read about problems with 5G (health
Lower power, 5" wavelength, will operate at 4g almost all the time (because 2 watts at 240ghz most likely won't even make it the length of a football field and is entirely line-of-sight. Even at 2.4 ghz rain fog and dust interferes with signal strength.) What 'health problem'?
It won't be immediately obvious, but limited range isn't necessarily a disadvantage: It may sometimes actually be an advantage. The concept of "cellular" systems is that the same frequencies can be used 'nearby' (what constitutes 'nearby' depends on factors...). A single city or suburban block could be served by one (or a couple) of cell sites. An old friend of mine (Who, like me, is a 'ham', an amateur radio operator) who was working on the problem for a company explained it this way: There are certain frequencies which are fairly strongly absorbed by oxygen molecules in the atmosphere. You'd actually benefit if you could place more (and very cheap) cells. I'm talking about frequencies of about 60 gigahertz. Extremely high frequency | | | | | | | | | | | Extremely high frequency Compared to lower bands, radio waves in this band have high atmospheric attenuation: they are absorbed by the ga... | | | Such frequencies, if used, won't interfere with terrestrial uses. related are the last ones I remember),
the more I have doubts about it, and especially wild, far-flung predictions like this one.
On November 13, 2019 9:19:05 AM PST, jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, November 13, 2019, 07:27:37 AM PST, Razer <g2s@riseup.net> wrote:
On November 12, 2019 6:43:11 PM PST, "Shawn K. Quinn" <skquinn@rushpost.com> wrote:
On 11/12/19 19:16, jim bell wrote:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/12/common-networks-bets-5g-will-replace-cable-i...
Doubtful. You will always be able to get more bandwidth out of wires than out of any wireless connection.
The more I read about problems with 5G (health
Lower power, 5" wavelength, will operate at 4g almost all the time (because 2 watts at 240ghz most likely won't even make it the length of a football field and is entirely line-of-sight. Even at 2.4 ghz rain fog and dust interferes with signal strength.) What 'health problem'?
It won't be immediately obvious, but limited range isn't necessarily a disadvantage: It may sometimes actually be an advantage.
Remember Ricochet? Like that. You connected to a ricochet node on a nearby phone pole and it went into the hardwired phone system. This HAS TO BE safer than 50/100 watt phased array cellsites.
The concept of "cellular" systems is that the same frequencies can be used 'nearby' (what constitutes 'nearby' depends on factors...). A single city or suburban block could be served by one (or a couple) of cell sites. An old friend of mine (Who, like me, is a 'ham', an amateur radio operator) who was working on the problem for a company explained it this way: There are certain frequencies which are fairly strongly absorbed by oxygen molecules in the atmosphere. You'd actually benefit if you could place more (and very cheap) cells. I'm talking about frequencies of about 60 gigahertz. Extremely high frequency
| | | | | |
|
| | | | Extremely high frequency
Compared to lower bands, radio waves in this band have high atmospheric attenuation: they are absorbed by the ga... |
I was operating as KC6NFR (coded tech) when the manufacturers were selling all the senile rubes on the bands 1.2 ghz as the next big thing and the 'thing' could barely work through the walls of a building... SUCKERS!
|
|
Such frequencies, if used, won't interfere with terrestrial uses.
Meh. All pulse coded modulation messes with terrestrial use of hyper-sensitive microwave receiving equipment like Radio Astronomy gear, and it's broadband noise. In analog daze RA RF engineers used to build elaborate notch filters and such. Doesn't work with PCM, Square Waves. The 'corner' of the 'square' generates even order harmonics "from DC to Daylight". I SUPPOSE, like audio, one could use 'fast-fourier filtering' (Meyer Sound could make any room's reverberation disappear, even in Commodore/Amiga daze, and did so for the Grateful Dead for years) but I haven't heard of it, and due to the upper range of frequencies involved it would take one really fast computer and most likely machine/assembly language based software that I don't believe exists. Regarding harmonics... In case you never noticed, blues and rock musicians who like distortion prefer tube amps which always have a touch of 'fuzz' and really go for it when driven hard. Jazz and classical musicians who like a clean sound pick transitor amps. Tube amps deliver odd order harmonics when overdriven... 1st, 3rd, 5th... as is with music. Transistor amps generate even order harmonics when pushed and sound nasty, but jazzeers and classical musicians never overdrive their amps so...
related are the last ones I remember),
the more I have doubts about it, and especially wild, far-flung predictions like this one.
Some people... SOME PEOPLE... say the 5g fearmongering is russian influenced as a way of delaying the US 5g rollout. Most of the 5g fear-freaks I've met also think Putin is hiding in their closet, so if that's the case the 5g Russophobes are in reality "Putin's Puppets". That would be soooo apropos. Rr Sent from my Androgyne dee-vice with K-9 Mail
participants (3)
-
jim bell -
Razer -
Shawn K. Quinn