16 ms·
Nokia selected by NASA to build cellular network on the moon
- mcfly1985 6y agoThe best evidence that we never landed on the moon is the fact that we aren't currently there. If we truly had the ability to put people up there, we'd have built a cellular network decades ago. But now we've "forgotten" how to do it. The moon race was great piece of propaganda and Hollywood theatrics, I'll give them that.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- HenryKissinger 6y agoAnd so the legendary indestructibility of Nokia's phones shall be put to the test once more. The very first or two digits of any phone number on Earth are the country calling codes. We should add extra digits for a planetary calling code.
- hnarn 6y agoAlmost all of them are taken but 999 is still free!
- DanBC 6y ago999 is the emergency number in the UK and a few other places. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/999_(emergency_telephone_number) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/999_(emergency_telephone_numbe...
- hnarn 6y agoThat's far from ideal, but country codes in phone numbers are also always prefixed, so a phone number in country code 999 would never start with that number, it would either be +999 [something] on a smartphone for example, or the old school equivalent 00 999 [something].
- can16358p 6y agoImagine accidentally calling an astronaut. Or doing FaceTime/Zoom with them on the moon. It would be interesting.
- reaperducer 6y ago"I have great news about the extended warranty on your moon buggy!"
- secondcoming 6y ago"According to our records you've been involved in an accident..." (Maybe that's UK only)
- hexscrews 6y agoAnd so, in 2050, the Nokia Shield Initiative was launched. 500 (american) football field sized Nokia 3310's were put into orbit to protect the earth.
- iso1631 6y agoMost country codes are 3 digits. There are a few 2 digits, and I think parts the old USSR and the North American Dialing region are the only 1-digit codes.
- pilsetnieks 6y agoNokia isn't doing the phones, that's maybe why you're getting the downvotes; On the second point, however, I kinda agree. People are mentioning some of the +8XX international codes but we should really go hierarchical. A separate higher level code for Earth, for Moon, other planetary bodies; then eventually higher level codes for solar systems, etc. I really doubt they'll even be doing phone numbers, though.
- bluGill 6y agoThere is no point in doing solar systems - the turn around time to the next star is ~ 8 years. Nobody will make a phone call with that sort of latency. It will be email (or videos) if anything at all. Even in this solar system only Venus and Mars can you even think about a phone call from earth - and then only for a few days when the orbits align closely. The rest of the time the latency will be too bad. Even when it is possible you will need special training to deal with the latency - it will be more of a monologue not a conversation, with pre-planed handoff times for the other side to state their bit. The moon will be possible, but most people who try it will find it annoying enough that they will avoid it. If grandma didn't go with you that it will be the only way to talk to the grandkids so it will be done, but if the moon ever becomes self-sustaining expect that there isn't a lot of communication back and forth. There is a reason satellite never took off for long distance calls - it works but people hated it because the other party didn't respond fast enough. Geosynchronous orbit is only used for calls where there isn't an underseas cable (I don't know if any such satellites are even left in orbit).
- pilsetnieks 6y agoI know, I was being facetious. It's possible they won't even do phone numbers for the moon - LTE gives a data connection, and you use whatever protocol on top, VoIP, Signal, Whatsapp, Facetime, whatever.
- pintxo 6y agoI wonder how bad the roaming charges will be for the astronauts if they accidentally use their earthly iPhone SIM with the Moon network.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- timdux 6y agoAll terrestrial base stations (1) require GPS signal for time synchronization. Most of them can run for 4 hours - 24 hours without GPS, but that's it, after that holdover period it's dead. There is no GPS signal on the moon. That's a problem. (1) except micro base stations
- kitteh 6y agoThey could use their own timing source, though? I recall back in the day being able to pull timing source off a circuit.
- timdux 6y agoYes, that's the clock holdover circuit, usually built using a OCXO or double OCXO or rubidium clock. It's good for 4 to 24 hours. Example: [0] https://www.rakon.com/19-rak-product/rak-product-ocxo https://www.rakon.com/19-rak-product/rak-product-ocxo
- snypher 6y agoIt's a problem being worked on, but it should be possible to use the existing GPS satellites on Moon. Also, given it is just being used as a time source and not for navigation, it should be possible to make a moon-based time signal with less hardware units? https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2019/nasa-eyes-gps-at-the-moon-for-artemis-missions https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2019/nasa-eyes-gps-at-t...
- anticensor 6y agoLow lunar orbits are unfortunately too unstable.
- cozzyd 6y agoThere's only like an extra 25 dB of path loss to the moon than Earth since GPS satellites are at orbits of 20,000 km. Of course the GPS antennas are probably oriented facing the Earth, but you'd still see GPS satellies on the far side (with a bit more path loss). Since GPS has a 43 dB processing gain from the modulation scheme, and thermal noise levels on the moon are similar to Earth (I think?), that means you need -150 dBm or so at the receiver. I believe newer GPS satellites have an EIRP of 50 dBm or so, so receiving GPS signals on the moon might work without even using a high gain antenna. Use of a high gain antenna would probably completely compensate for the increased path loss to the moon.
- BuildTheRobots 6y agoI was going to make a silly joke about roaming charges being astronomical, but with the round trip time being approximately 2.7 seconds I think you'd actually have just enough time to request vectors and do a location update... maybe you will be able to bring your own SIM and device.
- simonh 6y agoLaunch-pad Ninja 1: "Great launch, good job team." Launch-pad Ninja 2: "Let me take a team selfie.... that's funny I had my phone here somewhere. Let me check Find My iPhone...... er, oops!"
- DaniloDias 6y agoThe moon is going to have a dense fleet of Wireless IoT I guess.
- iso1631 6y agoWith Blackjack. And Hookers. In fact forget the cellular network!
- FerretFred 6y ago"Something went wrong." oh dear.. Send an engineer I guess :)
- TedDoesntTalk 6y ago> remote control of lunar rovers and other robotic devices And what about the known vulnerabilities of LTE/4G?
- tengbretson 6y agoCool and all, but I'd settle for a cellular network in Wyoming.
- LinuxBender 6y agoI've been wanting to move to Wy, but I can't figure out what locations actually have decent internet. Looks like Casper has gigabit fiber? That's all I can tell so far.
- macjohnmcc 6y agoIn live in San Antonio and while you can get gigabit AT&T even Google Fiber (I can get either) many neighborhoods have 25-50 mbit max from AT&T so you get whatever your cable provider (Spectrum offers).
- scarecrowbob 6y agoI was living in far south Austin last year, and I could only get ATT DSL (10M down, 4M up).
- AirborneUnicorn 6y agoI'm in San Antonio as well and I've had gigabit fiber in both downtown (currently) and north side residences.
- andjd 6y agoFor a second there, I was like "when did the mattress company relocate to Wyoming..."
- Miner49er 6y agoWhat do you consider decent? Gigabit only? You can get at least 60-100 Mbps in most towns, as long as you aren't out of town. Probably gigabit if you're willing to pay a lot. Spectrum is the main option in the big towns. Looks like you can get gigabit from them in the big towns for $110/month for the first 12 months. Not sure what it would go to after that. If you live out of town, or in a really small town, you're gonna have tougher luck
- timdorr 6y agoAs usual, The Onion's take on this is fantastic: https://www.theonion.com/nasa-builds-4g-tower-on-moon-tastefully-disguised-as-pi-1845414052 https://www.theonion.com/nasa-builds-4g-tower-on-moon-tastef...
- cbsks 6y agoI assumed it would be about the moon aliens protesting about the tower going in their backyard. NIMMBY: not in my moon back yard :)
- dr_orpheus 6y agoWell done. That reminds me of one of those cell phone towers disguised as a tree I drive by quite often. It is in the middle of a very large, very flat plain. I don't think there is another tree within 10 miles of it.
- reaperducer 6y agoI see cell towers in the desert that are "disguised" to look like pine trees in places where pine trees haven't grown in 10,000 years. https://twitter.com/Reaperducer/status/1153046208442540032 https://twitter.com/Reaperducer/status/1153046208442540032
- DanBC 6y agoHere's a Google Maps image of one of these "trees" from a distance. This one is in the UK. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.8765015,-2.0253306,3a,75y,29.22h,87.15t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sGPX0rjVlWrkry82PSHfFnA!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.8765015,-2.0253306,3a,75y,...
- dr_orpheus 6y agoThat's so strange. I don't see why they couldn't just pick a color that matched the other trees around it even slightly. The out-of-place ones I see that are among other trees are usually out-of-place because they are just so much taller, not a completely different color.
- ortusdux 6y agoI would love to see some mock-ups of orbital patterns for a moon based starlink-like network. How does the relative lack of an atmosphere affect things? How large of a constellation do you need when the orbital body is 1/4 the size of earth?
- nickik 6y agoI would not be very hard to do. The principle problem is just that the moons gravity is unstable so low flying objects would need quite a bit of fuel to stay in the correctorbit. However, since the distance to earth anyway is the limiting factor you don't need low flying sats at all. A handful of sats could do a pretty good job with global coverage.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- kibwen 6y ago> the moons gravity is unstable How so? Even if, say, its mass were very unevenly distributed, there should still be a center of gravity around which to orbit, yeah?
- _Microft 6y agoYou can read about this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_concentration_(astronomy)#Effect_of_lunar_mascons_on_satellite_orbits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_concentration_(astronomy)...
- api 6y agoIt would be way, way easier on the Moon because there's no atmosphere to attenuate signal. You would need fewer satellites and lower power. Since you could build enormously tall towers in 1/6 gravity satellites might not even be economical compared with a few big towers.
- bouncycastle 6y agoIf there is intelligent life somewhere out there, when they travel to space, I wonder if they also insist on operating technology that is at least one generation back, for the reason of "proven reliability"? I'd say probably yes. If we ever get a visit from them, that "shmux semiconductor" will be the old model...
- aeortiz 6y agoits so they can have some planned obsolescence
- FlyMoreRockets 6y agoLots of profit in those service contracts.
- tpmx 6y ago5G base station/terminal power usage isn't very optimized yet.
- spelunker 6y ago"Greetings humans! Our vessel has arrived to destroy your planet! Please wait a few months though because this is the old model that takes a while to charge up, sorry about that..."
- ralmidani 6y agohttps://youtu.be/2XUnMiERBj4 https://youtu.be/2XUnMiERBj4
- ehnto 6y agoGiven the nature of space travel, it will likely be a very old model indeed. Unless they have FTL!
- bluGill 6y agoIf they don't have FTL (including no time effects) they will never come. Space is too large to go anywhere useful. The nearest start is ~4 light years away, at 1/10th the speed of light (vastly faster than we know how to go) it is 40 years to get here! We have done a lot of searching for life and haven't found it, the closer the planet is, the more likely we are to find it, thus I think it is safe to concluded there is no life within 20 light years or so. At 20 light years communication via radio is hard to establish just because turn around time for questions won't be answered in a lifetime. (It will be interesting learning about their Roman Empire history, but if they explain science and there is even one thing we don't get the person who sends the what do you mean question is retired/dead before the answer arrives - unless a few years latter we figure it out anyway. Take the civilization 20 light years away, either they left before they even know we existed (we didn't have any emissions that indicated intelligence, though they might be able to detect life), and so they are not equipped to deal with us. If they want to take over - they didn't break enough weapons because they didn't expect to need them. Even if life is common in the universe, it isn't common in any area where an intelligent civilization can expect to actually reach without FTL.
- reaperducer 6y agoDoes this mean the ITU is going to assign the moon a country code? I vote for +6666 (MOON). Who decides what parts of the moon get what area codes? Imagine how long it will take to get Orange to instal a landline in a crater!
- iratewizard 6y agoThe conspiracy theorists would go rabid.
- toast0 6y agoI like it, but +66 is Thailand already. It would probably get one of the available +87x or +88x codes. If they aren't just going to issue numbers from the home country.
- reaperducer 6y agoI like it, but +66 is Thailand already. Maybe Thailand could be reassigned. Like when Mexico dropped out of +1 to become +52. Or maybe instead of +, we dial & to get off-planet.
- iso1631 6y agoYou're suggesting an entire country of millions of people change their phone numbers because America decides that it wants to create a new international area code which happens to match the word "moon" in English?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- CrazyPyroLinux 6y agoWatch Elon implement this as an OTA update to Starlink without breaking a sweat, while NASA burns billions just to prototype a model...
- por0 6y agoAre reddit's Elon worshippers leaking to HN?
- bufferoverflow 6y agoYou're confusing respect with worship. And he was clearly joking.
- por0 6y agoI'm not
- CrazyPyroLinux 6y agoIndeed I was :) /whoosh
- Nokinside 6y agoRadiation environment on the moon is worse than in the LEO. Earth's magnetic field is not protecting in the Moon. It's unclear how much rad-hard they need if they don't use it for anything safety critical. Rad-hard 90nm SoC for 4G/LTE should be relatively straightforward. Or maybe they use redundancy and use already available few generation old chipsets. Changes for thermal management and testing eats most of the budget.
- nimbius 6y agoit doesnt need to last long enough for the first permanent moon colony, just long enough to get the investors excited and bump the stock. frankly i think a moon colony thats anything but underground is a laughably myopic idea. the delta T for the moon is pretty insane.
- risyachka 6y agoMaybe, but it will definitely push technology a few steps forward. Big possibility something useful will be found along the way, maybe even in not related field but still.
- FlyMoreRockets 6y agoDelta T? Please explain. I'm familiar with DeltaV, but pretty much all the delta T usages I have seen refer to a time interval. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta-v https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta-v
- dr_orpheus 6y agoDelta T in this case is probably referring to the change between the minimum and maximum temperatures experienced on the surface of the moon. In other words, the delta between something getting really hot spending 14 days in direct sunlight with no convection to cool it down and then getting really cold spending 14 days in darkness. Delta T (for temperature) can also refer to the delta in temperature across an object as well. One side is very hot and one side is very cold. Often used when describing problems of relative thermal expansion.
- VonGuard 6y agoThis reminds me of when the Bush administration gave the contract for building a cell network in Iraq to Worldcom. And Worldcom went bankrupt. Clearly, they were not in the right position to fullfill the contract, but they were in the right position to bribe their way into the contract.
- NovemberWhiskey 6y agoIn fairness to the Bush administration (not words I often use), WorldCom went bankrupt due to a massive accounting fraud that was probably largely unrelated to their technical capability to fulfill the contract.
- addicted 6y agoNokia is a highly profitable company. I’m not seeing the comparison. Their loss making division was the phones division which was sold off a while ago.
- tekkk 6y agoWell, I wouldn't say highly profitable. Unless I am reading incorrectly they haven't been making much of profit lately. Maybe the good parts make a hefty profit but alas, as a whole it has been a pretty sad sight to see.
- SSLy 6y agoThe top management is out, we'll see next year how it changes the books.
- helsinkiandrew 6y agoNokia have an unrivalled technology and product platform, they’ve shipped millions of 4G/LTE base stations over the past decade. What makes you say they are not in a position to fulfil the contract? Presumably they’ll get a lift to the moon from NASA
- cure 6y agoThis isn't the part of Nokia you're thinking of, which made handsets. That business was sold to Microsoft in a very dubious deal, and Microsoft promptly ran it into the ground. Nokia is one of the three main players in the cell phone infrastructure market. The others are Ericsson and Huawei. There are a couple of smaller players too like Samsung and ZTE. Nokia seems like a very reasonable choice for this contract. The Chinese players were presumably out for (mostly) political reasons. So this was probably a 2 way race with Ericsson. edited: fix typo.
- helsinkiandrew 6y agoThere’s lots of comments about roaming charges and dialling codes here but despite using 4G/LTE I’m assuming this is a closed network - you won’t be able to call an astronaut without going through NASA.
- Bhilai 6y agoDumb question: What gives NASA the authority to build anything on the moon?
- ampdepolymerase 6y agoBy being in a country that is a nuclear armed superpower with veto rights on the UN Security Council. Stuff like outer space treaty only matters when the bigger players are willing enforce it.
- sobellian 6y agoAs far as I know the outer space treaty only prevents the construction of military installations, but civilian construction would be perfectly lawful under the treaty.
- leetcrew 6y agoit's fairly limited. only WMDs are explicitly prohibited. other weapons (eg, anti-satellite) are a grey area AFAIK. recon satellites and facilities for military research are fair game.
- bluGill 6y agoMilitary installations will go out the window as soon as a military has something useful to do up there. Right now it is a interesting idea but not actually practicable. When a war starts military leaders get their way if it means winning, which means the treaty will be broke if there is something useful to do in space. This is why chemical weapons treaties are signed and obeyed, while land mind treaties are not: the military of powerful countries doesn't seem chemical weapons as something they want, while landmines are useful in some situations. (If your country has signed a land mind treaty it is probably because they can count on an allied country that hasn't to place land mines. If your country hasn't signed a chemical weapons treaty it is because your military isn't very good by modern standards and so you can accept the downsides)
- vorpalhex 6y ago
- temptemptemp111 6y agoHaha... Nokia must have been in serious debt to you know who...
- sparker72678 6y agoIs the idea here that by building a 4G/LTE network they can use pre-existing hardware (or at least pre-existing technology) on future missions at much lower cost than the alternative?
- Mo3 6y agoThat’s funny. Can’t even get LTE in the countryside but sure, build a network on the moon
- JackFr 6y agoIt's crazy to think only three space programs have soft landed on the moon. And since the first in 1966, there have only been about 2 dozen soft landings on the moon. We tend to forget it's really hard to do.
- iso1631 6y agoI think the full list is Luna 9, 13, 16, 17, 20, 21, 24 (1966-1976) Surveyor 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 (1966-68) Apollo 11,12,14,15,16,17 (1969-72) Chang'e 3 and 4 (2013 + 2019)
- JackFr 6y agoThe gaps in numbers are telling. And even Apollo which was by far and away the most successful had three astronauts killed on the launchpad and Apollo 13's lunar landing scrubbed.
- mywittyname 6y agoThe later Apollo missions weren't very popular with the public and were a potential political disaster for the president. Many people felt they were an enormous waste of money. James Burke made a really great documentary mini-series in ~1980 where he interviewed a lot of the people involved in the Apollo missions. You can still find them on YouTube.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Seb-C 6y agoIs anyone aware of a date/time representation system that would work universally (including extraterrestrial places)? I just have been curious about this question for long. Sure, we could keep an earth referential on a moon base, but then what about Mars? As a software developer it is already difficult to always get dates/times properly with timezones, now imagine places which does not have 24 hours per day or the same weeks/months/years durations...
- timdux 6y agoMars calendar, each year has 24 months: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darian_calendar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darian_calendar Solar system time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_Coordinate_Time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_Coordinate_Time
- throw0101a 6y agoAlternatively: * https://www.kimstanleyrobinson.info/content/martian-calendar https://www.kimstanleyrobinson.info/content/martian-calendar See also: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timekeeping_on_Mars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timekeeping_on_Mars
- wh313 6y agoThere's Barycentric Dynamical Time, which takes time dilation into account: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_Dynamical_Time https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_Dynamical_Time NASA has actually thought through this problem and created SPICE, which lets you convert between different time systems, some relativistic and some not, as well as doing conversions between various reference frames: https://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/naif/index.html https://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/naif/index.html
- dr_orpheus 6y agoSPICE is pretty awesome. I wish that more people in the aerospace industry were aware of, including people AT NASA. I work at a company contracting on NASA projects and a couple weeks ago I had to correct their code because they weren't accounting for the leap second offset between UTC and GPS correctly. When I asked why he wrote his own function instead of using SPICE he responded "what's SPICE?". Literally people in the same building as him maintain the SPICE toolkits.
- eternalban 6y agoMicrosoft and allies seem to be winning "hearts and minds" in the DoD and related sectors of US. https://www.geekwire.com/2019/microsoft-nokia-reunite-new-alliance-5-years-failed-7b-smartphone-megadeal/ https://www.geekwire.com/2019/microsoft-nokia-reunite-new-al...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jjuuaann 6y ago“When deep space exploration ramps up, it’ll be the corporations that name everything. IBM stellar sphere, Microsoft galaxy, planet Starbucks.”
- hydrogenbonds 6y agoI see nice things like this and I wonder if they could’ve spent that money on actually making better service and proving more coverage in hard to reach areas.
- dhagz 6y agoNot to be facetious or anything, but I'd argue the moon is a hard-to-reach area with a distinct lack of coverage. Now, I don't think it's going to impact a significant number of end-users, so probably not great from that perspective.
- fsloth 6y agoWho? Nasa? Nasa is not in telco business the last time I lopked. And it’s not certainly Nokia’s business to provide cellular coverage. They provide the hardware but the actual coverage is implemented by network providers installing the hardware after purchase.
- jzer0cool 6y agoFor nostalgia they should have towers capable of their old phones. Remember this nokia ringtone? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vk4KK-gh0FM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vk4KK-gh0FM
- agumonkey 6y ago3310 already moon-grade in terms of solidity. 20 years of field tests.
- durnygbur 6y agoWonder if ads with eat chunk of astronauts broadband there as well... matter of time. Ad division in YouTube must be hysterical over a new market appearing.
- tehjoker 6y agoThe 4G/5G question seems absurd the way it was posed as a matter of mere reliability. Don't we care more about range and the odd characteristics of the moon and the vacuum of space?
- fogihujy 6y ago4G hardware is mature and fairly reliable at this point. There's probably 5G base equipment that would work too, but the client hardware is probably also an issue. 4G speeds ought to be more than enough for a lot of traffic -- it's not that the astrounauts will be streaming movies off Netflix when they're outside or anything.
- bibelo 6y agoAnyone noticed his way of speaking? Journalist type, without point at the end of their sentence, but commas. We have the same phenomenon in France: https://www.koreus.com/video/journaliste-voix-off.html https://www.koreus.com/video/journaliste-voix-off.html
- frabbit 6y agoWhen can we send Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Richard Branson and Elon Musk there so that they can chat with each other?
- ineedasername 6y agoWe'll have a cell network on the moon and still lack basic broadband access to many rural areas.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> We'll have a cell network on the moon and still lack basic broadband access to many rural areas. Probably, but then the share of the population on the moon is nondecreasing, unlike that in the rural areas at issue.
- ineedasername 6y agoIn absolute numbers, the rural population in the US has remained fairly steady. It's only decreased as a % of the total population: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/random-samplings/2016/12/life_off_the_highway.html https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/random-samplings/2016/...
- matmatmatmat 6y agoAm I the only one wondering what the point of this is?
- kristopolous 6y agoImagine you need robots and machines to work remotely on the moon without a human inside a cabin controlling things, without a line of sight and in a low power, low footprint form factor Now you have 2 options: 1. Use off the shelf Quectel and Qualcomm devices and off the shelf existing embedded hardware. Then test and develop using common terrestrial networks and harden it for radiation. Pack and deploy. 2. Use something else that requires custom design, exotic hardware, untested interoperability, custom built terrestrial towers etc... I'm going to vote on option 1 for saving time and money...
- fogihujy 6y agoYeah, 1) seems to be much more cost effective. Building the equipment on off-the-shelf hardware and software could potentially reduce the costs quite a lot, and there's no reason all the stuff around the lander shouldn't be able to communicate over standard TCP/IP instead of some proprietary protocol.
- matmatmatmat 6y agoThanks for the ideas, they seem reasonable. In passing, I'd note that I don't think cell technology would work without LoS; also, there's no atmosphere to reflect off of. I guess if they're just thinking of some comm system for the moon, it might as well be 4G. (I guess? I'm not qualified to answer this.)
- OpticalWindows 6y agoLets see if this survives the election (it probably should)
- analog31 6y agoAt least we won't have to hear that ring tone, because there's no air on the moon.
- zw123456 6y agoUh oh... Those 4G signals are what will wake up the black obelisk buried on the moon.
- tibbydudeza 6y agoWaiting for the Huawei 7G network on Mars.
- pontusrehula 6y agoWhat will be the country code for the moon? I would guess that the network must have one even though it would not be directly connected to the cellular networks on earth. Can the astronauts actually phone home using some kind of link from their network to ours?