5 ms·

Sigh, these always read like such PR department unclear jargony press releases. "...The 5G Challenge would leverage the innovative capabilities of the software

Sigh, these always read like such PR department unclear jargony press releases. "...The 5G Challenge would leverage the innovative capabilities of the software development and telecommunications technology communities to enable more open implementations of 5G systems, including end-user equipment, the radio access network, and the core network, with a focus on the 5G protocol stack software. " How about: "We want to run a game with a big reward. A game that gets people to come up with the most innovative, clever, secure, resilient ways to use 5G for our military that we haven't seen before. Do you have ideas for how 5G can be implemented in open hardware or software? Do you have ideas for how we can structure a game and its reward to achieve something like that? Let us know if you have ideas, and you may be able to be a part of something big."

aWidebrant 6y ago
Personally, I'll have the former style of business jargon over the latter. Sure, "leverage the innovative" doesn't mean anything, but at least it's not actively infantilizing.
- Frondo 6y ago
  Yeah, seems like trying to get away from the business speak got us to job descriptions that call for ninja rock stars. I'll take the business jargon.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  Doesn't sound infantilizing to me. It reads like normal people talk. That's good. Infantilizing is what 'Frondo refers to, "ninja rock stars" job descriptions. What they have in common with business jargon is using a lot of words to communicate near-zero actual content. They use language to press emotional buttons in the audience to create a desired atmosphere (importance and fun, respectively). I think GP did a really good job, and I prefer their take.
gostsamo 6y ago
Or you can read this as: We are behind in the game and we don't have anyone capable in this sphere. Nokia, Erikson, Huawey, and Samsung have all the market now and we need american presence there. We can't create a state company, so we will try to break the leaders either by sanctions or by diminishing the value of their IP through open standards until the moment when the standards are open enough to favorite our proprietary IP using them.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  >Having dropped the ball on cisco being shit, the DOD is now willing to spend some cash to look like they are holding at least one ball in this market...
- Daho0n 6y ago
  /end thread Sorry, but I just had to. This is likely the exact scenario. Well put.
- seebetter 6y ago
  We shouldn’t conflate foreign governments with the US government. Although its form is outside the legality of the Constitution, the core principles of America exceed that of any other nation. So yes the premier defender of classical liberalism should develop technology for open standards and true individual freedom. Not complex convoluted systems that dole out token privileges to compliant citizens who pay all taxes fees and licensing requirements to be able to communicate with others and learn online.
  - gostsamo 6y ago
    Aham, so, why don't they break Oracle, if licenses are such an evil? I admire your patriotism, but the rest of us are not bound by it. At least I think that the nice thing about liberal democracy is that it is easy for one to defend it when they are also the one who has entitled themselves to define what it is. TBH, I'm okay with open 5G and even more, I'm just pointing that the sudden desire of the US government to create it is not from the purity of their hearts. The bad thing will be if they try to shape the openness in such a way that it will favoritize the US companies and hinder anyone else.

aWidebrant 6y ago

Personally, I'll have the former style of business jargon over the latter. Sure, "leverage the innovative" doesn't mean anything, but at least it's not actively infantilizing.

Frondo 6y ago
Yeah, seems like trying to get away from the business speak got us to job descriptions that call for ninja rock stars. I'll take the business jargon.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
TeMPOraL 6y ago
Doesn't sound infantilizing to me. It reads like normal people talk. That's good. Infantilizing is what 'Frondo refers to, "ninja rock stars" job descriptions. What they have in common with business jargon is using a lot of words to communicate near-zero actual content. They use language to press emotional buttons in the audience to create a desired atmosphere (importance and fun, respectively). I think GP did a really good job, and I prefer their take.

gostsamo 6y ago

Or you can read this as: We are behind in the game and we don't have anyone capable in this sphere. Nokia, Erikson, Huawey, and Samsung have all the market now and we need american presence there. We can't create a state company, so we will try to break the leaders either by sanctions or by diminishing the value of their IP through open standards until the moment when the standards are open enough to favorite our proprietary IP using them.

LatteLazy 6y ago
>Having dropped the ball on cisco being shit, the DOD is now willing to spend some cash to look like they are holding at least one ball in this market...
Daho0n 6y ago
/end thread Sorry, but I just had to. This is likely the exact scenario. Well put.
seebetter 6y ago
We shouldn’t conflate foreign governments with the US government. Although its form is outside the legality of the Constitution, the core principles of America exceed that of any other nation. So yes the premier defender of classical liberalism should develop technology for open standards and true individual freedom. Not complex convoluted systems that dole out token privileges to compliant citizens who pay all taxes fees and licensing requirements to be able to communicate with others and learn online.
- gostsamo 6y ago
  Aham, so, why don't they break Oracle, if licenses are such an evil? I admire your patriotism, but the rest of us are not bound by it. At least I think that the nice thing about liberal democracy is that it is easy for one to defend it when they are also the one who has entitled themselves to define what it is. TBH, I'm okay with open 5G and even more, I'm just pointing that the sudden desire of the US government to create it is not from the purity of their hearts. The bad thing will be if they try to shape the openness in such a way that it will favoritize the US companies and hinder anyone else.