5 ms·

Why is 5G being treated like a big public decision that we're supposed to have an opinion on, when in reality it's coordination between chipset manufacturers an

Why is 5G being treated like a big public decision that we're supposed to have an opinion on, when in reality it's coordination between chipset manufacturers and cell tower operators that hardly involves us at all? It doesn't even seem like it's worth marketing to me, I'm not going to go out and buy a cell tower. Even selling me on 5G so I'll buy a new phone is unnecessary, the phone manufacturers could sell me on the improved performance directly.

RyanShook 5y ago
The costs to carriers will be going up and by marketing they are subtly letting us know the cost of our service plan will be going up.
JauntyHatAngle 5y ago
Don't think it's the whole story, but 3g, 4g and now 5g were used as big selling points for new phones and plans to consumers. If people start buying things based on the name, they'll form opinions on it. Most consumers purchase based on buzz words like 4g and 5g. They barely pay attention to bandwidth.
ep103 5y ago
Because Chinese companies developed 5G before American companies did. American telecarriers not only didn't initially research the technology, they refused to even agree to a standard definition. IIRC, AT&T marketed their 4G network as 5G for a while. As a result, Chinese companies had an opportunity to enter western markets with superior, government funded technology. They started making sales, notably in Canada, IIRC, before Western pushback started. From the private sector, telecoms pushed on the government to ban the Chinese technology, to buy them time to play catch-up with China. Politically, the need to protect the inadequate technology (not) developed by the private market, from a government funded program doesn't fit with the current US ideological model, so a different excuse was found. The legitimate reason: "Telecommunications infrastructure is a national security priority, and Chinese technology in this arena, due to its ties to the CCP, is a national security threat" was used. Again, a legitimate reason. It even has the bonus that it implies the current western ideology that governments should not direct private research. But this sort of market protectionism makes 5G a public policy and national security interest matter. So in order to ensure there is public support for such a policy, one of the easiest things to do, is convince the bottom-information tiers of society with conspiratorial, xenophobic, nonsense. Which is where the 5G conspiracy theories come from. You will note that the 5G conspiracy theories can be generalized into the statement "5G is evil, and is used for mind control / cancer", which really, is a dumbed-down game of telephone (pun) away from the original source material: [5G is evil] <-- The CCP is bad / national security and we must reject their tainted technology; [It is used for mind control] <-- CCP = big brother, Chinese 5G = surveillance, national security; [Cancer] <-- more tangible than 'mind control'.
- missedthecue 5y ago
  There still isn't a standard for what 5G is. Unlike 2G, 3G, and 4G LTE, which all have very specific technological definitions, 5G could be edge computing, MIMO, small cell, beamforming, and so forth. No one has actually created guidelines about what it is. At present, it seems any kind of 5G service you can actually buy is at best just new frequency spectrums that the government auctioned off in recent years.
  - cesarb 5y ago
    > There still isn't a standard for what 5G is. Unlike 2G, 3G, and 4G LTE, which all have very specific technological definitions In common usage, these "generations" always match a change in the low-level protocol used by the radios. For 1G it was analog, for 2G it was GSM, for 3G it was W-CDMA, for 4G it was LTE, and for 5G it's NR. So distinguishing between 4G and 5G is simple: if you're using LTE, it's 4G; if you're using NR, it's 5G.
  - matthewmacleod 5y ago
    This is not really true – "5G" is pretty universally accepted to refer to 3GPP Release 15, defining 5G New Radio (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G_NR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G_NR).
  - ng55QPSK 5y ago
    actually there is, ITU-R recommendation IMT2020 is 5G and only 3GPP Rel15 and following release satisfy this.
- p_l 5y ago
  A lot of 5G conspiracy theories might also correlate with incumbent ISPs (especially cable ones) who can block new wired ISPs but they can't block mobile phones - so a lot of the conspiracy theories included things like "wifi connected by cable to internet is fine" :V And 5G includes technologies that allow for much denser mesh, higher throughput, lower latency, and more clients per cell enjoying good service. So it could start supplanting wired broadband services.
- jolux 5y ago
jotm 5y ago
Age of social media. Everyone discusses topics they have zero control over to hell and back. "Hey look, we're doing Democracy with thousands of people and everyone agrees/disagrees" - it really tricks the brain into thinking it's doing something. Everyone's busy talking and believing they're doing something, we all feel good about it, there's no real need to actually do something.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
analyte123 5y ago
Microcell deployment, regardless of whatever protocols they’re using, is part of the “5G” push. If carriers suddenly put one in your front yard [1] what are you going to do, be against technology and progress? [1] https://abc13.com/houston-homes-seeing-5g-boxes-placed-without-homeowners-being-notified-not-of-box-placement-verizon-home/10039722/ https://abc13.com/houston-homes-seeing-5g-boxes-placed-witho...
- Sebguer 5y ago
  Not to mention the ecological impacts of the density required.
- jimmaswell 5y ago
  Looks fine to me. Doesn't really stand out among similar utility boxes you find around for electric or gas. I'd love to have a 5g tower by my house and not need my repeater.
rexf 5y ago
Carriers & phone makers need something to talk about for marketing. The iPhone 12 was unremarkable, so they had to lean on 5G as a reason to upgrade. 5G in my experience (latest iPhone 13 Pro on one of the largest US carriers) is broken/underwhelming, so I've turned it off. I agree that there is a lot of bikeshedding regarding 5G and countless other topics (microservices vs monolith, electron vs native, etc). There are lots of topics that drive heavy user engagement while never answering an actual question.
- ecf 5y ago
  ~~Couriers~~ Carriers shouldn’t be in the business of selling phones at all, but that’s a different discussion entirely.
  - hackernewds 5y ago
    With net neutrality gone, once the dust settles they will also be in the B2B business of selling internet speeds to corps such as Netflix etc. There are already are so called fast/slow lanes
- jimmaswell 5y ago
  > broken/underwhelming Really? It's been great for me. Tested it the other day and got 30 megs down.
  - sidewndr46 5y ago
    I get flat out insane speeds on 5G. Must faster than any home internet I have ever even had the option to subscribe to. When it works. When it doesn't work, my battery life goes to shit & I cannot check my email because no data seems to get through. I disabled it about 3 days after buying a 5G capable phone. I've never turned it back on.
    - SpodGaju 5y ago
      I checked, 5G on and off. My battery drops 20% more when on 5G. iPhone 12. So I wonder if all you smart people can do the math, how is that going affect power use and climate change when everyone has this new demand for power?
rahimnathwani 5y ago
"Even selling me on 5G so I'll buy a new phone is unnecessary, the phone manufacturers could sell me on the improved performance directly." If 5G makes it cheaper for the carrier, they could make plans cheaper for folks whose handsets support 5G, i.e. penalize people who don't upgrade.
- ac29 5y ago
  Adjusted for inflation, mobile internet has been decreasing in cost - I pay the same price I did a decade ago and have much better coverage and much better speeds.
- dylan604 5y ago
  Wait, did you just suggest a carrier would make something cheaper, voluntarily? I seriously doubt that. Even if it does lower their operating costs, why would they lower their potential profit padding?
  - rahimnathwani 5y ago
    Competition. Why do Visible and Mint offer cheaper plans than the Verizon and AT&T brands? To attract customers from other carriers.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      Do either of Visible, Mint, etc install their own infrastructure or buy bandwidth from ATT and/or Verizon? Also, their services are spotty at best compared to other providers. There's a reason for their prices being lower similar to how Spirit Airlines is cheaper than other carriers.
      - otterley 5y ago
        Mint uses T-mobile as its underlying carrier.
      - rahimnathwani 5y ago
paxys 5y ago
Carriers are marketing 5G as a public facing feature so they can charge more for it.
zozbot234 5y ago
Spectrum allocation in licensed bands is a public decision. The public literally decides what use those chunks of spectrum should be put to. Only the free bands (like 2.4GHz) are a pure matter of cooperation among users and hardware manufacturers.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  I thought it was decided by an auction?
  - ac29 5y ago
    Who gets specific assignments is often done by auction, but how the overall spectrum is allocated is by the FCC. In theory they're responsible to the public.
    - hackernewds 5y ago
      That implies 1) the FCC listens to the public and 2) the public understands the technology and 3) the public will vote for what's good for themselves in the networks domain. Arguably 2 and 3 are false, and 1 we know to be false depending on the admin (see: net neutrality)
      - gotaquestion 5y ago
        I'm having deja vu, didn't Ajit Pai ignore all that public input from the web forms (blaming it on prank submissions)?
      - pessimizer 5y ago
        I don't think it implies any of those things. If something is regulated by the FCC, it's regulated by a public agency, even if that agency disregards public opinion or public interests. If an anti-5G sentiment caught fire, the FCC could be directed by an administration or Congress to move in a different direction. Anti-5G sentiment shares a lot of DNA and membership with antivax sentiment which seemed like a vocal fringe minority 20 years ago, but may end up being a majority of voters in the next election cycle. It's not completely out of the realm of possibility that you could see major anti-5G political candidates and/or notable incidents of anti-5G violence and terrorism.

RyanShook 5y ago

The costs to carriers will be going up and by marketing they are subtly letting us know the cost of our service plan will be going up.

JauntyHatAngle 5y ago

Don't think it's the whole story, but 3g, 4g and now 5g were used as big selling points for new phones and plans to consumers. If people start buying things based on the name, they'll form opinions on it. Most consumers purchase based on buzz words like 4g and 5g. They barely pay attention to bandwidth.

ep103 5y ago

Because Chinese companies developed 5G before American companies did. American telecarriers not only didn't initially research the technology, they refused to even agree to a standard definition. IIRC, AT&T marketed their 4G network as 5G for a while. As a result, Chinese companies had an opportunity to enter western markets with superior, government funded technology. They started making sales, notably in Canada, IIRC, before Western pushback started. From the private sector, telecoms pushed on the government to ban the Chinese technology, to buy them time to play catch-up with China. Politically, the need to protect the inadequate technology (not) developed by the private market, from a government funded program doesn't fit with the current US ideological model, so a different excuse was found. The legitimate reason: "Telecommunications infrastructure is a national security priority, and Chinese technology in this arena, due to its ties to the CCP, is a national security threat" was used. Again, a legitimate reason. It even has the bonus that it implies the current western ideology that governments should not direct private research. But this sort of market protectionism makes 5G a public policy and national security interest matter. So in order to ensure there is public support for such a policy, one of the easiest things to do, is convince the bottom-information tiers of society with conspiratorial, xenophobic, nonsense. Which is where the 5G conspiracy theories come from. You will note that the 5G conspiracy theories can be generalized into the statement "5G is evil, and is used for mind control / cancer", which really, is a dumbed-down game of telephone (pun) away from the original source material: [5G is evil] <-- The CCP is bad / national security and we must reject their tainted technology; [It is used for mind control] <-- CCP = big brother, Chinese 5G = surveillance, national security; [Cancer] <-- more tangible than 'mind control'.

missedthecue 5y ago
There still isn't a standard for what 5G is. Unlike 2G, 3G, and 4G LTE, which all have very specific technological definitions, 5G could be edge computing, MIMO, small cell, beamforming, and so forth. No one has actually created guidelines about what it is. At present, it seems any kind of 5G service you can actually buy is at best just new frequency spectrums that the government auctioned off in recent years.
- cesarb 5y ago
  > There still isn't a standard for what 5G is. Unlike 2G, 3G, and 4G LTE, which all have very specific technological definitions In common usage, these "generations" always match a change in the low-level protocol used by the radios. For 1G it was analog, for 2G it was GSM, for 3G it was W-CDMA, for 4G it was LTE, and for 5G it's NR. So distinguishing between 4G and 5G is simple: if you're using LTE, it's 4G; if you're using NR, it's 5G.
- matthewmacleod 5y ago
  This is not really true – "5G" is pretty universally accepted to refer to 3GPP Release 15, defining 5G New Radio (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G_NR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G_NR).
- ng55QPSK 5y ago
  actually there is, ITU-R recommendation IMT2020 is 5G and only 3GPP Rel15 and following release satisfy this.
p_l 5y ago
A lot of 5G conspiracy theories might also correlate with incumbent ISPs (especially cable ones) who can block new wired ISPs but they can't block mobile phones - so a lot of the conspiracy theories included things like "wifi connected by cable to internet is fine" :V And 5G includes technologies that allow for much denser mesh, higher throughput, lower latency, and more clients per cell enjoying good service. So it could start supplanting wired broadband services.
jolux 5y ago

jotm 5y ago

Age of social media. Everyone discusses topics they have zero control over to hell and back. "Hey look, we're doing Democracy with thousands of people and everyone agrees/disagrees" - it really tricks the brain into thinking it's doing something. Everyone's busy talking and believing they're doing something, we all feel good about it, there's no real need to actually do something.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

analyte123 5y ago

Microcell deployment, regardless of whatever protocols they’re using, is part of the “5G” push. If carriers suddenly put one in your front yard [1] what are you going to do, be against technology and progress? [1] https://abc13.com/houston-homes-seeing-5g-boxes-placed-without-homeowners-being-notified-not-of-box-placement-verizon-home/10039722/ https://abc13.com/houston-homes-seeing-5g-boxes-placed-witho...

Sebguer 5y ago
Not to mention the ecological impacts of the density required.
jimmaswell 5y ago
Looks fine to me. Doesn't really stand out among similar utility boxes you find around for electric or gas. I'd love to have a 5g tower by my house and not need my repeater.

rexf 5y ago

Carriers & phone makers need something to talk about for marketing. The iPhone 12 was unremarkable, so they had to lean on 5G as a reason to upgrade. 5G in my experience (latest iPhone 13 Pro on one of the largest US carriers) is broken/underwhelming, so I've turned it off. I agree that there is a lot of bikeshedding regarding 5G and countless other topics (microservices vs monolith, electron vs native, etc). There are lots of topics that drive heavy user engagement while never answering an actual question.

ecf 5y ago
~~Couriers~~ Carriers shouldn’t be in the business of selling phones at all, but that’s a different discussion entirely.
- hackernewds 5y ago
  With net neutrality gone, once the dust settles they will also be in the B2B business of selling internet speeds to corps such as Netflix etc. There are already are so called fast/slow lanes
jimmaswell 5y ago
> broken/underwhelming Really? It's been great for me. Tested it the other day and got 30 megs down.
- sidewndr46 5y ago
  I get flat out insane speeds on 5G. Must faster than any home internet I have ever even had the option to subscribe to. When it works. When it doesn't work, my battery life goes to shit & I cannot check my email because no data seems to get through. I disabled it about 3 days after buying a 5G capable phone. I've never turned it back on.
  - SpodGaju 5y ago
    I checked, 5G on and off. My battery drops 20% more when on 5G. iPhone 12. So I wonder if all you smart people can do the math, how is that going affect power use and climate change when everyone has this new demand for power?

rahimnathwani 5y ago

"Even selling me on 5G so I'll buy a new phone is unnecessary, the phone manufacturers could sell me on the improved performance directly." If 5G makes it cheaper for the carrier, they could make plans cheaper for folks whose handsets support 5G, i.e. penalize people who don't upgrade.

ac29 5y ago
Adjusted for inflation, mobile internet has been decreasing in cost - I pay the same price I did a decade ago and have much better coverage and much better speeds.
dylan604 5y ago
Wait, did you just suggest a carrier would make something cheaper, voluntarily? I seriously doubt that. Even if it does lower their operating costs, why would they lower their potential profit padding?
- rahimnathwani 5y ago
  Competition. Why do Visible and Mint offer cheaper plans than the Verizon and AT&T brands? To attract customers from other carriers.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    Do either of Visible, Mint, etc install their own infrastructure or buy bandwidth from ATT and/or Verizon? Also, their services are spotty at best compared to other providers. There's a reason for their prices being lower similar to how Spirit Airlines is cheaper than other carriers.
    - otterley 5y ago
      Mint uses T-mobile as its underlying carrier.
    - rahimnathwani 5y ago

paxys 5y ago

Carriers are marketing 5G as a public facing feature so they can charge more for it.

zozbot234 5y ago

Spectrum allocation in licensed bands is a public decision. The public literally decides what use those chunks of spectrum should be put to. Only the free bands (like 2.4GHz) are a pure matter of cooperation among users and hardware manufacturers.

whatshisface 5y ago
I thought it was decided by an auction?
- ac29 5y ago
  Who gets specific assignments is often done by auction, but how the overall spectrum is allocated is by the FCC. In theory they're responsible to the public.
  - hackernewds 5y ago
    That implies 1) the FCC listens to the public and 2) the public understands the technology and 3) the public will vote for what's good for themselves in the networks domain. Arguably 2 and 3 are false, and 1 we know to be false depending on the admin (see: net neutrality)
    - gotaquestion 5y ago
      I'm having deja vu, didn't Ajit Pai ignore all that public input from the web forms (blaming it on prank submissions)?
    - pessimizer 5y ago
      I don't think it implies any of those things. If something is regulated by the FCC, it's regulated by a public agency, even if that agency disregards public opinion or public interests. If an anti-5G sentiment caught fire, the FCC could be directed by an administration or Congress to move in a different direction. Anti-5G sentiment shares a lot of DNA and membership with antivax sentiment which seemed like a vocal fringe minority 20 years ago, but may end up being a majority of voters in the next election cycle. It's not completely out of the realm of possibility that you could see major anti-5G political candidates and/or notable incidents of anti-5G violence and terrorism.