No coronavirus outside

[AustinBike]

8 minutes ago, 4fun said:

I know nothing about tech anything, but from what I’ve heard about what the 5G network will allow computers to do, I think the lines on that graph will separate very rapidly in near future. I’m currently much more scared of the 5G network vs. getting The corona virus. 
I’m am scared of the corona virus impact on my wife’s 25 employee business though.

Why are you afraid of 5G? Radiation? It is pretty much the same as 4G but shorter distances, so from a health perspective it is a wash.

I am a tech guy and know a lot about 5G and at this point, based on what the world is experiencing, the 2020/2021 predictions for 5G look more like they will be 2021/2022. The biggest issue with 5G is carrier migration and a ton of infrastructure build outs are gonna get pushed and trials suspended. Suddenly the carriers are less worried about being behind the curve. The iPhone team has to be breathing a big sigh of relief at this point, they might actually get something to market before you see any widespread 5G coverage.

Basically downtown and places with density will get it first. When you get it in some of the less dense areas (like my neighborhood in Central Austin) the signal will not be as beneficial, it will look like 4G with better back end management and service slicing so that there is less contention.

Most of the 5G stuff is marketing hype and I'm a marketing guy. But it is an important step, not because of the perceived speed but because of the things they can do on the back end for better signaling, better quality, etc.

[4fun]

To think if crowd funding had existed prior to the invention of health insurance health care might be much more affordable. Our system is so broken I don’t know if it can be fixed. I would say the insurance companies do need some kind of checks imposed on them but now your introducing another group that has to be paid that isn’t making you healthier. I could rant on some of the most ridiculous  blatant theft of services by health insurance companies to providers and there is nothing the provider can do about it. 

[4fun]

23 minutes ago, AustinBike said:

Why are you afraid of 5G? Radiation? It is pretty much the same as 4G but shorter distances, so from a health perspective it is a wash.

I am a tech guy and know a lot about 5G and at this point, based on what the world is experiencing, the 2020/2021 predictions for 5G look more like they will be 2021/2022. The biggest issue with 5G is carrier migration and a ton of infrastructure build outs are gonna get pushed and trials suspended. Suddenly the carriers are less worried about being behind the curve. The iPhone team has to be breathing a big sigh of relief at this point, they might actually get something to market before you see any widespread 5G coverage.

Basically downtown and places with density will get it first. When you get it in some of the less dense areas (like my neighborhood in Central Austin) the signal will not be as beneficial, it will look like 4G with better back end management and service slicing so that there is less contention.

Most of the 5G stuff is marketing hype and I'm a marketing guy. But it is an important step, not because of the perceived speed but because of the things they can do on the back end for better signaling, better quality, etc.

It was explained to me like this. Once the full network is up and running it will allow computers to make basically all the job site decisions. The real world example this gentleman gave me was: unmanned tractor harvest a field. once its full, it sends  signal to a unmanned truck that come and picks up grain and delivers to silo, etc. I say what happens to the farmer. He says he sits on his porch and watches this all go down. I ask myself who will be able to actually afford this technology when it first comes out and thus crush the competition. Top 1% 

The future is very scary to me and I’ll strongly encourage all my children to study engineering/computer science and business!

Edited March 15, 2020 by 4fun

[TheX]

5G is the network, not the compute resources.

[4fun]

I think I derailed this threat. Damn rain and rampant anxiety! Sorry guys. 5G is the network, but 1000x’s faster networks allow innovation in compute resources. Like our phone wouldn’t be so advanced if everyone was still on dial up.

 

[AntonioGG]

1 hour ago, 4fun said:

It was explained to me like this. Once the full network is up and running it will allow computers to make basically all the job site decisions. The real world example this gentleman gave me was: unmanned tractor harvest a field. once its full, it sends  signal to a unmanned truck that come and picks up grain and delivers to silo, etc. I say what happens to the farmer. He says he sits on his porch and watches this all go down. I ask myself who will be able to actually afford this technology when it first comes out and thus crush the competition. Top 1% 

The future is very scary to me and I’ll strongly encourage all my children to study engineering/computer science and business!

Even some engineering will be replaced by AI.  This is why if you start thinking about all the consequences of all this technology, the thought of guaranteed minimum income is not so radical anymore.  You can think of it as communism and people getting paid to do nothing, or you can think of it as freeing you from the yoke we're all under so you can do what you really would like to do.  

It's the same with healthcare.  I know people that work for a corporation only because of healthcare.  They have lots of ideas for cool things to make but they cannot take the risk while they have a family.  It will boil down to the cost of energy.  Once we get fusion, the Star Trek future will be possible.

[AustinBike]

4 hours ago, 4fun said:

It was explained to me like this. Once the full network is up and running it will allow computers to make basically all the job site decisions. The real world example this gentleman gave me was: unmanned tractor harvest a field. once its full, it sends  signal to a unmanned truck that come and picks up grain and delivers to silo, etc. I say what happens to the farmer. He says he sits on his porch and watches this all go down. I ask myself who will be able to actually afford this technology when it first comes out and thus crush the competition. Top 1% 

The future is very scary to me and I’ll strongly encourage all my children to study engineering/computer science and business!

I’d just reply “ok boomer”. That is such a crazy statement. It just isn’t true. It isn’t even feasibly true. 5G will make the internet on your phone about 20% faster, nothing more. On the back end there are cool things but ass that sci fi shit is so far off I can’t even respond. 
 

Stop watching Black Mirror. 

[AustinBike]

3 hours ago, 4fun said:

I think I derailed this threat. Damn rain and rampant anxiety! Sorry guys. 5G is the network, but 1000x’s faster networks allow innovation in compute resources. Like our phone wouldn’t be so advanced if everyone was still on dial up.

 

20%, not 1000%. Your porn will be smoother on your phone. 

[mack_turtle]

4 hours ago, 4fun said:

 the insurance companies do need some kind of checks imposed on them . 

I say the health insurance CEOs need to be led to a guillotine. Every last one of them them.

[ATXZJ]

13 minutes ago, mack_turtle said:

I say the health insurance CEOs need to be led to a guillotine. Every last one of them them.

Oh god, I just got a little tingly. When do we start?

 

[St.Bernardo]

Some 5G pundits contend that the new network generates radiofrequency radiation that can damage DNA and lead to cancer; cause oxidative damage that can cause premature aging; disrupt cell metabolism; and potentially lead to other diseases through the generation of stress proteinprotein

[TheX]

1 hour ago, St.Bernardo said:

Some 5G pundits contend that the new network generates radiofrequency radiation that can damage DNA and lead to cancer; cause oxidative damage that can cause premature aging; disrupt cell metabolism; and potentially lead to other diseases through the generation of stress proteinprotein

And some people think vaccines cause autism.

 

They're wrong also.

[AustinBike]

10 hours ago, St.Bernardo said:

Some 5G pundits contend that the new network generates radiofrequency radiation that can damage DNA and lead to cancer; cause oxidative damage that can cause premature aging; disrupt cell metabolism; and potentially lead to other diseases through the generation of stress proteinprotein

Source, or it didn't happen.

I googled 5G DNA and found this:

https://www.howtogeek.com/423720/how-worried-should-you-be-about-the-health-risks-of-5g/

And there are a ton of other articles and research papers that I have read that basically dismiss this. The biggest danger is for those working ON the towers because of their exposure.

Yes, it is higher density, but yes, it does not go as far.

A simple analogy: which is worse for you? A 200F burner on a stove where you put your hand 1" away from the flame, or a 2,000F industrial fire where you are standing 100 yards away? The industrial fire is clearly 10X HOTTER, that HAS to be worse for you, right? Simply looking at broadcast rates and making assumptions based on those and completely ignoring proximity is going to be a real issue.

Here is an interesting take: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/science/5g-phone-safety-health-russia.html?ref=cta&nl=top-stories

It appears that *some* of the outlets pushing the 5G is bad narrative might have some other motives that are not visible to the naked eye.

Any time someone says "5G pundit" and not doctors, be worried. After all, according to some publications that I have written for I could be a "5G pundit." So that gives you some perspective. 

Don't listen to me. Do your own research. Make sure they are in the medical field. 

 

[El Gringo]

There are legitimate questions:

https://emfscientist.org/

[Barry]

19 minutes ago, El Gringo said:

There are legitimate questions:

https://emfscientist.org/

EMF Scientist are kind of Unbelievable, to pun an old song. They're very much akin to the many scientist (in non-biology fields) who are "skeptical" of evolution, which has been hilariously rebutted by "Steves." But go ahead with your aluminum foil hat. Because "so far the apparent risk from non-ionizing radiation from radiofrequency devices appears to be little to none..."

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/scientists-sign-petition-warning-about-emf/

 

[El Gringo]

And COVID-19 was just the flu . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_vvex_mfik

[AustinBike]

First I would say this:

4G/5G antenna densification is escalating health risks

This is not just about 5G,  but also 4G that has been deployed for many years and has been checked heavily by the scientific/medical sectors.

Then:

The Appeal calls on the United Nations to resolve the inconsistencies among its sub-organizations and to seriously address the rapidly escalating health and environmental crisis caused by man-made EMF pollution. 

"Rapidly escalating health and environmental crisis"?

I'm with Barry.

And why don't we let the cancer experts weigh in: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phones.html

Ultimately, while I am generally skeptical of new technologies, knowing that 5G is going to be using many of the same frequency bands that are already in use today is a clearer indication that a lot of this is overblown. When is the last time that any of us climbed a cell tower? We live with radiation every day from a variety of sources.

[Jessica]

15 hours ago, St.Bernardo said:

Some 5G pundits contend that the new network generates radiofrequency radiation that can damage DNA and lead to cancer; cause oxidative damage that can cause premature aging; disrupt cell metabolism; and potentially lead to other diseases through the generation of stress proteinprotein

The only kind of radiation that can cause somatic changes ( damage DNA)  is ionizing radiation. 

[Jessica]

1 hour ago, AustinBike said:

First I would say this:

4G/5G antenna densification is escalating health risks

This is not just about 5G,  but also 4G that has been deployed for many years and has been checked heavily by the scientific/medical sectors.

Then:

The Appeal calls on the United Nations to resolve the inconsistencies among its sub-organizations and to seriously address the rapidly escalating health and environmental crisis caused by man-made EMF pollution. 

"Rapidly escalating health and environmental crisis"?

I'm with Barry.

And why don't we let the cancer experts weigh in: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phones.html

Ultimately, while I am generally skeptical of new technologies, knowing that 5G is going to be using many of the same frequency bands that are already in use today is a clearer indication that a lot of this is overblown. When is the last time that any of us climbed a cell tower? We live with radiation every day from a variety of sources.

The fed government is pretty tight with ensuring those are exposed to ionizing radiation are monitored and their doses are measured shiftly, monthly or quarterly.  There are quarterly and yearly limits that are not exceeded for ionizing radiation dosage.  weird side note, nuclear workers who are routinely exposed to low level ionizing radiation have cancer rates lower than the rest of the population. Most likely is due to the small sample size of the population.   

[FJsnoozer]

Bloomberg spent $500 million on a campaign that went nowhere, that's enough money to give each American 1.6 million dollars each. My hope for a good outcome from this virus is that it might help level the playing field a little bit. Viruses don't negotiate or care about money or for that matter toilet paper. 

 

Thats 1 dollar and 52 cents each.

 

Now I can’t see any try this in your entire post due to this glaring mistake.

 

You basically regurgitated everything you have ever heard anywhere.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chief]

10 hours ago, FJsnoozer said:

 

Thats 1 dollar and 52 cents each.

 

Now I can’t see any try this in your entire post due to this glaring mistake.

 

You basically regurgitated everything you have ever heard anywhere.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

??? somewhat incoherent reply but...whatever. I realized my mistake . You believe whatever you want.

[mack_turtle]

that fuzzy math about Bloomberg's spending was spread around social media heavily. some people I know who are smart enough to know better shared it without checking it. 

[TheX]

7 minutes ago, mack_turtle said:

some people I know who are smart enough to know better shared it without checking it. 

This is one of the biggest issues.

[AustinBike]

5 minutes ago, TheX said:

This is one of the biggest issues.

<furiously fact checking whether this is one of the biggest issues>

😉

[TheX]

2 minutes ago, AustinBike said:

<furiously fact checking whether this is one of the biggest issues>

😉

Don't forget to send thoughts and prayers.