Oddly Iran is at 4.5 G and launching 5G now.
5G towers are being set on fire because of corona conspiracies
- Thread starter Koba St
- Start date
Oddly Iran is at 4.5 G and launching 5G now.
So no one has ever conspired against black people huh? You funny bro, always have to be that guy to immediately denounce every theory that can’t be proven by a “reputable article” well guess what! If people in power commit things, which we know they do all types of nonsense, then it’s not as simple as a web search to find answers always.Who is 'they'? Name names and post receipts, please.
I’m not for this nonsense that people like to push nowadays feeling they’re smarter than anyone who believes in ANY theory that goes against the MSM’s narrative. It’s closed minded and intentionally backed by them. Not everything is a tin foil hat situation is what I’m getting at and we should always use discretion because HISTORY has taught us so. Peace cause I ain’t going back and forth.
null
...
Young people unaware of the big picture.
IVS
Superstar
Yeah them Volks are manufacturing a "conspiracy theory" by taking corona and 5g and mismashing the stories for disinformation...
so that when people tell the truth about 5g and Uberveillance you'll ignore it
so that when people tell the truth about 5g and Uberveillance you'll ignore it
Last edited:
and what is this suppose to be? KJV is what dafunkdoc reads ...all other ones have changed, edited, altered.
The fukk are you talking about breh? My post had literally nothing to do with the Bible.
My bad I misquoted when I was posting.
the bossman
Superstar
We already have real-time routing involving millions of vehicles. Look at Waze for example. The amount of information which has to be exchanged is minuscule. ID, Location (GPS), type and for moving objects direction and some numbers related to velocity. That's it. You could condense the data for 1 million moving vehicles into less than the size of one 4K DVD ~2Gb. Each data exchange is far less than 1kb. You need a vehicle ID 4 bytes MAX, location GPS 6 bytes, vehicle type 2 bytes MAX, direction 2 bytes MAX, velocity 1 byte, velocity history 10 bytes, some meta data for protocol max 10 bytes. That all together is nothing.
The difficult part is the massed calculation and that does not take place on the network, it happens on the server. Routing isn't freeform - on land we deal in vertices not feet (most of the time). When you say "algorithms" do you actually understand what that means? Where it is done? How it works?
You need to justify the rush, not the move to better tech. I am arguing against the former not the latter. So far you have failed to either provide sensible reasons for the drive to 5G now and you also have NOT addressed the privacy concerns.
Given your level of conviction I would have expected that you would already have some firm ideas about privacy safeguards.
We are doing this now with Waze,. I use it every now and again. It even works in the USA. Try it.
I've said this several times already but you keep ignoring it.
Here's a video - "real time routing"
I gave you a breakdown re. data size. You are free to present your own.
You are severely underestimating what it takes to make autonomous vehicles work. I don't think you really grasp how much data is required and how fast that data needs to be processed and transferred for this whole thing to work.
You're here talking about Waze/Google Maps, comparing how much little data those basic location-based services need to the extreme data-intensive needs of Autonomous Vehicles. AVs rely on a shyt load of data. way more than any Waze/Google Maps would ever need. simply google "how much data do AVs use" AVs rely mostly on multiple sensors. Each one of those sensors on the car is generating a lot of data. You will get a lot of estimates but the consensus is they will generate an enormous amount compared to the small data that Ubers, Waze, Google Maps type apps need like you laid out. We're talking big numbers. Minimum 300-400 GB of data per day and easily much more from just driving a few hours a day.
4G is good enough for stuff like Uber, Waze, etc. they are just basic location-based services (i.e. share real-time status updates, location updates, traffic updates, etc.). But 4G cannot support the processes at the level/scale/speed that AVs will need. Those AVs cannot operate safely if they don't have access to a TON of data and access to that data fast. AVs will need to have damn near human-level reflexes so all that data needs to be processed and transferred extremely fast with very low latency. Lower than what 4G is able to provide. Think about the ability to react quickly to prevent an accident or one car sending data back and forth with multiple cars, traffic lights, reacting to road signs/weather updates, etc.). Think about you as a human driver. All the things you react to from your senses to allow you to drive a car competently. It's a lot more than just basic ass traffic or location GPS updates
Current wifi nor 4G can facilitate handling, processing, analyzing all that data as fast as AVs will need it. How long does it take for a message to get from the sensors in the car, to the computer in the car, then to process/analyze, make a decision, etc.
Nick Barnes
All Star
Shut the fukk up. Square.
Bring back 3 G
null
...
Nah
1. I didn't talk about google maps (for a reason).
2. The calcs for the local operation of the vehicle are done locally on board. What makes you think the driving calcs are done centrally and why would they need to be done centrally? NOTE: by driving calcs I mean local locomotion.
3. A ton of data (over the network) needed to drive? like what??? Driving itself is a local system and doesn't need anything outside of its direct environment to perform. Lidar - Wikipedia + Cams is enough and faster than any network communication.
Let's start with those. Be specific and be structured.
You could talk about sautéed racc00n feet and some coli breh with no idea would start talking.
Are you a programmer? What languages? What experience? Have you studied AI? How much maths have you studied? How much do you understand about concurrent model+controller architectures?
the bossman
Superstar
Yes all that data today is generated and analyzed locally on board. Fully autonomous vehicles will need to get to a point where they are also using data from remote systems and data from other AVs. Vehicle to vehicle communication. Vehicle to road infrastructure (traffic lights, road signs, weather stations, etc.) You mix all this data to have a full and better picture about what's happening around the car (in the immediate vicinity and beyond). You have a limitation if you're doing everything on board only.
AVs will need to handle computing a lot of tasks onboard but they will also need to be connected to a network that allows them to talk to other networks and vehicles. There are tons of examples of this (information shared between traffic light and AV, information shared between weather stations and AV, etc.) Allowing vehicles to learn about other potential hazards or accidents or whatever from each other. Some of that data will flow between the vehicles and others with co-located servers at a DC somewhere. This goes back to the breh who mentioned the need for edge computing to you.
For this information to be shared you need to have extreme low latency which is what 5G provides.
I'm not a programmer. I can get by with basic levels of a few languages. But I know networks. You seem to think that everything will be done onboard and that is not the case. large amounts of data will need to be transferred in and out of the AV and it will need to be transferred quickly and with low latency.
Iyov - Job - Chapter 40
null
...
We already have what we need in terms of infrastructure for self-driving cars. N.e.e.d. The problems that remain to be solved are in the code, hardware and their interface.
This is how it works. No wifi required.
Video
Waymo
BMW
( I interviewed at BMW research to work on this in 2018 - decided to take a different job. Up to 70K EUR BMW company car after the first year
)Critical driving systems will NOT be on the network. That would be like having a plane's auto-pilot on a network. You would not make a critical system dependent on a non-guaranteed point of failure (the network) when you do not have to.
Having a fully connected vehicle MAY make it safer BUT it is not required for the act of automated driving itself. Part of being fully connected will have nothing to do with act of driving itself - see entertainment, maintenance, security, tracking, diagnostics as per other IOT devices.
Cert gang don't @ me unless you demonstrate that current AV's don't fully work in terms of safe locomotion because they do not have wifi.
An elephant...ill wait to you show how dinosaurs correlate with the bible.
