Microwaves don’t ionize atomically. So there’s nothing happening there.
do you listen to the radio? Or have a house phone? Or a PlayStation?
5G towers are being set on fire because of corona conspiracies
- Thread starter Koba St
- Start date
Microwaves don’t ionize atomically. So there’s nothing happening there.
do you listen to the radio? Or have a house phone? Or a PlayStation?
Low End Derrick
Veteran
Pull Up the Roots
Veteran
Pull Up the Roots
Veteran
You are the epitome of an idiot, I'll pass
I mean, you posted this on the last page, but *I'm* the idiot.
You're hilariously dense! Imagine believing a cotton hoodie is really going to shield a person from non ionizing radiationI mean, you posted this on the last page, but *I'm* the idiot.
Sit in your corner with a dunce cap, champ
null
...
Let everyone own their data.
If I were to start following people around and making a database of their actions agents of the government would stop me.
Yet we are letting big-tech do all of that and more. Soon to be increased by iOT, commercial facial recognition and companies like Plantir.
Personal solutions?
Rid yourself of google and apple and any company which tracks you.
Get a privacy phone (Librem, Pinephone). Hardware switches for all communication interfaces is important.
Use private DNS + Hardware VPN + Tor (Qubes) on Linux.
Compartmentalise activity.
Use few phone apps - and then avoid big tech. Use open source.
Use signal / wickr messenger. No WhatsApp.
Avoid all things Facebook.
-
Some of these are harder than others. Some take time (changing a gmail address for example). I am in the process of doing the above myself.
The trick is not to get attached to things. You lived without them once and you can do so again.
Once people start deserting the big-brothers they will get the message.
People are building private and open source solutions and I think that privacy become a major issue in the next few years. Like Bitcoin, Email, Google, smartphones etc have moved from nerd to the mainstream, privacy concerns are going to go the same way when people start to realise what is going on?
Why should big tech automatically own and sell your data? The government cannot to that. The police cannot do it. But companies can??? Why should google be able to read all of your emails? store them indefinitely? Google AI might not be able to understand everything today but what about in 15, 20, 30 years?
Plantir is doing what governments are unable to do themselves but it working in concert with them. What it is doing should be illegal but it's not and it will be supported. It's an ambitious idea but then so were amazon, google (search, map, tools), Tesla (space X, cars) etc when they were first mooted.
see The Hated One or The Internet Privacy Guy for what you can do now. Start by installing a clean copy of Qubes and go from there.
null
...
Decisions are local and sensors will be local - decisions will be local.
Cars are limited in speed. In town you are looking at sub 100 mp/h normally and outside of town nothing in excess of 250mp/h. That's slow.
"Current wifi nor 4G can facilitate handling, processing, analyzing all that data as fast as AVs will need it"?
Ignoring the fact that there is overlap the bulk of the analysis will be local. LOCAL (as it is now). There is no mention of a central server which operates as part of the car REAL-TIME decision making routines (not data). The cars just need to communicate their relative positions, travel vectors, state etc to each other. Data which in most cases they can source themselves via their own primary sensors. Just like we do ourselves. That additional information and any further information are not essential for the act of driving itself - whether automated or not.
The only reason that you need that sort of bandwidth is for video and other commercial services or to enhance safety beyond human senses (around corners, lights intention to change color etc) but again relative to the speeds at which car processing takes place light changing and objects around corners are in slow motion.
The commercial aspect as you open it up so that anything can be sent over the wire (for example adding/removing options to/from your car - engine tuning, suspension modes, running remote diagnostics, running live diagnostics) is a big driver of this. The hire rather than buy model of car "ownership" is a big driver of this. Control by making the car part of the network rather than a local user of the network is a driver. That is NOT the same thing as automated driving itself needing these. If you move control / processing from the car to the network then the network controls whether the car functions or not. If it is just information sharing, then you are talking about marginal gains.
Automated cars already work without remote processing. Now.
You do realise that real-time operating systems need to provide guarantees. No way are those guarantees possible with off-unit remote decisions.
"How long does it take for a message to get from the sensors in the car, to the computer in the car"
The speed of light - a bit or for practical purposes, locally?
Compared to processor / bit transmission speeds we are all moving in slow motion.
-
It is not about driving. It is about services, improving capacity (to allow tech to expand) and video.
Remove all video, images and binary data streams from the Internet and we could probably go back to 1G without missing a beat.
Watch this video and boil it down to its essence.
Even the 5G stanners are saying that it's a bit faster than 4G and it only really counts for accident prevention (i.e. seeing around corners et al.).
You say a lot more than "a basic ass message with position info" but that's essentially what a car needs to know ... A message that says where you (other cars) are and which says where you are likely to be next (relative to my car). That can be inferred from a time sequence of position data or can be supplied directly by the supplying car which additional and pre-emptively indicates what is likely to happen next.
There is no list of additional types of data that have to be communicated by 2 cars (or even infrastructure) operating within the same frame that you can name.
the bossman
Superstar
Decisions are local and sensors will be local - decisions will be local.
Cars are limited in speed. In town you are looking at sub 100 mp/h normally and outside of town nothing in excess of 250mp/h. That's slow.
"Current wifi nor 4G can facilitate handling, processing, analyzing all that data as fast as AVs will need it"?
Ignoring the fact that there is overlap the bulk of the analysis will be local. LOCAL (as it is now). There is no mention of a central server which operates as part of the car REAL-TIME decision making routines (not data). The cars just need to communicate their relative positions, travel vectors, state etc to each other. Data which in most cases they can source themselves via their own primary sensors. Just like we do ourselves. That additional information and any further information are not essential for the act of driving itself - whether automated or not.
The only reason that you need that sort of bandwidth is for video and other commercial services or to enhance safety beyond human senses (around corners, lights intention to change color etc) but again relative to the speeds at which car processing takes place light changing and objects around corners are in slow motion.
The commercial aspect as you open it up so that anything can be sent over the wire (for example adding/removing options to/from your car - engine tuning, suspension modes, running remote diagnostics, running live diagnostics) is a big driver of this. The hire rather than buy model of car "ownership" is a big driver of this. Control by making the car part of the network rather than a local user of the network is a driver. That is NOT the same thing as automated driving itself needing these. If you move control / processing from the car to the network then the network controls whether the car functions or not. If it is just information sharing, then you are talking about marginal gains.
Automated cars already work without remote processing. Now.
You do realise that real-time operating systems need to provide guarantees. No way are those guarantees possible with off-unit remote decisions.
"How long does it take for a message to get from the sensors in the car, to the computer in the car"
The speed of light - a bit or for practical purposes, locally?
Compared to processor / bit transmission speeds we are all moving in slow motion.
-
It is not about driving. It is about services, improving capacity (to allow tech to expand) and video.
Remove all video, images and binary data streams from the Internet and we could probably go back to 1G without missing a beat.
Watch this video and boil it down to its essence.
Even the 5G stanners are saying that it's a bit faster than 4G and it only really counts for accident prevention (i.e. seeing around corners et al.).
You say a lot more than "a basic ass message with position info" but that's essentially what a car needs to know ... A message that says where you (other cars) are and which says where you are likely to be next (relative to my car). That can be inferred from a time sequence of position data or can be supplied directly by the supplying car which additional and pre-emptively indicates what is likely to happen next.
There is no list of additional types of data that have to be communicated by 2 cars (or even infrastructure) operating within the same frame that you can name.
I remember this back and forth we had back months agoLemme finish my lunch and read all this then get back to you
the bossman
Superstar
funny enough, had a chance to do some cool things at work this year, so I better understand how the deep learning concept works. I was wrong. You were right on all counts.
none of the things 5G enables are critical for the car itself to functionally drive. All the necessary compute to make that happen is done onboard. What the 5G is primarily doing is enhancements, giving that extra level of safety, better predictability to avoid collisions, etc. through the V2X services like mentioned in the video. I still bet in the future some of the realtime decision-making will be offloaded to the edge(not some central server). Especially if the benefit you can gain with better predictability leads to less accidents on the road plus from a cost standpoint - your ability to cut down on the expensive onboard system if you can offload some of that processing.Autonomous cars work today yes at a basic level. What Level 2? Level 3? Is it the highest level of autonomous like what most people are envisioning when they hear 'self-driving cars'? (e.g. my car picking me up from the airport or my car doing Uber to help pay itself off while I sleep) I don't think so and I don't think you will until you add 5G into the mix. 5G is what gives you that reliability guarantee or SLAs to support those real time OS. And again to your point I understand you would never fully offload the bulk of decision-making to the network. I think it will be a mix.
maybe for downloading 4k videos it's just a bit faster, but for uses cases that require things like split second decision-making? nah. 5G is a hell of a lot more than "bit faster" 1ms of latency is a hell of a lot lower than 50ms
Last edited:
There are some anti-5G anti-vaxxers on this site - judging from the 21 pages of comments I'm sure they're already in this thread deep.
null
...
funny enough, had a chance to do some cool things at work this year, so I better understand how the deep learning concept works. I was wrong. You were right on all counts.
Autonomous cars work today yes at a basic level. What Level 2? Level 3? Is it the highest level of autonomous like what most people are envisioning when they hear 'self-driving cars'? (e.g. my car picking me up from the airport or my car doing Uber to help pay itself off while I sleep) I don't think so and I don't think you will until you add 5G into the mix. 5G is what gives you that reliability guarantee or SLAs to support those real time OS. And again to your point I understand you would never fully offload the bulk of decision-making to the network. I think it will be a mix.
maybe for downloading 4k videos it's just a bit faster, but for uses cases that require things like split second decision-making? nah. 5G is a hell of a lot more than "bit faster" 1ms of latency is a hell of a lot lower than 50ms
The average human reaction time is around 250ms and I think they quoted 30ms in that video for 4g latency. By those numbers 5G is a lot faster than 4G in isolation but the gain vs. the Human to 4G gain is marginal.
Also whether over 4G or 5G the computers can make predictions much faster than humans. ~29ms speed up good but given the relative low speeds of road vehicles it makes a small difference.
A car travelling at 90km/h moves at 2.5m/s and 7.25cm in 29ms (I think).
I think they are upgrading to allow services to fill the void and I believe that surveillance will be added.
I am not an anti-vaxxer or anti-5G person BTW but I am anti-authoritarian creep.
Further to privacy big-tech has already started their misinformation campaign (and in-fighting) when in reality their businesses rely on your data being tied to you.
Privacy is going to be a big IT theme going forwards.
