<story><title>Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying</title><url>https://www.wsj.com/articles/cities-are-saying-no-to-5g-citing-health-aestheticsand-fcc-bullying-11566619391?mod=rsswn</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>chvid</author><text>Funny how people even on a tech website seems to be stuck at &amp;quot;640 KB is enough for everyone&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;When technology gets a lot cheaper, a lot more powerful, a lot less power consuming, the magic of the market creates completely new categories of use that unlock new demand at consumers.&lt;p&gt;Right now your phone has a sim-card. There might be one in your tablet or your car too. But there is not one in your TV or the lights in your bathroom. But at some point telecommunications technology is going to be so cheap that drawing a wire to connect a button to a light is going to be the expensive option.&lt;p&gt;5G is a step on the way.</text></item><item><author>JumpCrisscross</author><text>&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;at best it&amp;#x27;s just... faster internet&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Counterpoint: streaming audio and video were singularly enabled by faster internet. That is restructuring multibillion-dollar industries. The iPhone, one could argue, and through it real-time social media, are products of mobile internet.&lt;p&gt;There are legitimate new capabilities that will likely erupt from cheaper, faster mobile internet. If the playground is in Shenzhen versus Silicon Valley, that’s where resources should be allocated to explore that potential.&lt;p&gt;I’m not arguing for 5G. (I don’t know enough about it.) But “it’s just faster internet” is a facile counterargument.</text></item><item><author>_bxg1</author><text>There&amp;#x27;s such weird marketing zealotry behind 5G. They&amp;#x27;re acting like it&amp;#x27;s going to completely reshape society, but at best it&amp;#x27;s just... faster internet. In places where the internet is already pretty fast.&lt;p&gt;I can only assume it&amp;#x27;s a mixture of political and economic stakeholders that have their own reasons for really wanting it to succeed (looking competitive against China, selling new phones, etc.)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>delecti</author><text>Obviously sentiments like &amp;quot;640 KB is enough for everyone&amp;quot; hilariously failed to predict the value of faster and more powerful computers. At the same time, most people&amp;#x27;s personal use of computers hasn&amp;#x27;t kept up with the capabilities of the high-end of consumer grade products. Lots of people only really use a web browser, and even an ad-infested website will run fine on most 10-20 year old computers.&lt;p&gt;You can say &amp;quot;we don&amp;#x27;t need to frantically rush to deploy 5G&amp;quot; without also saying &amp;quot;nobody will ever benefit from 5G&amp;quot;.</text></comment>
<story><title>Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying</title><url>https://www.wsj.com/articles/cities-are-saying-no-to-5g-citing-health-aestheticsand-fcc-bullying-11566619391?mod=rsswn</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>chvid</author><text>Funny how people even on a tech website seems to be stuck at &amp;quot;640 KB is enough for everyone&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;When technology gets a lot cheaper, a lot more powerful, a lot less power consuming, the magic of the market creates completely new categories of use that unlock new demand at consumers.&lt;p&gt;Right now your phone has a sim-card. There might be one in your tablet or your car too. But there is not one in your TV or the lights in your bathroom. But at some point telecommunications technology is going to be so cheap that drawing a wire to connect a button to a light is going to be the expensive option.&lt;p&gt;5G is a step on the way.</text></item><item><author>JumpCrisscross</author><text>&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;at best it&amp;#x27;s just... faster internet&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Counterpoint: streaming audio and video were singularly enabled by faster internet. That is restructuring multibillion-dollar industries. The iPhone, one could argue, and through it real-time social media, are products of mobile internet.&lt;p&gt;There are legitimate new capabilities that will likely erupt from cheaper, faster mobile internet. If the playground is in Shenzhen versus Silicon Valley, that’s where resources should be allocated to explore that potential.&lt;p&gt;I’m not arguing for 5G. (I don’t know enough about it.) But “it’s just faster internet” is a facile counterargument.</text></item><item><author>_bxg1</author><text>There&amp;#x27;s such weird marketing zealotry behind 5G. They&amp;#x27;re acting like it&amp;#x27;s going to completely reshape society, but at best it&amp;#x27;s just... faster internet. In places where the internet is already pretty fast.&lt;p&gt;I can only assume it&amp;#x27;s a mixture of political and economic stakeholders that have their own reasons for really wanting it to succeed (looking competitive against China, selling new phones, etc.)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>wongarsu</author><text>&amp;gt;  But there is not one in your TV or the lights in your bathroom. But at some point telecommunications technology is going to be so cheap that drawing a wire to connect a button to a light is going to be the expensive option.&lt;p&gt;For stationary objects like TVs and lights we already have wifi, and a range of simpler low-power options used by IoT basestations. What does 5G bring to the table here?</text></comment>