Slashdot Mirror


The Promise of 5G

An anonymous reader writes: From instant monitoring of leaking pipelines, to real-time worldwide collaboration, the increase in machine-to-machine communications that 5G allows will change the way we live. This TechCrunch article takes a look at the promise that 5G holds and its possibilities. From the article: "By 2030, 5G will transform and create many uses that we cannot even think of yet. We will live in a world that will have 10-100 times more Internet-connected devices than there are humans. Hundreds of billions of machines will be sensing, processing and transmitting data without direct human control and intervention."

158 comments

  1. Flying Car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is the contemporary version of the "flying car". It's nonsense that will never happen. Ever.

    1. Re: Flying Car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will it cure cancer?
      Stop war too?

    2. Re:Flying Car by pepty · · Score: 1

      Hundreds of billions of machines will be sensing, processing and transmitting data without direct human control and intervention."

      Cell phones, cars, kettles from China that come with hidden hardware for plugging into botnets ... we'll be up to a hundred billion easy.

    3. Re: Flying Car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do because I want to opportunity to purchase one or should I say screw that because you've decided that no one should one?

    4. Re: Flying Car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your toaster will be my bitmining bitch

    5. Re: Flying Car by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Yes. Both will gone once it eradicates the human infestation.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    6. Re:Flying Car by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      well.. 5g "will happen" and it will be faster than stuff before.

      but really whe the fuck do you need to make an article about it that doesn't talk anything about the technologies trying to be that technology?

      well, it's techcruncchchhchhchch. never ever open a link to there, it will just make you more stupid. and you know what, I bet 10 000 cto's are mailing this to their ceo's in an effort to seem like they're on top of things.. that's what wankcrucnhhch is for - another thing it's for is to inject a news story about your startup so you can put a link on your startups home page, because all the other hip startups do the same.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    7. Re: Flying Car by RicktheBrick · · Score: 1

      According to the article
      The benefits extend far beyond convenience and avoiding traffic jams. The opportunity to not just reduce, but eliminate, car accidents will translate to saving more than one million lives every year in the U.S. alone. This means saving $300 billion in economic costs due to car crashes, and reducing annual CO2 emissions by as much as 300 million tons, just in U.S.
      According to the CDC there are about 2.5 million deaths each year and about 130,000 accidental deaths each year. So I very much doubt the 1 million figure. The 300 billion dollars saved is about a thousand per person so that would have a significant effect on our wealth.
      But with a million less funerals each year, it would definitely effect the funeral homes bottom line. It would also mean a lot less cars being destroyed each year so it would mean a lot less would have to be made each year. Every dollar saved is a dollar less for paying other people's wages. Maybe we will spend some of the savings by travelling more since it will be safer.

    8. Re: Flying Car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure whether you are trolling or have never heard of the broken window fallacy.

    9. Re: Flying Car by CreatureComfort · · Score: 2

      Yeah, this article is almost complete bollocks and the author is a complete idiot.

      First, there are fewer than 35,000 traffic related deaths per year in the U.S. and that number, while still way too high, is dropping. Yes, self driving cars will dramatically reduce this number, even if we manage to implement them in a way where perfect doesn't get in the way of good enough.

      NHTSA reports traffic fatalities fell 3.1 percent in 2013 to 32,719 people from 33,782 in 2012. An estimated 2.31 million people were injured in motor vehicle crashes in 2013, down 2.1 percent from 2.36 in 2012.

      New findings from the Insurance Research Council's (IRC) Auto Injury Insurance Claims Study shows that medical expenses reported by auto injury claimants continue to increase faster than the rate of inflation, in spite of the fact that the severity of the injuries themselves remain on a downward trend. From 2007 to 2012, average claimed economic losses (which include expenses for medical care, lost wages and other out-of-pocket expenditures) grew 8 percent annualized among personal injury protection (PIP) claimants. Among bodily injury (BI) claimants, average claimed losses grew 4 percent. Over the same period, measures such as the percentage of claimants who had no visible injuries at the accident scene or who had fewer than 10 days in which they were unable to perform their usual daily activities provided evidence of a continuing decline in the severity of injuries.

      In 2013, the average auto liability claim for property damage was $3,231; the average auto liability claim for bodily injury was $15,443 (ISO, a Verisk Analytics company).

      In 2013, the average collision claim was $3,144; the average comprehensive claim was $1,621 (ISO, a Verisk Analytics company).

      In addition, there is no reason that self driving cars will need 5G to operate. In fact, almost all of the manufacturers working on driverless vehicles are explicitly targeting full, on-board self sufficiency, because if your external communication fails, for whatever reason, the vehicle still needs to function.

      The water issue is stupid. It's NOT that much data. The only reason we have the leaks that we do is (most minor) the lack of sensors on existing water infrastructure, and (most important) the extreme cost of replacing the oldest, and most leaky of the pipes. I work in the office right next to our municipal water department operators. They know where our biggest losses are, (it's easy to see the flow through upstream and downstream pumps and compare them, you don't need centimeter accuracy) but to replace the, in some places 80 year old pipes (much worse in older cities) would cost around a billion dollars. In some places like NYC or LA, you can bet that replacing some of the oldest existing infrastructure would require the demolition of skyscrapers to get to it

      Finally, to get higher data transmission, you MUST go to higher frequencies. Higher frequencies degrade faster over distance and are far more affected by interference and line-of-sight issues, requiring a much larger number of base stations connected to the wired grid. There are still vast swathes of the US without even basic 2G service. 10-100 Gb wireless may become available in some very high density locations, or eventually be an option for devices within a private home, but unless we discover new physics, I can't see it ever being deployed for large scale coverage, especially in sparsely populated or poor regions.

      --
      "Unheard of means only it's undreamed of yet,
      Impossible means not yet done." ~~ Julia Ecklar
    10. Re: Flying Car by CreatureComfort · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hossein Moiin (author) is executive vice president and CTO of Nokia Networks.

      Wow...how far Nokia has sunk.

      --
      "Unheard of means only it's undreamed of yet,
      Impossible means not yet done." ~~ Julia Ecklar
    11. Re: Flying Car by sjames · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, M2M mostly happens over 2G these days. More than a few are unhappy with AT&T's announcement that they are shutting 2G down. There are a few modules for 3G targeted at M2M coming out.

    12. Re: Flying Car by jsbthree · · Score: 1

      I don't understand how the fact check process -- if there is one -- at TC allowed that 1 million number slide by.

    13. Re: Flying Car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but to replace the, in some places 80 year old pipes (much worse in older cities) would cost around a billion dollars.

      Typically, a complete piping renovation is done at 30-40 year intervals in residential buildings. Fortunately at least the underground pipes can be inspected with a robot and blow-fitted with an insulating and supporting lining, Since similar techniques are utilized in laying optical fiber in old buildings, there should be a way to use them inside a building during a piping renovation.

    14. Re: Flying Car by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Will the USA become over populated?
      No car deaths or aircraft downs will mean we can all expect to live to 120

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  2. What could possibly go wrong? by Assmasher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I mean, afterall, we're all so good at network security now...

    --
    Loading...
    1. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not worried. I don't expect to see 5G with my carrier anytime soon; it's illogical for them to upgrade their infrastructure because upgrading costs money.

    2. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

      where do you live? I'm in the USA and have had a cell phone since 2001 and the carriers have upgraded their networks every year or two

    3. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel sorry for the security person who has to do real-time event monitoring in the 5G world. "Every pixel on the screen is dedicated to a single device in this cell cluster. Once it turns color you'll know that there's a problem in the particular device."

    4. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Maybe we will visually act with the data in another way? I'm still not plugging any of that shit in but tech may be very different by 2030 in some other guy's house. The last thing I want is more computer stuff. :/ I have piles of stuff I do not even play with already. We all do. How many of us could not build at least one decent computer out of parts or has not already done so and is using it currently? Who knows where it will be, though.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    5. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by davester666 · · Score: 1

      yes, they have changed the little number in the corner of your cell phone from 2, to 3 to 4.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    6. Re: What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you so daft? 10 years ago, network speed was about 150 kbps. Today it is about 30 Mbps. That isn't as fast as the op let on but considering that each G has been about 10x faster I'm perfectly pleased.

    7. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this troll supposed to be implying that the networks are lying about their infrastructure upgrades in place to this point? In the UK, I've very recently just managed to pull out 1.5 megabyte per second downloads out of EE's 4G network. Yeaaaah. Totally possible over 3G. Right.

  3. Thoughts by DaMattster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I just cannot get excited about 5G because there are still large gaps in 4G coverage. I'd like to see the telecoms finish what they started.

    1. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. There are large swaths of the US that have no cell phone data coverage at all, let alone 4G or 3G data service.

      We're not talking about rural Wyoming or Alaska, either... I'm talking sections of New York, Connecticut, and Northeastern Pennsylvania that are dotted with small towns.

    2. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya, but nobody cares about them.

    3. Re:Thoughts by sshir · · Score: 1

      Those places (in US) which do not have 4G right now, will not get 5G pretty much by definition. If I understand correctly, 5G is exclusively for areas with very high population density. Basically, thanks to physics, your cells are of the size of a city block. So if you do not have enough customers at that scale - you do not get 5G.

    4. Re:Thoughts by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      i live in the hudson valley NY, not exactly a small place, very populated only an hour outside of NYC

      we were just ranked the worst cell coverage in the country

      worry about 5G when you can get 4G (or even 3G... or even a standard 1x signal....) going

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    5. Re:Thoughts by smittyoneeach · · Score: 0

      The internet of things is going to spread the technological distribution from the creepy uber-geeks who are embedding processors in their heads, to the Mexican fisherman who still gives it a "Meh, gringo."

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    6. Re:Thoughts by mjwx · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I just cannot get excited about 5G because there are still large gaps in 4G coverage. I'd like to see the telecoms finish what they started.

      I can't get excited over 4G because we haven't actually got it yet. LTE is still a 3.9G tech, LTE Advanced was supposed to be the first 4G technology according to the ITU definitions.

      But then the marketing trolls decided that they could just re-define words to mean whatever the hell they wanted to and 4G went from a well defined standard to arbitrary marketspeak. Some telco's had rebranded HSPA+ as 4G, because of this 5G has no real meaning and it will just lead to marking one-upmanship. "Our competitors are still on 6G, we've gone to 11G" without actually telling you they haven't changed technology at all.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    7. Re:Thoughts by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

      and how many of these are filled with crazy people who don't want an antenna because of the radiation or it ruins the view? just like in nassau and suffolk counties where they passed laws limiting where the antennas can be built

    8. Re:Thoughts by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Are you saying I shouldn't buy Cat6 cable to replace my Cat 5E because there's still one run of Cat 4 cable in my house?

      I hate the idea of stalling technical progress because the previous generation failed to reach 100% ubiquity and would sooner not pay a telecom company to install equipment which is actively reaching end of it's lifecycle.

    9. Re:Thoughts by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Everyone said the same thing about 4G... and you know what? They were right. Right now, there are STILL large gaps in 3G coverage!

    10. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least nobody who matters.

    11. Re:Thoughts by harperska · · Score: 1

      Part of the blame lies with the ITU for defining a pie-in-the-sky practically sci-fi (for the time when it was specified) standard as the next official milestone. That left all of the carriers in a tough spot, as they would be investing millions or billions in rolling out a brand-new technology (LTE) that would give them an order of magnitude speed boost, but would be forbidden from calling it a next generation technology.

    12. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying I shouldn't buy Cat6 cable to replace my Cat 5E because there's still one run of Cat 4 cable in my house?

      No, dumb ass. They are saying that when the switch you connect to is at 10Ms, you having a 1Gs is a waste of your money. I believe you know this and are just trolling...

    13. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Shouldn't you want 5G to plop in your yard, instead of the last gen technology reaching your area last, then we start all over again with the newest generation?

    14. Re:Thoughts by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      They may be very vocal, but they are few.

      I'm guessing most people in rural areas live there because they either were born there and simply see no good reason to leave, have rural jobs or like the peace and quiet.

      You mention laws limiting placement, not banning them altogether. I wouldn't be surprised if New York had a law limiting placement of antennas on the statue of liberty either. "Ruins the view" is a pretty good reason to limit corporate interests.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    15. Re:Thoughts by antdude · · Score: 1

      Heh, I still have that problem with 3G. I just want stabliblity (sometimes bad as 1X and nothing) and decent unlimited speeds with it.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    16. Re:Thoughts by ultranova · · Score: 1

      But then the marketing trolls decided that they could just re-define words to mean whatever the hell they wanted to and 4G went from a well defined standard to arbitrary marketspeak. Some telco's had rebranded HSPA+ as 4G, because of this 5G has no real meaning and it will just lead to marking one-upmanship. "Our competitors are still on 6G, we've gone to 11G" without actually telling you they haven't changed technology at all.

      So 4G is the Firefox of wireless?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    17. Re:Thoughts by chihowa · · Score: 1

      Because that's not how these gaps in coverage work. They aren't blanketing the country and filling in the gaps with the latest gen technology... They're just upgrading the previous gen installations, so that the biggest urban centers go from 2G->3G->4G->5G while the holes remain unfilled. There are vast areas of my state that are still only 2G and they're not just the unoccupied areas.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    18. Re:Thoughts by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      The issue is that the middle of New York and Pennsylvania and other places are filled with mountains. That means they need to put a cell tower on each one to get full coverage, and there isn't enough people there to make it worth their while. Easier to stick to the metro areas where the money is to be made.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    19. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More important, you will still have that 2Gb/month data cap. Who cares if 5G is faster than 4G or even 3G - if you don't pay through the nose, you can't actually use it for much. And most people will go for the cheap plans - that is all they need to make calls and surf a little and read some mails.

      So 5G will not "change our lives" in any way - even if 5G might be able to do that in theory. Too many will hit that data cap, nobody will be able to run any kind of new-fangled service that requires customers to really use 5G bandwith - for the majority of customers will then be capped and just drop this "expensive" service.

    20. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but with gigabit wireless, those 16 seconds will be internet nirvana.

    21. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the ITU gave into the carriers and redefined 4G to 50Mbps (from 100 Mbps) and that allowed HSPA+ to be 4G (depending on the MIMO config HSPA+ can be 168 Mbps down)

    22. Re:Thoughts by coofercat · · Score: 1

      I was told 4G would 'revolutionise' my life and I'd be throwing away my "old tech" home broadband because 4G was going to be so awesome.

      I actually do have 4G in a few places I spend a lot of time. There's no way I'd ditch my broadband for it though - I've tried using it for tethering, and it's terribly slow compared. It just doesn't cut it against even a decent ADSL broadband connection (let along against fibre or similar). It's fine for downloading my email on the move, and even for looking stuff up online. I have used it for tethering on the train and downloaded some bits and bobs for later off-line use. But still - it's no substitute.

      So.. even in an area of decent coverage, it's still no where near what it was supposedly going to be. 5G will be no different once you've gone through some crappy proxy, over some crappy backhaul and over some crappy wan networks to get to the Internet, you could give me 10G and it'd still suck.

      That said, when my provider starts rolling out 5G, I'll consider upgrading my phone (which by then will be plenty old enough to need some love).

    23. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because that's not how these gaps in coverage work. They aren't blanketing the country and filling in the gaps with the latest gen technology... They're just upgrading the previous gen installations, so that the biggest urban centers go from 2G->3G->4G->5G while the holes remain unfilled. There are vast areas of my state that are still only 2G and they're not just the unoccupied areas.

      Actually, the real problem is that what they call 4G is anything but, according to the ITU standard. Hell, even 3G is not really 3G yet. This is just another grab for the wallets of customers. They will come out with something new which they will call 5G but is more like 3.5-3.8G and charge exorbitant rates for this great breakthrough. It would be great to have a genuine 5G. I would actually settle for a real, honest to god 4G, but that's not happening any time soon.

    24. Re:Thoughts by sjames · · Score: 1

      So how does that happen? Instead of that, or finally covering the areas that have no coverage, the telecomms will declare 3G obsolete and 4G deprecated and start over putting 5G in places that already have plenty of coverage while other places go with none. Eventually, they'll have 5G coverage where they now have 4G coverage and would get around to the places with none except by then 6G will come out and they'll lather, rinse, and repeat.

      That's pretty much what happened when 2G, 3G, and 4G came out.

    25. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gaps in 4G? You mean gaping holes the size of small countries.

  4. Heard this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    5G will transform and create many uses that we cannot even think of yet....

    4G will transform and create many uses that we cannot even think of yet.

    3G will transform and create many uses that we cannot even think of yet.

    2G will transform and create many uses that we cannot even think of yet.

    Still waiting...

    1. Re:Heard this before by TWX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There are a few actually. Building security systems now are not dependent on landlines, so it's harder for someone to sever the security system's ability to report trouble. Medical alert monitoring is easier and works away from the residence more reliably. Cars can report-in when there's a likely automobile accident and can get map information in real-time instead of relying on outdated locally-stored maps exclusively. For those that want to spend the money, they can have full Internet access nearly everywhere they go, so businesses have made use of this for real-time status reporting (think package delivery) and for general Internet use.

      Now, most of these were achieved with "G" and "2G" speeds. It's tough to say that beyond being able to add realtime video capability that there have been too many significant improvements.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re: Heard this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cellphone hammers are easy to buy.

    3. Re: Heard this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Cellphone hammers? You mean Nokia phones?

    4. Re:Heard this before by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Automatic failover from DSL links are something that 3G and latter have provided to some remote sites that transmit a lot of data.

    5. Re:Heard this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a few actually. Building security systems now are not dependent on landlines, so it's harder for someone to sever the security system's ability to report trouble.

      Severing landlines is hard - they tend to be very well buried. There are so many questions when you dig up a street, and it takes time. Illegal jammers that disrupt all cell activity in a 100m radius are $15 a piece from Chinese suppliers. Deploy a few of those around your target - and no cell-based alarm will go off.

  5. Waste of time by manu0601 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is not much more in this article than in Slashdot summary. You can skip it.

    1. Re:Waste of time by TWX · · Score: 1

      There are articles on Slashdot?

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Waste of time by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      I meant the article Slashdot links to.

    3. Re:Waste of time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's tech crunch in a nutshell.

    4. Re:Waste of time by Gavagai80 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh, is that what those underlined phrases do? Never clicked one.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  6. Article is completely meaningless by jonnythan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    5G will turn this one-way interaction we have today with data into something new. Imagine a new network that will enable machines to communicate instantly without any human intervention, and to do things on our behalf and for our benefit without our active engagement.

    ... What? Is 4G too slow for "machines to communicate instantly without any human intervention"?

    And speaking of 4G vs 5G... I can burn through my 5 GB/month data allowance in about 45 minutes by maxing out my 4G connection. Not in any hurry to do it in 45 seconds via 5G.

    Our cars will download real-time traffic information and use it to avoid congestion and accidents, getting us safely and quickly where we need to go.

    O RLY? 4G is way too slow for real-time traffic.

    1. Re:Article is completely meaningless by rockout · · Score: 3, Funny

      ... What? Is 4G too slow for "machines to communicate instantly without any human intervention"?

      O RLY? 4G is way too slow for real-time traffic.

      Are you having an argument with yourself?

      --
      I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
    2. Re:Article is completely meaningless by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      There is far more to 5G than speed increases.

      Less latency, better tower handover, less setup and negotiation time, by all first research it will have a far more efficient use of bandwidth and equipment allowing a much larger subscriber density (which is critical when every bloody device is IoT)

      No one gives 2 shits about the speed except for those people working on using 5G to backhaul data from 5G subscribers.

    3. Re:Article is completely meaningless by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      2.5g is fast enough for real time traffic updates..

      what you need is less shitty data plans from your provider.. oh finland finland home of the 10 bucks/month / 100 gb+ connections.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:Article is completely meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can burn through my 5 GB/month data allowance in about 45 minutes by maxing out my 4G connection.

      Now imagine me, with a 500 MB/month data allowance...

    5. Re:Article is completely meaningless by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Are you having an argument with yourself?

      No, I'm not.
      Yes, I am!
      Am not!
      Oh shut up. Y'know, sometimes, I really get on our nerves.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  7. Watch out by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hundreds of billions of machines will be sensing, processing and transmitting data without direct human control and intervention.

    Your toaster is talking about you behind your back.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Watch out by kesuki · · Score: 1

      to think instead of skynet launching a nuclear strike, the instead will make our fridges burn out, tie up our comm networks, say they're obsolete every 18 months, make our toast have colored sprinkles when we ordered them plain, and will refuse to accept our credit cards because we didn't entire the pin number fast enough. oh yeah, and a few more rads of exposure every 18 months as they invent new standards of communication.

    2. Re: Watch out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally Talkie Toaster is here!

    3. Re:Watch out by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Have your refrigerator call my shoe to set up an appointment... we can talk about it.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    4. Re:Watch out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the douchebag down the street is trying to figure out how to make your wireless toaster start a fire.

    5. Re:Watch out by KGIII · · Score: 1

      The guy who says such a thing has to be named Vinnie and have a New York accent, say Queens, and I am in.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  8. 5G? I'd settle for reliable 3G. by JimMcc · · Score: 4, Informative

    The subject kind of says it all. Around here we have pockets of LTE, larger areas of 3G, but the bulk of our geographic area has no service or just barely enough to send and receive an SMS message. I don't see where 5G means a thing to us here.

    1. Re:5G? I'd settle for reliable 3G. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wow, it's almost like private businesses don't spend money to help poor people download Youtube videos of tractor pulls.

      Maybe you should move to the city, country bumpkin.

  9. tech-incompetent writer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTFA: "The network and the data centers that contain it are the true brain of any complex operation."

    Either the writer doesn't understand technology or biology, or there is such low craftsmanship as to issue statements like... well like this.

    Why greenlight tripe like this??

    1. Re:tech-incompetent writer by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2, Informative

      The article was written by some clueless moron who has absolutely no grasp of . . . well, anything. As he breathlessly sings the praises of all the miraculous things we'll be able to do with 5G, while completely ignoring (or completely unaware of) the fact that we can already do all of these things with 4G and/or conventional internet connections.

    2. Re: tech-incompetent writer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup. The first sentence can only be replied to with a "fuck you."
      Go ahead, read it out and try not to say "fuck you" to it.

  10. Yay! by paiute · · Score: 1

    Comcast will still be sodomizing their customers - even faster!

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re: Yay! by binarylarry · · Score: 2, Funny

      So you're saying Comcast is going to grandfather their old Sodomy plans in for customers changing plans?

      Woo hoo!

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  11. The bees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should finish off those fuckers for good!

    1. Re: The bees... by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter, Elon Musks new cyberbees are going to make traditional bees obsolete.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  12. Yeah, maybe we'll get hoverboards too by areusche · · Score: 3, Insightful

    5G is going to be meaningless if it means carriers like Verizon and AT&T are metering usage at a per gigabyte rate. RIP grandfathered verizon unlimited data plan.

    1. Re: Yeah, maybe we'll get hoverboards too by binarylarry · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't worry T-Mobile's new unlimited plans are unlimited until you exhaust your alloted bandwidth.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    2. Re:Yeah, maybe we'll get hoverboards too by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      The grandfathered plans are still around I can vouch I have one I greatly depend on.

      I used 150gb last month.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    3. Re: Yeah, maybe we'll get hoverboards too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      T-Mobile is offering plan asymptotic onward to the infinite. That's really something special.

  13. I Doubt It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The opportunity to not just reduce, but eliminate, car accidents will translate to saving more than one million lives every year in the U.S. alone. This means saving $300 billion in economic costs due to car crashes, and reducing annual CO2 emissions by as much as 300 million tons, just in U.S."

    Hmmm...I thought the number of traffic deaths in the U.S. was more like 44,000 per year. I guess that 5G slices and dices and makes Julian fries...

    I am so glad for the constant breathless hype in the media these days.

    1. Re: I Doubt It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have to exaggerate the danger of driving. It's part of the quest a lot of these 20-something idiots to convince everyone that humans are awful at absolutely everything. In their case it's largely true. We're talking about people who can use apps on phones and think they're tech geniuses after all.

    2. Re:I Doubt It by jdschulteis · · Score: 1

      I guess that 5G slices and dices and makes Julian fries...

      That's fine for Julian, I guess the rest of us will have to wait for 6G to make our julienned fries.

  14. We Must Dissent by headkase · · Score: 1

    Anyone else get a feeling of: The Self Aware Colony from good old Alpha Centauri? Layers and layers of automated systems that keep the cities running "smoothly."

    --
    Shh.
  15. But, there is no 4G yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Nokia executive who wrote this article is spouting misinformation here. Talking about 5G, when 4G systems don't exist yet. LTE (Long Term Evolution) service is 3G which is (in theory) moving towards meeting 4G standards of 1 gigabit/sec, but is nowhere even close to that now. It's only branding. Considering AOL owns techcrunch, this is clearly a PR/propaganda piece which no content of any actual value in the entire article. Even the slashdot summary is misinformed. The only way you'll be seeing 5G is in a false advertising lawsuit.

    1. Re:But, there is no 4G yet by asimons04 · · Score: 1

      Quote: It's only branding. Considering AOL owns techcrunch, this is clearly a PR/propaganda piece which no content of any actual value in the entire article.

      And Verizon owns AOL, so that makes this doubly true.

    2. Re:But, there is no 4G yet by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      If it's only branding, then what passes off as 4G is actually 4G?
      I don't remember that much what are the difference between LTE and LTE Advanced but we could care less about getting to 1 Gbps in unrealistic or useless conditions.
      The real performance is when e.g. 20 people are uploading or downloading simultaneously, in a real word setting. Does the "3.9G" LTE lose badly next to "real 4G" LTE? Or is it about the same, but the latter has a useless high-bandwith mode for feature checking and for allowing higher-up people to boast?

  16. By 2030 .... by PPH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... the carriers will be pitching 8G.

    Anything to trade you up to a new two year contract.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:By 2030 .... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The RF technology doesn't do that. The latest super retina display that is so good you can't even make out pixels under the microscope will make you do that.

    2. Re:By 2030 .... by laffer1 · · Score: 1

      It does because you have to buy a new phone to use it.

    3. Re:By 2030 .... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Except I don't know any body ever who has bought a new phone because they wanted to use LTE or 3G or 4G or whatever.

      Every single person I have ever met has a new phone because either:
      a) Their previous contract expired
      b) Apple released a new shiny thing they absolutely had to have and justified breaking their contract to get.
      c) Their company issued an upgrade.

      Part if this is usually to do with timing. When your new phone gets the latest and greatest modem there's every chance coverage even in major cities is so poor that it's not worth the upgrade. Even Apple was a famous laggard in this regard releasing a 4GS at the same time as all of its major competitors were releasing LTE phones, and people still bought it.

  17. If we continue to suck this bad at IT security... by gweihir · · Score: 1

    ... then this future will not materialize any time soon, as none of these devices will work right. If what happens currently with mobile phones is any indicator, then all the stupid mistakes will be made all over again with the "Internet of Things", likely including no easy way to patch your fridge, stove, etc. Of course, this may eventually be fixed, but there is no way in this universe to make that by 2030. If we are really lucky, mobile phones will be reasonable secure by then, but that is it.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  18. Faster speed, fewer options by aNonnyMouseCowered · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The non-linear, if not exactly exponential, growth of information-related technologies from Moore's proverbial microchips to wide area network speeds appear to have the side effect of placing important aspects of global civilization under the control of a few companies when they have the equal potential to decentralize it. Why has Google search become for most people the starting point for research or Facebook the dominant means of text-based communication?

    I know the arguments for economies of scale. But why can't we have mesh or peer-to-peer versions of these technologies where we don't have to rely on the good intentions or fault tolerance of a few dozen IT behemoths? We now have the equivalent of an '80s supercomputer in our pockets. Why can't I just beam my documents or videos directly to my friend on the other side of town, instead of routing them right across the world?

    Critics scoffed at the ease with which a human "hacker" brought down the alien invasion force in Independence Day. I'm thinking the movie's a metaphor for where the Internet and all our information technologies are heading.

    1. Re:Faster speed, fewer options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because mesh, peer-to-peer technologies already *exist*. Fundamentally, that's what the Internet /is/. They all, however, have the same problem: Mesh systems become unwieldy as scale increases. You can send whatever you want between two publicly-accessible IP addresses, but it's vastly more simple to use a hierarchical service or two to act as a go-between, allowing it to handle the challenges of locating and establishing connections between you and your friend.

      A centralized database is far easier to search then going to every public library in town looking for a book. If all your friends already use Facebook, then it's simpler to use an already-established means, then coming up with your own, independent system. And even then, you're likely only contacting the local data center housing Google or Facebook, who maintains its own mesh network of databases available to be searched.

    2. Re:Faster speed, fewer options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Pretty much this.

      Also a true Peer-to-Peer model where they couldn't run the risk of losing someone would be really damn unwieldy. I mean stuff like the old Limewire and such where you didn't really need to access everyone at any given moment and if they dropped off your list, it didn't really matter. Losing your link to the person you were dealing with wasn't a huge deal and even then, you still were connecting via IP address which was being managed by another entity with a hierarchy to it.

      Now, to do that with TRUE Peer-to-Peer where you had to keep them up within the P2P network would involved linked lists running into the hundreds of millions and billions which, even today, would really lag many computers if not outright bring them to their figurative knees. Part of the reason why the internet runs so fast is that each area only really worries about its little piece and sends stuff based on IP ranges down a select set of paths that it knows will get it to its end destination without it knowing exactly the route it will take. Really P2P will involve each part basically having to figure out much of that itself.

    3. Re:Faster speed, fewer options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its corruption. If you haven't noticed, ISPs are colluding with the NSA and a select few crony capitalist friends to impose a boob-tube-3.0 centralized evolution of the establishment. The FCC is well aware of this, and a willing coconspirator. Give up, it's all just bullshit.

    4. Re:Faster speed, fewer options by khoonirobo · · Score: 1

      Why the hell is this modded down. That's as insightful a post as any.

    5. Re:Faster speed, fewer options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The post was not modded down you moron, Anonymous posts start at -1. When you don't know how the system works you should really shut up.

    6. Re:Faster speed, fewer options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Money and control. You KNOW this.

    7. Re:Faster speed, fewer options by KGIII · · Score: 1

      AC starts at zero if you do not apply any bonus to it and you are signed in. It is zero for ACs to. Not at -1... Not unless they have changed something. I probably would have heard about it.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    8. Re:Faster speed, fewer options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somebody please mod this troll down to -1 where he belongs.

  19. Yes, 5G is needed by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    Yes, because you really need 5G over 3G for a pipeline monitor to send "There's a leak"

    1. Re: Yes, 5G is needed by binarylarry · · Score: 3, Funny

      Silly Canadian, here in the US we use our cellular network for more than monitoring maple syrup storage silos.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    2. Re: Yes, 5G is needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like taking videos of your police shooting the coloured folks?

    3. Re: Yes, 5G is needed by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Protip UK guy: They don't like being called "coloured." At least at the moment, they change their minds a lot.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    4. Re: Yes, 5G is needed by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      Nobody expects the Canadian Maple Syrup Reserve! Our chief export is sap...sap and sucrose...sucrose and sap.... Our two exports are sucrose and sap...and waffles.... Our *three* exports are sucrose, sap, and waffles...and an almost fanatical devotion to hockey.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our exports.... Amongst our exportry...are such elements as sucrose, sap.... I'll come in again.

    5. Re: Yes, 5G is needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I only just learned what the C stands for in NAACP.

    6. Re: Yes, 5G is needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come to the US and stay for a year. Then see what you think.

  20. Go away greenwow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are an idiot

  21. 5G will not deliver all the promises of 3G or 4G by tomwrake · · Score: 2, Informative
    Coverage will be spotty, I am 80 miles from lower Manhatten and we still have dead spots. Radio signals has blind spots. $ fix that locals complain about cell towers.

    And what about security, will this prevent Russian gangs from looting my bank account.

    With 5G do you get free credit monitoring or virus scanning?

    Will my driverless car be able to be controlled by hackers using my sound system?

    The 5G forecast is cloudy.... film at 11 ... in other news you will be able to send email from your spreadsheet.,,,,

  22. Reach your data cap up to 40X faster! by tlambert · · Score: 2

    Reach your data cap up to 40X faster!

    That is all.

  23. What? Is 5G going to be free? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    If not, I won't see any difference, unless WIFI has a matching speed increase.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  24. bogus article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The article shows a lot of numbers about the prospects of 5G that the author pulls out of his
    ass. He is wrong by a factor of 28 for yearly US car fatalities so we should not bother to
    think any other number is serious. Also I am not sure how the number relates to 5G.

    > The opportunity to not just reduce, but eliminate, car accidents will translate to saving more than one million lives every year in the U.S. alone.

    the real number is ~36k which is pretty big compared to other developed countries. That gives a
    yearly rate of ~13/100,000
    Pulled from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

  25. What Does N-G Mean? by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

    Help me out folks - I don't have a smartphone. WTF does 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G mean? This is all I know about the N-G: I Want an I-Phone 4!

    --

    Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

    Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    1. Re:What Does N-G Mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iPhone is still the most sold cell phone EVER. I can't believe there are still people who won't buy it because its popular. You people are called hipsters, who won't buy something because its popular. Yet, you turn around and call people who own iPhones hipsters. You are all a bunch of idiots. The iPhone is an extremely good phone, and I'm not even using one and I can still admit to it.

    2. Re:What Does N-G Mean? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 2

      The 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G, etc simply means you'll reach your monthly data cap faster than the previous generation of G while paying a higher monthly bill.

    3. Re:What Does N-G Mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's an arbitrary designation for a set of radio broadcast/reception techniques that provide an increasing number of capabilities and data rates. Usually ten times the speed of the preceding number.

  26. 5G to the rescue! by swell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Statistics show that 20 percent of our water supply is lost every single day because of leaks in the pipes that make up the national infrastructure...
    Monitoring every pipe in real time would require the ability to gather and analyze huge volumes of data at speeds that are just not possible today. "

    I'm not sure how 5G is going to help our 100 year old supply pipes that we can't even afford to repair. Perhaps we can plug the cracks with 5G Nokia phones.

    This appears to be a promo aimed at ignorant investors. It's hard to believe that the Nokia CTO would write such nonsense to the tech savvy.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:5G to the rescue! by adolf · · Score: 1

      My local municipality already monitors water lines on a per-household basis in near-realtime, using existing 900MHz license-free ISM bands.

      This is primarily for billing (there aren't any more human meter readers peering into holes in the ground), but is also used for leak detection.

      The system was rolled out quietly and without fanfare, and seems to work well.

  27. So we'll blow through our bandwidth in 30 seconds? by Karmashock · · Score: 0

    Bandwidth caps are so low and prices for bandwidth are so high that even 4G isn't really practical. what are you doing with it?

    Most people have bandwidth caps around 2 GBs to 10 GBs.

    I'm over wireless anywhere internet provided by the cellphone companies. Its bullshit.

    I'm looking forward to google's new project where they only bill you for bandwidth used and they'll bill your bandwidth in a flat way. So the first megabyte costs as much as the last megabyte. The concept will be to run most traffic through wifi bypassing the cell towers entirely.

    I heard it described as text messages will be free, wifi calling will be free. And that means... if you were so inclined you could pay NOTHING for your cellphone service. Just answer and make calls in wifi hotspots and exchange text messages otherwise.

    I've got my cellphone bill down to about 18 dollars. It would be pretty sweet if I could bring it down to 0... or maybe a couple bucks to account for the few calls I make/receive outside of hotspots... which is basically never. I spend most of my time in one hotspot or another.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  28. Fun way to force them to fix their coverage lapse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Require that they must cover all the current places that they claim to cover with no 4g coverage with the 5g towers before they can update any of the other areas.

    Then you see them rush to finish that so they can get the profit areas before the other guys do.

    Sucks watching areas with virtually at best 2g coverage at all while 2 miles over it is 4g and sitting like that for years.

  29. 5G and rf frequency spectrum by nickweller · · Score: 2

    How are all these 5G devices going to fit into the same rf spectrum?

    1. Re:5G and rf frequency spectrum by fizzup · · Score: 1

      How are all these 5G devices going to fit into the same rf spectrum?

      Shorter range. More towers.

  30. 20% every day! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...in just 5 days it'll be all gone!

  31. The history of stupid by holophrastic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First, an inventor invented invented a pipe, and installed it, and it was found to leak. Then a plumber improved the pipe and re-installed it, and would never leak again.

    Then a new-age company said they could build a cheaper pipe to save costs. It was installed, and it leaked only sometimes. Then a plumber figured out precisely how often it would leak, and designed a maintenance plan to prevent it from leaking, so the leaking would never be a problem again.

    Then an accountant saw the money being spent on maintenance of a pipe that didn't leak, and reduced the maintenance until it started to leak.

    Now, a new-age company is offering to invent and build and install billions of sensors on the pipe, to see when it's leaking, so we'll know when to perform the maintenance.

    It'll work great. Not only will we know exactly when to send out the maintenance crew -- i.e. pretty close to the same rate as when the plumber designed the maintenance plan the first time, because he wasn't stupid -- but we'll spend more money on the sensors than we will on the pipe.

    As my mother's always said. You can pay me now, or you can pay me later. So the pipe will be cheap, and the maintenance will be occasional, and the sensors will be amazing.

    And then we'll save money on the sensors.

    And then we'll have a maintenance plan for the sensors.

    And then we'll start monitoring the sensors.

    It's turtles all the way down.

    Anyone remember how much the high quality pipe that didn't leak in the first place cost? I didn't think so.

    1. Re:The history of stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your base assumption is incorrect. The real goal of the sensor net is to register the detailed, real-time, water usage of every household. This data set will then be added to all the other data being collected to further advance the surveillance society we are living in.

      Leaking pipes is just the vehicle to sell this plan on.

    2. Re:The history of stupid by njhey · · Score: 0

      Fantastic comment, which has made my night.

    3. Re: The history of stupid by phocion · · Score: 1

      This comment wins it all today. Spot on and exactly so. The concept of "do it right the first time" is rarely applied. We live in a "pay later" world.

      --
      Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to.
  32. Re:5G will not deliver all the promises of 3G or 4 by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    The main push for this is control. Not to have to roll out optical per site that will be a shared common carrier to all other local brands.
    Limited bandwidth, cheap per gig plans per month or expensive plans for more data is the better lock in.
    If the local usage ever really gets saturated then the limitations of huge amounts of people wanting perfect low cost networking on very limited bandwidth will start to be interesting.
    Re "And what about security?" Local city, state, parish and federal gov officials can track any new 5G perfectly. Data use, voice print ready, its all in the new standards.
    The per user per month bandwidth question is the fun part. How many gigs per month can each user be sold before wireless physics is in play for every attempted fast connection.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  33. Fix legacy issues first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While progress is always welcome, when will the telecommunications industry clean up the legacy issues from the POTS era? Why is it still so easy to spoof caller ID in this day and age? Why do we have to crowdsource solutions to unwanted solicitation calls? We need to stop rewarding phone network providers that willingly allow this type of misfeasance.

  34. 6G by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

    It won't be until 6G that the machines will rise up and overtake humanity..... Right?

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:6G by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      Yes, yes. 6G. That's right. Now, about those 5G not-spots near the nuclear silos...

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  35. IoT directly connected by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

    Why is this a good idea? I have a house full of smart devices the last thing I want is them connecting directly out to the internet. Sure my house knows the weather forecast and adjusts heating/cooling based upon that. It knows when I'm headed home and to crank up the hut tub turn the lights on and continue my playlist from where I left off in the car. None of this would be aided by direct connectivity, it would only be giving up security and control.

    I would love a fridge that could tell me my current levels and project when I'll run out or things will spoil. To make that a killer app you need pricing data from all the local stores and for rfid or some other method that does not require user intervention on a regular basis.

    I would love a heating plant that can use oil, NG, Propane, or heat pump based upon the cheapest current option. That does not mean my thermostats should be connecting out the the internet.

    The whole concept of a lightbulb that has to go out to the cloud to get instructions baffles me what use case does that make sense? LED bulbs 22 year life span you think that cloud server will still be there? Sure it's great for the manufactures to get rent forever.

    This all makes about as much sense as the meraki gear from cisco, a router that shuts off if you don't pay the maintenance.

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
  36. Good for the rest of the world by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    It is nice to know that the rest of the world will be able to enjoy the benefits of 5g, while here in the U.S.A. AT&T, Verizon and Sprint will be able to charge us $10/month for every device that we want to hook up (maybe more with inflation) plus taxes and "fees" and then put a pathetic data cap on the usage.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  37. Almost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are right about the push being for control, but wrong with your explanation. Anyone looking can see that the internet of things is a huge useless pile of waste that will be used as leverage against the masses. The chronic push to get people watching facebook, youtube, twitter, self driving cars, visiting your doctor over a phone, etc.. is to keep them from looking at reality. The reality is that a few people are gaining immense power while the masses are becoming drones.

  38. Puff piece by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    Don't bother reading if you expect to see any technical insight. The article summary is "oh gosh gee whiz it's so gosh darn fast" followed by a dump about all kinds of amazing things a really fast data link might enable.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re:Puff piece by nikkipolya · · Score: 2

      Thanks for the insightful comment, I skipped reading the article and saved time.

  39. billions of machines hooked to botnets by nikkipolya · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hundreds of billions of machines will be sensing, processing and transmitting data without direct human control and intervention."

    Hundreds of billions of machines will be connected to botnets that will be indirectly controlled by humans for fun and profit at the expense of others.

  40. Re: Reasons why I don't like the Internet of Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think fear is your main problem. Why would IoT give a damn about you peeing or doing your whatever with yourself?

    I believe self importance drives most of the things you've listed.

  41. Might happen sooner by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    This might appear 10 years sooner if the FCC would get the hell out of the way. Profit motive, you know.

    1. Re:Might happen sooner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This might appear 10 years sooner if the FCC would get the hell out of the way. Profit motive, you know.

      Um, yeah. Sure. Whatever. The only reason why we don't all have genuine 4G yet is because of those evil regulators.

      So, tell us. What is the color of the sky over there in your alternative Universe? Just curious.

    2. Re:Might happen sooner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please tell me this is sarcasm. If it were up to the fucking telcos we'd all be paying 100 bucks a month for limited dog shit slow ass service.

  42. Re:Reasons why I don't like the Internet of Things by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Roy Scheider, police chief in Jaws, to Roy Scheider, NSA chief in 2010 Odyssey 2: "We're gonna need a bigger multibillion dollar spy computer center."

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  43. Re: Reasons why I don't like the Internet of Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think fear is your main problem. Why would IoT give a damn about you peeing or doing your whatever with yourself?

    Yeah, why would they care? Why are they collecting all this information about us? I mean, if it is not important then why are they bothering? What's that? You think the original AC was listing off concerns about stuff that would never happen? You do realize that some of his concerns are already happening, right?

    I believe self importance drives most of the things you've listed.

    Hint: just because you are not paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

  44. Never mind that... by whoisjoe · · Score: 1

    I've got Bieber 6G Fever!

  45. Advertising by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    Once everybody is on 5G, it will make it possible for ALL devices to show us advertising. Your refrigerator, your faucet, your toilet, your chair...they will ALL be conspiring to show you advertisements, all the time. As long as AdBlockPlus gets ported to all these devices, we'll be OK!

  46. Doesn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still won't have service at my house. Less than half a mile in either direction from my house is full LTE signal. 100meg cable, sure np. Want some crappy DSL instead? Sure. Want to make a phone call, nope not happening asshole.

  47. Re: Reasons why I don't like the Internet of Thing by segin · · Score: 1

    They're out to get you... and what are they going to do once they get you?