darkvader
About
- Banned
- Username
- darkvader
- Joined
- Visits
- 110
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 3,581
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 1,146
Reactions
-
FAA forced 5G rollout delays despite no proof of harm, claim trade bodies
kempathonnodge said:
You can’t prove a negative, and what exactly how that wording can be interpreted is infinite.darkvader said:The FAA does their job, wants to be sure planes don't fall out of the sky.The telcos whine about it.The standard in aviation isn't "proof of harm" - it's "as close as possible to proof that there is no harm". And if there's a chance, even a small chance, that these frequencies used for cell phone data is going to interfere with older altimeters (I'm assuming radar altimeters, I doubt pressure altimeters could be affected) then the FAA did exactly what they're supposed to do - put the brakes on and demand testing.The telcos need to calm down. 5G isn't a big deal for the vast majority of people, not having planes fall out of the sky is.Planes falling out of the sky is not a rational consideration here - slight interferrance would have backup systems in place and, as reported, has not been demonstrated.Rolling out 5G is important to users, as data usage is increasing, and each new iteration of networks increases capacity and reduces the chance of having slow speeds. Blocking the technology when there is almost no risk is ridiculous.If the FAA was in the game of no risk, they wouldn’t fly planes or allow Boeing planes in the sky… there is evidence of harm there!As I said, "as close as possible to proof that there is no harm". I'm fully aware that you can't prove a negative, but you can get as close as possible.What we don't know is which systems are vulnerable to interference from this frequency being used for 5G, how much greater that interference will be if there is a wide rollout of 5G on that frequency, and what the potential is for that interference to cause a "controlled flight into terrain". And those are all things that should be known before it's turned on in wide deployment. Maybe it's nothing, maybe it's safe to go ahead. Taking a bit longer makes sense.Maybe a few users care about 5G. I strongly suspect that the vast majority do not really care all that much. It's certainly not a life or death issue, which a failing altimeter can be. Pressure altimeters are great, but weather change + radar altimeter interference + mountain can in fact cause a really bad day.And yes, the FAA definitely has some regulatory capture problems. This isn't one of them. The regulatory capture problem here is the FCC, which approved these frequencies for 5G before they should have. The FAA shouldn't be a Boeing cheerleader, the FCC shouldn't be a telco cheerleader.
-
Apple's Self Service Repair unlikely to impact iPhone upgrade cycle, study finds
DAalseth said:I remember this with Macs and other computers. There was a lot of talk about upgradability, A lot of people here and on other sites saying how critical it was to be able to add RAM, or replace drives, and such. But the fact was they were the minority. Most people would buy a computer, use it until it didn't do what they wanted any more, and then replace it.Except that's not even remotely close to true. Back when you could upgrade RAM and hard drives on Macs, the VAST majority of people bought the minimum configuration and either upgraded immediately or a few years later when RAM and HD prices dropped.Apple knew this, and that's why the RAM and SSDs are soldered now. There is NO valid technical reason for it. It's purely a cash grab by Apple. Any performance gains are trivial, whole system reliability goes through the floor and TCO goes through the roof with soldered SSDs. -
AirPods are no longer cool, claim people who can't afford them
I mean, they've never been 'cool'. The reality is that you look like you've got snot dripping out of your ears.If you can live with that for the functionality, fine. But you look about as uncool as somebody dragging toilet paper on their shoe.
-
FAA forced 5G rollout delays despite no proof of harm, claim trade bodies
The FAA does their job, wants to be sure planes don't fall out of the sky.The telcos whine about it.The standard in aviation isn't "proof of harm" - it's "as close as possible to proof that there is no harm". And if there's a chance, even a small chance, that these frequencies used for cell phone data is going to interfere with older altimeters (I'm assuming radar altimeters, I doubt pressure altimeters could be affected) then the FAA did exactly what they're supposed to do - put the brakes on and demand testing.The telcos need to calm down. 5G isn't a big deal for the vast majority of people, not having planes fall out of the sky is.
-
'Apple Car' will disrupt auto industry, says Morgan Stanley
They're nuts.Sure, a few people are going to be fine not owning a car. Most of those people already don't own a car today. Uber is a thing, taxis are a thing, buses are a thing, you can have somebody else drive you around if you want. And yes, autonomous taxis will be a thing.But Americans at least are NOT going to give up on the concept of personal car ownership. If you own the car, it's there when you need it, you have the freedom to make last minute plan changes. And (this is really important) you can leave your stuff in it. You don't have to worry about whether you left something in the taxi. If you're going somewhere that you need more stuff than you want to carry into where you're going, you can leave the rest in the car and get it later if you need it.The concept that Americans are going to give up owning cars is as crazy as the concept that most Americans would give up on owning homes.
