Starry wants to put high-speed 5G internet in reach of everyone.

Techcrunch.com ^ | 9/7/2018 | Ron Miller

[Openurmind]

“Light pollution” is a real thing, Cool to actually “see” the milky way. :)

[GraceG]

Maybe it’s good Islam is taking over, I won’t look foolish walking around in a Cooper mesh faraday cage buqrua.....

[jeffc]

You are correct.

I am so far out in a forest, away from a big city (Ocala is a small city at best), AT&T doesn't even deign to bestow upon us heathens the blessings of their slow, crappy 6 Mb DSL.

We are left to fend for ourselves with using our Verizon phone's hot spot (Verizon is the only service that works out this far)...

[GraceG]

Move to the country, setup a steel quancet building, put trailer house inside of it.

Only way to avoid 5G someday....

[PAR35]

“The system requires high rooftops to function,”

Or, perhaps, a 100 foot tall tower?

[Openurmind]

That’s what we are stuck with too. Wild blue and Hughes is far too expensive for what you actually get, it’s just expensive dial up speed after your high speed allotment is up. So hot spotting or tethering to our phones are the only ways to get online. It’s actually cheaper and faster than satellite even after our high speed limit is up.

[Openurmind]

I think there is an issue with range distance so it would probably need more and closer relay points? I think what they might be describing in function would be similar to relay radio “repeaters”?

[central_va]

I'm 5G ready!

[Basket_of_Deplorables]

“Risks of 5G include:
-DNA single and double-strand breaks (which leads to cancer)
-Oxidative damage (which leads to tissue deterioration and premature ageing)
-Disruption of cell metabolism
-Increased blood-brain barrier ...”

Complete, 100%, B.S.

All of these frequencies are WELL below ionization level, which is required for breaking or altering any molecules, including DNA. What’s the cutoff frequency, you may ask? Simple. UV. Well known.

All of these frequencies are below even infrared. You know, from a warm, sunny day. If IR doesn’t hurt you, neither will they. And their transmit levels, their energy, are WAY below what you receive from sunlight on your arm.

Big-time HOAX.

[Openurmind]

“they will provide these marginal “huge improvements” way too early so they can raise prices across the board....”

Absolutely... And force everyone in the world to purchase a new compatible phone at $500+ a pop.

[Basket_of_Deplorables]

“As an Amateur Radio Operator for about fifty years, being familiar with the frequency spectrum, I know what you are driving at, unfortunately you may be right, but the ignorant public will lap it up anyway.”

As an EE and military trained and FCC licensed RF Tech, with 20+ years in medical (including multiple RF devices, such as MRI scanners) he’s dead wrong.

[T-Bird45]

“...setup a steel quancet building...”

For the benefit of those needing to use a search engine to understand the term, here’s the correct spelling: Quonset. It’s also a trademarked name but I don’t know the HTML code to get the fancy TM subscript...

[Openurmind]

You can sunburn in an hour even when it’s overcast and clouded over. But I think the concern here would be the long term affects and an environment where there are numerous devices in close proximity of each other increasing the true amount of exposure. One might be harmless... But 50 hitting you over extended periods very well might be.

[Basket_of_Deplorables]

Yeah, I read that bs alarmest article, clicked the links in it, and read the stupid WHO study from 2011. No evidence in it. It concludes: Results The evidence was reviewed critically, and overall evaluated as being limited2 among users of wireless telephones for glioma and acoustic neuroma, and inadequate3 to draw conclusions for other types of cancers. The evidence from the occupational and environmental exposures mentioned above was similarly judged inadequate. The Working Group did not quantitate the risk; however, one study of past cell phone use (up to the year 2004), showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas in the highest category of heavy users (reported average: 30 minutes per day over a 10‐year period). Conclusions   Dr Jonathan Samet (University of Southern California, USA), overall Chairman of the Working Group, indicated that "the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk." "Given the potential consequences for public health of this classification and findings," said IARC Director Christopher Wild, "it is important that additional research be conducted into the long‐ term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands‐free devices or texting. " In other words, no evidence, but not enough studies, so keep studying. One debunked paper from friken 2004 cited, and no others. That was 2011. Since then, many, many studies have been done, and no evidence still of any threat. Because the underlying physics says so. See my previous post above. There. Is. No. Threat. From. 5G. And no credible study yet has shown there is.

[palmer]

I heard 5g is based on a wavelength that is deeply effected by moisture. Foggy days mean no Internet

I had experience with wifi (2.4GHz) at long distance, about 5 miles, and medium about 1/4 mile. The fog killed the long distance signal. Rain was no problem except for the shorter distances through trees. No problem in winter, but wet leaves killed the signal. I also had satellite internet for a while and that signal died in heavy rain. My guess is the 5g is closer to the satellite wavelengths which were 20-30 GHz

[Basket_of_Deplorables]

“You can sunburn in an hour even when it’s overcast and clouded over. But I think the concern here would be the long term affects and an environment where there are numerous devices in close proximity of each other increasing the true amount of exposure. One might be harmless... But 50 hitting you over extended periods very well might be.”

That’s from UV, which can be ionizing, esp. UVC. But infrared is not, and all these frequencies are well below that.

As for total absorbed energy, there are already long established standards, heavily regulated. They transmit in milliwatts. Don’t worry. And if you pile 50 devices against you, you won’t even get close to reaching the energy of an incandescent bulb warming your skin. Which is transmitting MUCH higher power, at a MUCH higher frequency.

[Blueflag]

FYI, the posts on the article are deep with partial facts and outright falsehoods.

Once I get on the ground I will respond in depth.

The closest most of these posts get to the truth is that one spectrum band, the millimeter bands, are very short range, (like 100s of yards outdoors or in open interiors. They dont even penetrate drywall.

5G is simply the evolution of the design, that includes how endpoints authenticate and connect, how they send/receive/format data, AND, very importantly, how fast the backhaul is from the ‘towers’ and MIMOs. AND where edge computing will be located.

Today, in some areas, you can get 200+ Mb/sec down and 50 up ON 4G LTE where the system, including back-haul, is fiber-served. I happen to be an ATT customer and our area upgraded to the new 5G Evolution, which T-Mobile and Verizon screamed about, but near my Kroger in rural north GA, I GET 200+ down, nearly 42 up, on 23 ms pings. THAT is WITHOUT any ‘scary’ 5G millimeter wave spectrum deployed. You won’t even be able to buy Samsungs or iOS devices that can connect to those high spectra until near Thanksgiving. Macro network deployment outside announced metros is years away.

Businesses can today install private distributed antennae systems that are multi spectrum and start enjoying REALLY high speeds off cellular with really low pings- because they also employ edge computing at the ‘base of the tower’ in their building. Edge computing plus a private 4G/5G network lets you enjoy VERY low latency, traffic segregation (security/privacy) TODAY. Very few near term applications need super high speeds, but they DO require low pings/latency- like autonomous factories and warehouses.

Long term applications (years away) for the public like augmented reality DO need high speeds from 5G, but not the low latency.

People who dont understand RF are scared of RF regardless of the frequency or wavelength. The big scare point in articles from places like the Guardian is that the shorter wavelengths like CBRS and millimeter wave ARE used in RADARs and microwaves, but at orders of magnitude higher power.

Disruption of DNA is from IONIZING radiation- alpha particles, high power beta (electrons- dont sit so lose to the TV), Gamma and Xray.

#sciencematters. Get a STEM degree or speak with someone who does.

Posted from 24C- exit row aisle, so excuse any typos from my mobile.

[Blueflag]

Thank you! #realscience

[moovova]

Yeah...I noticed the difference between the title and the first sentence in the article...they seem confused.

TITLE - “Starry wants to put high-speed 5G internet in reach of everyone”

FIRST SENTENCE - “Boston startup, wants deliver high-speed 5G internet in major cities at a reasonable price.”

BUTT...if it’s gonna fry me, I don’t want it anywhere.

[Blueflag]

It. Won’t. Fry. You.