Question BOYCOTT 5G LTE

[blahcomp222]

LOOL,
they're phasing out 3G.

I have 4g on my phone like most people, but I barely ever use or need it, sometimes I'll be in a big box store and need to google info on something and 4G works better there, or I'm driving and need to switch on directions very quickly, then I might use 4G for a little bit, but otherwise 3G works JUST FINE lol. Eww is that a 5G lte phone?

I'm in a somewhat good coverage zone for 3G but I think most people are too and would do fine with 3G.

I don't understand the infatuation with high speed wireless, or things like air pods that beam radiation straight into your brain. Yes certain businesses that NEED TO transfer lots of data wireless would benefit from faster speeds but MOST people don't.
I have my phone in airplane mode all the time and then if I want to send/check texts, I'll just take it out of airplane mode real quick, or apply data (3G) to send a picture text or use the internet for a bit.
I use speaker phone mostly too, I try to cut short voice calls, some people like to talk talk talk on voice calls.


I'm just saying, this radiation stuff is scary, 4g is <<edited>> killing trees, lol, and now they want to do 5G and get rid of 3G. Soo dumb.

Same for home internet, there's usually no reason for wireless, it's SLOWER, LESS SECURE, HAS RADIATION. People are <<edited>> to new trends being force fed to them.

 

[weCzarek]

Same for home internet, there's usually no reason for wireless, it's SLOWER, LESS SECURE, HAS RADIATION. People are <<edited>> to new trends being force fed to them.

There're reasons for wireless network. For example I live in a small countryside in Poland. The mobile network is one of the only options here. On 4G I can get up to 50Mb/s of download. That wouldn't be possible on standard, cabled network (which is up to 9Mb/s where I live)

In Poland the operators says that there's 99% 4G signal coverage in country, which isn't even true. In Podlaskie (something close to a region or state) the coverage of 3G is up to 90%, not saying about 4G.

If that's the future. I don't see it very well

 

[hang-the-9]

LOOL,
they're phasing out 3G.

I have 4g on my phone like most people, but I barely ever use or need it, sometimes I'll be in a big box store and need to google info on something and 4G works better there, or I'm driving and need to switch on directions very quickly, then I might use 4G for a little bit, but otherwise 3G works JUST FINE lol. Eww is that a 5G lte phone?

I'm in a somewhat good coverage zone for 3G but I think most people are too and would do fine with 3G.

I don't understand the infatuation with high speed wireless, or things like air pods that beam radiation straight into your brain. Yes certain businesses that NEED TO transfer lots of data wireless would benefit from faster speeds but MOST people don't.
I have my phone in airplane mode all the time and then if I want to send/check texts, I'll just take it out of airplane mode real quick, or apply data (3G) to send a picture text or use the internet for a bit.
I use speaker phone mostly too, I try to cut short voice calls, some people like to talk talk talk on voice calls.


I'm just saying, this radiation stuff is scary, 4g is <<edited>> killing trees, lol, and now they want to do 5G and get rid of 3G. Soo dumb.

Same for home internet, there's usually no reason for wireless, it's SLOWER, LESS SECURE, HAS RADIATION. People are <<edited>> to new trends being force fed to them.

Could you explain how 3G is better than 4 or 5G? And could you explain how people in the modern world that use modern services would run them on 3G?

You know that 3G is wireless radiation also right? As is the WiFi signal that is in pretty much every building in the modern world.

I think this guy may have the same ideas, maybe there is a club out there to join.

 

[nigelivey]

LOOL,
they're phasing out 3G.

I have 4g on my phone like most people, but I barely ever use or need it, sometimes I'll be in a big box store and need to google info on something and 4G works better there, or I'm driving and need to switch on directions very quickly, then I might use 4G for a little bit, but otherwise 3G works JUST FINE lol. Eww is that a 5G lte phone?

I'm in a somewhat good coverage zone for 3G but I think most people are too and would do fine with 3G.

I don't understand the infatuation with high speed wireless, or things like air pods that beam radiation straight into your brain. Yes certain businesses that NEED TO transfer lots of data wireless would benefit from faster speeds but MOST people don't.
I have my phone in airplane mode all the time and then if I want to send/check texts, I'll just take it out of airplane mode real quick, or apply data (3G) to send a picture text or use the internet for a bit.
I use speaker phone mostly too, I try to cut short voice calls, some people like to talk talk talk on voice calls.


I'm just saying, this radiation stuff is scary, 4g is <<edited>> killing trees, lol, and now they want to do 5G and get rid of 3G. Soo dumb.

Same for home internet, there's usually no reason for wireless, it's SLOWER, LESS SECURE, HAS RADIATION. People are <<edited>> to new trends being force fed to them.

Thats all very nice for you but you are making sweeping statements about what people need and even wilder statements about the danger. It's simply not backed up with science.

 

[dorsai]

There is a limited amount of radio spectrum available to cell phone companies to satisfy demand...it's the reason older technology like 3g is replaced with newer higher speed services.

As far as killing trees...lol

 

[blahcomp222]

well, whether cell towers are killing trees or not, I have heard about that, and did a quick google and image search about it before posting, without digging too much as though it were a myth because I didn't think it was supposed to be a myth, but I saw lots of headlines/titles saying it's been 'concluded' and proven.
Still pretty sure it's %100 true that any of this radiation is not good for people, and the more Gs, the worse.

I'm just saying, 3g is 'better' than 4 and 5g in the sense that for most people who get good 3G reception, that's all you need. I have a $100 android phone and 3G is perfectly fine to stream a video or driving directions. Sometimes yes in a store/building I need to switch to 4G to get it faster or at all, but that's rare.

Yes the power of 5G is usable for certain things, like I'm seeing all these 5G commercials all of a sudden, and one is saying something like firefighters can have x ray vision through smoke, provided by real-time 5G relaying sonar type vision - OK that makes sense and that's great and all but normal people dilly dallying on their phones just don't need that much power (radiation).

EWw is that a 5G phone?

 

[COLGeek]

well, whether cell towers are killing trees or not, I have heard about that, and did a quick google and image search about it before posting, without digging too much as though it were a myth because I didn't think it was supposed to be a myth, but I saw lots of headlines/titles saying it's been 'concluded' and proven.
Still pretty sure it's %100 true that any of this radiation is not good for people, and the more Gs, the worse.

I'm just saying, 3g is 'better' than 4 and 5g in the sense that for most people who get good 3G reception, that's all you need. I have a $100 android phone and 3G is perfectly fine to stream a video or driving directions. Sometimes yes in a store/building I need to switch to 4G to get it faster or at all, but that's rare.

Yes the power of 5G is usable for certain things, like I'm seeing all these 5G commercials all of a sudden, and one is saying something like firefighters can have x ray vision through smoke, provided by real-time 5G relaying sonar type vision - OK that makes sense and that's great and all but normal people dilly dallying on their phones just don't need that much power (radiation).

EWw is that a 5G phone?

The Internet if full of lies, conspiracy theories, quackery, and pseudo-science. Don't believe everything you read.

More "Gs" means zero. Your concerns are baseless. However, feel free to hang on to your old tech as long as you can.

Take care.

 

[USAFRet]

well, whether cell towers are killing trees or not, I have heard about that, and did a quick google and image search about it before posting, without digging too much as though it were a myth because I didn't think it was supposed to be a myth, but I saw lots of headlines/titles saying it's been 'concluded' and proven.
Still pretty sure it's %100 true that any of this radiation is not good for people, and the more Gs, the worse.

I could probably find (or make) a headline that says you personally are made out of green cheese.

Doesn't make it true.

 

[hang-the-9]

well, whether cell towers are killing trees or not, I have heard about that, and did a quick google and image search about it before posting, without digging too much as though it were a myth because I didn't think it was supposed to be a myth, but I saw lots of headlines/titles saying it's been 'concluded' and proven.
Still pretty sure it's %100 true that any of this radiation is not good for people, and the more Gs, the worse.

I'm just saying, 3g is 'better' than 4 and 5g in the sense that for most people who get good 3G reception, that's all you need. I have a $100 android phone and 3G is perfectly fine to stream a video or driving directions. Sometimes yes in a store/building I need to switch to 4G to get it faster or at all, but that's rare.

Yes the power of 5G is usable for certain things, like I'm seeing all these 5G commercials all of a sudden, and one is saying something like firefighters can have x ray vision through smoke, provided by real-time 5G relaying sonar type vision - OK that makes sense and that's great and all but normal people dilly dallying on their phones just don't need that much power (radiation).

EWw is that a 5G phone?

It's still confusing why 3G is good but 4 or 5G is not, did you see some sort of study that showed that one is better for your health? How is a slower tech better than a newer faster one that has more industry support? I mean horses were pretty good also, who needs a loud, polluting and fast car when a horse will get you to your neighbor's house and won't run out of gas and is not likely to drive off a cliff if you fall asleep on it or get you a speeding ticket when you go 80 while listening to Motley Crue? In fact, that whole FM radio thing, what's wrong with good old AM mono, FM radio also produces all this extra radiation. As do TV transmissions, AM radio, the sun, power stations and a few other things that have been around for a while.

Not sure why you would want a slower connection even if you personally don't need a faster one, at least you still have the option to run things that need a faster connection. It's like saying that you don't want to have $100 because you are only going to spend $20 today, so lets just throw the other $80 away as being not as good as a 20 since who wants to carry around that extra 80 when it's not needed for you today.

 

[bryanc723]

I'll just throw some things out there...
3g, 4g, 5g etc isn't different radiation, it's different software translating that radiation more better than the last generation. The frequency changes are irrelevant in this aspect. The radiation put out by these devices is everywhere. It's not like Gamma or Beta radiation. It's in the uhf range. Radio frequency isn't the same as cpu frequency if that was a thing here.
I hate to be political here, but take the liberal mess with a grain of salt. Cell phone towers aren't killing trees. It doesn't work like that. Recycle tho.

 

[COLGeek]

No politics folks. Even (especially) if pure fantasy.

 

[Brian_180]

Just responding to what is actually important in the original post and ignoring the unsubstantiated political nonsense:

Same for home internet, there's usually no reason for wireless, it's SLOWER, LESS SECURE, HAS RADIATION. People are <<edited>> to new trends being force fed to them.

Both of the claims that it's slower and less secure are false on a practical level.

The only thing that makes wifi less secure than ethernet is the user. If you're prone to using passwords such as "password" then yes, many people could likely be intercepting your signal.

As for it being slower, this is basically no longer true for most people on Earth. A data center wouldn't want to use wifi as its main backbone but grandma streaming Doc Martin on Netflix will never notice a difference in speed between any of the wireless standards developed in the last decade.

Modern routers such as this ASUS RT-AX3000 are capable of wireless speeds that exceed the actual data connection that most people even have access to (2.4Gbps... I can't even get 1Gbps where I live and I live in a big city). It also has WPA3 192-bit encryption which would take longer than the heat death of the universe to crack with current technology.

People who develop these technologies aren't stupid and there's no conspiracy behind it. These standards are developed to solve problems with existing technologies.