It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump team considers nationalizing 5G network

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 07:58 PM
link   
5G. It needs to happen and how and by who is a very big question that Trump is considering.


Trump national security officials are considering an unprecedented federal takeover of a portion of the nation’s mobile network to guard against China, according to sensitive documents obtained by Axios.
www.axios.com...

The govt builds it or the private cell companies build it. There is concern it will take too long for the cell guys to do it. With self driving cars and virtual reality there is pressure to get this done. And Trump's team compares 5G to the highway system that President Eisenhower's administration built.


Two options laid out by the documents:

1 The U.S. government pays for and builds the single network — which would be an unprecedented nationalization of 'historically private infrastructure.
2 An alternative plan where wireless providers build their own 5G networks that compete with one another — though the document says the downside is it could take longer and cost more. It argues that one of the “pros” of that plan is that it would cause “less commercial disruption” to the wireless industry than the government building a network.


Rent some space if you want 5G.
All the big and well loved cell phone companies would rent the network from the Govt.


The best way to do this, the memo argues, is for the government to build a network itself. It would then rent access to carriers like AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile. (A source familiar with the document's drafting told Axios this is an "old" draft and a newer version is neutral about whether the U.S. government should build and own it.)


And with China being able to invest in the US market and the US companies being locked out of China something needs to change. There is real concerns of the lead that China, a nation that has most favored trade status with the US, is moving ahead in the AI race.


AI is a big concern, but unrelated

The document talks about China’s advanced role the development of artificial intelligence.

1 That’s a serious issue, especially since U.S. companies are locked out of China (and the data to be gleaned there), while Chinese companies can take part in the U.S. market.
2 But, that has little to do with 5G wireless networks, since AI processing is done at the server level.
3 “Clearly they are two different things,” Sharma said. “AI benefits from 5G but it doesn’t require it, and there China is racing ahead.”
www.axios.com... sletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=&stream=top-stories




posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:02 PM
link   
so it will cost at least ten times more then and work ten times less .



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:03 PM
link   
make it a public utility and regulate it similar to electricity

we payed for the original infrastructure that Bell naturally monopolized to begin with



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:09 PM
link   
yeah it was through giving easements on our land and what I don't understand is why we have to pay now for the internet companies to have the right to our free easements and then charge us for it.

really americans are so whatever, too much bacon in their brains to think clearly these days



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:12 PM
link   
5G isnt affordable and not compatible with any device yet. It took many years for 4G to be available to the public.

We just got LTE networks. There really is no need for 5G yet tbh.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: WarPig1939
5G isnt affordable and not compatible with any device yet. It took many years for 4G to be available to the public.

We just got LTE networks. There really is no need for 5G yet tbh.


I think he is thinking on the international level.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: toysforadults

I don't know enough about this issue, just read the article.

But if this was like natural gas and how that industry is heavily regulated I would like that.

The cell companies are really really expensive and the contracts bone the consumer.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: musicismagic


That will still take decades long after Trump is gone and still no guarantee of it being done



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: WarPig1939

Self driving cars, virtual reality and tech security was the main focal points of the article. The 5G must be needed for the new tech to have the band width.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:30 PM
link   
5g is the future but it has some interesting health concerns associated with it. its biggest benefit isnt really the bandwidth but the reduced latency. 5g can be sub 5ms latency times which is on par with wired service. personally im all for 5g so we can get rid of people like comcast and such for delivering internet
edit on 28-1-2018 by TheScale because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

and we payed for the backbone and allowed Bell to naturalize a monopoly in exchange for low prices



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I don't think I would want the government in charge of any new theology. If you don't believe me ask Edward Snowden.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
make it a public utility and regulate it similar to electricity. we payed (sic) for the original infrastructure that Bell naturally monopolized to begin with


Not exactly, unless you're still on dial-up. The infrastructure "we paid for" (which is also not quite accurate) was POTS, the point to point copper wire on telephone pole 19th century infrastructure that is fast fading into history and getting more expensive by the minute as people drop their land lines. (My landline has doubled in cost in the last few years.) Sure Bell was given a monopoly. What was the alternative? Can you even imagine how five different companies would string up five different sets of telephone poles down your residential streets so they could be competitive with each other? How would you like to have lived in THAT mess? Hey, we give the fire departments a monopoly, too! It used to be that you would buy fire insurance from one company. If your house caught on fire the companies would send out their trucks, but it had better be the right company, otherwise they would watch your house burn down. But fortunately enough people without bacon in their brains figured out that was absurdly stupid and a monopoly, i.e.: a government-run monopoly made a hell of a lot more sense. Read some history. We real didn't get here by accident.

The current "internet" is a vast structure of privately-funded satellite, cell, and cable parts that has nothing to do with the "Bell System," which no longer exists as a system, though some parts of it remain. Yes, yes, I know about your "free easements" that you so begrudge. How about getting your own service for POTS and electricity, then? No easements required. Of course, then you wouldn't get the service, would you? But up until recently, that was technically the only game in town. It's YOU who are not thinking clearly these days.

No, I do not think a government takeover of 5G will work. That's all we need is MORE government. But if they had policies in place to encourage a 5G roll out that was equitable, we might be on to something. But surely we need not fear the Chinese to make that happen.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:49 PM
link   
We need government to build it out and lease space back to providers to cover the cost. For profit companies have no incentive to do it.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 09:20 PM
link   
This is incredible news. I am very happy!!

I hope they do this. I will absolutely start a 2nd company of nothing but tower climbers. The Golden Age of Wireless is here just as I predicted!!!!





posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 09:24 PM
link   


make it a public utility and regulate it similar to electricity


This can't be said enough.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
We need government to build it out and lease space back to providers to cover the cost. For profit companies have no incentive to do it.


Wait; we want the government to build the cell towers so they can capture all our conversations/texts/internet search history, without having a middle man, and without any need for any kind of warranting at all because it's their property?

Why are we supporting this? Are we really thinking about the play here?

This is obviously about not having to pay/subpoena Apple/Google/Phone Carrier for text messages and internet data. This is to further entrench the big brother spy network -- and I can't believe how many people are like "YES, THEY NEED TO DO THIS" -- no, they don't. They need to be very far away from telecommunications. Your phone data isn't like your electric meter.
edit on 28-1-2018 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 09:38 PM
link   
I don't really know enough about the issue yet to suggest a viable solution, but I tend to think that putting the government in charge of ANYTHING in the commercial sector should be the absolute last option considered. As a general rule, letting the government be be in charge of pretty much ANY commercial venture outside of National Defense is much more likely to end up destroying or ruining it as opposed to helping it.

That being said, at this point in time there are lots of big companies that I distrust ALMOST as much. Although, all things being equal, I tend to think putting the the government in charge of ANYTHING is a recipe for absolute disaster, and generally a really, REALLY bad idea. They have a nasty tendency to to destroy anything they touch. Or at the very LEAST bloat and corrupt it enough that it's either unrecognizable or damn near unusable.

So, yeah, 99% convinced it would be a bad idea.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: MteWamp
I don't really know enough about the issue yet to suggest a viable solution, but I tend to think that putting the government in charge of ANYTHING in the commercial sector should be the absolute last option considered. As a general rule, letting the government be be in charge of pretty much ANY commercial venture outside of National Defense is much more likely to end up destroying or ruining it as opposed to helping it.

That being said, at this point in time there are lots of big companies that I distrust ALMOST as much. Although, all things being equal, I tend to think putting the the government in charge of ANYTHING is a recipe for absolute disaster, and generally a really, REALLY bad idea. They have a nasty tendency to to destroy anything they touch. Or at the very LEAST bloat and corrupt it enough that it's either unrecognizable or damn near unusable.

So, yeah, 99% convinced it would be a bad idea.



This is a whole new level of ignorance.

The Gov built the highways that connected America during WW2. They also built the fiber lines that exist to this day and are still in use. All Broadband Wireless is regulated already by the FCC and you must be licensed to operate in that space with some exceptions.

Private anything FK's it up completely. You are all brainwashed.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 10:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: WarPig1939
5G isnt affordable and not compatible with any device yet. It took many years for 4G to be available to the public.

We just got LTE networks. There really is no need for 5G yet tbh.


If you live in the middle of NOWHERE maybe...



The USA counted for 47% of LTE traffic in 2011...that's SEVEN years ago. . .
www.phonearena.com...




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join