You aren't helping your case by citing the Supermicro article, which was denied by both Amazon and Apple, led to widespread criticism of Bloomberg, and no source came forward.
This is fallacious thinking, if you already have biases that confirm or deny information in accordance with your conclusion. If you continue to apply different standards of proof you will end up with a distorted perception of the world. Maybe not in this subject (but maybe so), though certainly in many more.
The cost of that victory, according to the BBC, is a 1 year delay in the rollout of 5G tech.
That's a pretty large economic cost. Bob can't watch his medical lectures on the train, so ends up behind in class, Mary's company looses a contract to a foreign competitor because she got frustrated with her bad VPN and didn't read over the bid one last time, Fred couldn't afford the cost of the new 5G contracts so didn't get much data and ended up losing touch with his friends who were all group video calling eachother.
All these socio-economic costs cascade for decades or more. Do they really outweigh the theoretical ability for another nation to disrupt network traffic for a few hours until a mitigation is put in place?
Existing 4G LTE connections work well enough for those use cases you listed; users will hardly notice any difference on 5G. The real benefit of 5G will be in the new types of applications it enables.
Not sure if you are being sarcastic, but assuming you aren't. No consumer is asking for 5g, and I don't think any consumer will realise the difference. And not sure that 5g can do much good on a train, unless the train circles around inside a big city and never goes in the countryside where what matters is antenna with long range.
but your wifi is unreliable and slow. Instead of buying a good AP, buy this 5G modem for only $5 and get your nice, capped 20MBit/s for $200 a month. Isn't this just what you need, when every site is slowly just getting a fibre-connection theoretically allowing a community hosted mobile mesh-network in any city which deserves the name.
My understanding is that 4g requires a lot more effort to provision more or less capacity as need arises. I've been to a few brownbags on the topic and I didn't fully understand it (it's not my area of expertise by many hops), but the big selling point the engineers were explaining to us was that they can effectively put telco equipment in cloud-like datacenters and spool up or spin down capacity much simpler than they can now. And then something about the tower-edge being far more advanced and able to be spooled up or down as need requires.
I live on an island near a metro with a lot of traffic when the ferry from the metro arrives, then it disappears. Every single ferry that comes in knocks out 4g responsiveness (or takes it down entirely) while the ferry disembarks until everyone moves away from that area.
So, for me, 5g has a projected material benefit (presuming my understanding of their brownbags were sufficient). I'd love to hear any actual cellular network engineers fully explain it because between words I didn't understand and trying to balance a salad and eat it without a table, I'm sure I misunderstood _something_.
upselling it to everyone not satisfied with shitty wifi from their shittiest telco-modem/router/AP-abomination. And squeezing the lemon in the process.
lately, more and more articles appear, which outline what's the real and actual economic cost of 5G: local area, decentral, unlicensed Wifi-networks should get replaced with a centrally managed and tunable (for $$$ or power) alternative. I suspected this for a long time, but now, more and more people are openly acknowledging it. While this is good for surveillance capitalism, it's not good for anyone else... (I'll happily add some refs, if I'm off the commute).
> Every nation does this with their indigenous population.
And it is always wrong.
> Yet you don't seem to be outraged at the fact native americans are raped and murdered almost everyday in america.
Not under sanction of the state, and Non native americans are also raped and murdered almost every day in america. These things are crimes in USA regardless of the victim, where in China the state is sanctioning it and doing it.
It is a bit weird that there are whole movements like BDS setup against Isreal, a wholly democratic and liberal country where people of all religions enjoy the same rights and nobody is placed in concentration camps, while every time someone mentions that China is a bad actor we get asked why does BDS not exists.
BDS does exist, and China is a bad actor and should be opposed.
I assume you are referring to the Democrat controlled US House passing a resolution with bipartisan support and a 398-17 vote which condemns BDS[1].
BDS is still allowed to operate and the condemnation has no state-actionable consequences against BDS. And there are members of the US congress who openly support BDS.
Yea I'm just pointing out it doesn't work in the slightest. I agree with you for the most part. Especially in the case of China which for the most part is self sufficient. While israel relies on american intervention to even run sufficiently. But I also want to point out the groups perpetuating this in america are the republicans who dont actually care and are doing for xenophobic reasons not for the best interest of the people in these camps especially when they run their own.
A prison is not a concentration camp, US has a justice system with the right to trial and appeal, and if the people in prison actually committed crimes then I'm not sure what the problem is.
When a fifteen year old can be put into prison for years in some U.S. states for some weed it hardly makes makes the U.S. look like it values human rights. It’s more akin to the U.S. being ‘the skinniest kid in fat camp.’ Congratulations on being better than China and Saudi Arabia I guess...
> When a fifteen year old can be put into prison for years in some U.S. states for some weed it hardly makes makes the U.S. look like it values human rights.
Would like to see some examples of this, and numbers of this. I really doubt this is widespread.
And further, if it does happen, it would have to get through prosecutors, jury, governors, etc - all of who will completely eaten alive by the press if the kid could even be misinterpreted to be a minority in the USA and the whole world would know about it. Where if someone mentions China is not exactly a good actor we get a whataboutism shitstorm.
There were judges that were convicted of sending black kids to for profit prisons they held stock in. Believing there isn't systemic racism in the prosecutorial system at this point is the same as believing there isn't systemic racism in policing. Just because you aren't personally affected doesn't mean a problem isn't wide spread.
This has nothing to do with the topic at hand and was another whataboutism off shoot from the main topic.
Many people in prison in the US did not commit the crime they were accused of; thanks to wildly inflated sentencing, many people choose a 1-year plea bargain over a 10-15 year roll of the dice.
> Many people in prison in the US did not commit crimes;
By all means cite %, and still does not make it a concentration camp.
Further the DAs are themselves elected locally in many jurisdictions or appointed by locally elected officials and people can vote for change if they want it.
> You can always tweak law to make criminal out of anyone inconvenient.
And this would be immoral and if you are suggesting the US is doing this you would need to actually back that up.
> Wasn't Assange's consensual sex relegated to rape?
Even if it was, that is not an example of tweaking the law to make a criminal out of anyone inconvenient, it is a case of tweaking the truth to fit the definition of something which is a crime, and should be a crime.
> I'm constantly seeing westerners whine about Chinese human rights violations while simultaneously ignoring the HR violations occurring everywhere else, especially in the west. American cops routinely kill people.
There has been protests for more than a month in the USA and the west because one black man was murdered by police. The police officer that murdered him will be charged and brought to justice.
There has been nowhere near this level of outrage against the actions of China, and nobody will bring the perpetrators there to justice.
To suggests that HR violations in the west is being ignored is laughable and dishonest and is evidence of your ulterior motives.
The only way this makes sense is abstract of any value judgements, and yes sure, if we in the west ignore that everything about the Chinese Communist Party and how it conducts itself is an affront to our values then it makes no difference. But we are humans, we have values, we make value judgements.
