The Ornery American Forums

General Category => General Comments => Topic started by: TheDrake on January 29, 2018, 10:00:14 AM

Title: Government 5G
Post by: TheDrake on January 29, 2018, 10:00:14 AM

Is it more fake news? A "false flag" from a deep state operative to scare people about government intrusion? A job creation initiative? Currently I would classify this report about 5G as "low confidence" but it is intriguing.

It comes out of AXIOS (, whatever that is, and unconfirmed by major news outlets, but happily rebroadcast by CNN, CNBC - Reuters picked it up later. They do have the purported raw slide deck on the website.

5G is likely to become the primary channel of personal communication, including in-home wifi. I wouldn't be at all comfortable with the government owning the infrastructure for that. Anyone advocating it would clearly be interested in using this for surveillance domestically. The reported window dressing is to prevent Chinese hacking because they manufacture the equipment?
Title: Re: Government 5G
Post by: TheDeamon on January 29, 2018, 10:30:00 AM
Considering Trump's own FCC Chairman has come out solidly against Nationalized 5G, I think the idea is dead on arrival.

That the Carriers also oppose it(for obvious reasons) just further cements things.

I could certainly see the NSA trying to float the idea, as it makes their job easier. But that doesn't mean the idea actually "has legs" and could go anywhere.

Besides which, this is an Administration that claims to be Republican. Attempting to nationalize the wireless telecommunications industry, even "for National Security Reasons" is going to be a bridge too far for the vast majority of Republicans. Democrats, that might be a slightly different story, but I think even they would balk at it.
Title: Re: Government 5G
Post by: Seriati on January 30, 2018, 02:11:48 PM
Does someone have a good idea on the pros and cons?  At a naive level I can see a case for and against centralizing it, but less sure on the for and against decentralizing (other than as beneficiary of the centralization arguments).