U.S. Government 'Considering' Creation of Nationwide 5G Network [Updated]

[DakotaGuy]

Since Trump is proposing it, the Left will hate it.

This is why it's dangerous to support these ideas no matter who is in charge because leadership changes and you never know who is going to be the next person in charge.

Imagine how easy data collection on Americans will be if the Government owns and controls it all.

 

[thingstoponder]

The government that can't unlock an iPhone is going to build a 5G network. Brilliant.

Not sure why you would think the carrier companies would be better at cracking encryption? Just because they can’t crack it doesn’t mean anyone else can either.

As for the proposal.. I’m skeptical. Is this the future we’re heading? So called free market countries nationalizing and centralizing power in part of a dick waving contest with countries like China in the name of glory and pride? Sounds like a future of war.

How about roll out fiber lines instead? We need competition with broadband, not wireless.

 

[SuperCachetes]

This is correct. As a progressive I do support this because anything that helps more people (lower class) gain access to the network is a good thing. However privacy is a high concern for me. I would hope it is regulated. I believe the “protect against China” bit is propaganda to sell the right-leaders in.

The opinion you quoted is not “correct,” it is political trolling in the form of an uneducated generalization.

Out of curiosity, do you also think that repealing Net Neutrality is going to “help more people (lower class) gain access?”

 

[TiggrToo]

For me this has major issues; right now I'd imagine Republican supporters are in favor of it because it came from the GOP.

Fast forward 8 years - imagine there's now a Democratic President and party in power (and given the swings and roundabouts of party control that's very conceivable ) - then I wonder how many of the plan's GOP supporters today will support such a rollout in the future when the Democrats have control.

In fact, as we've seen before, memories of most people would make a goldfish blush. In the same way all we ever heard for the first few years of Obama's term was 'the Obama Phone' (despite the fact that original Lifeline program this was based upon came in under Ronald Regan in 1984, was increased by Clinton in 1986 and further expanded to cover cellphones by Bush II in 2008), I'd imagine such a program will be labelled the [Insert next DNC POTUS Name here] Spy Network.

In addition, whilst I think that the likes of Verizon Wireless, AT&T et al are pretty gosh darned awful, I have zero faith in the United States government being able to run a 5G Network without screwing it up in some quite spectacular way (no matter who's in power).

We can't even have a public television or radio network without it being squeezed out of existence. What's next, future Government Shutdowns forcing us to lose our wireless connectivity? Arguments over State control over Federal resulting in downed cell towers?

Good grief, the US Government is an absolute mess right now and they want to get involved in running a 5G network? Don't make me laugh!

 

[AlliFlowers]

Who will use it? Who will the government make it available to? Will this actually benefit the poor and provide some equity? Will it be available at no cost to K-12 and higher ed? If this is the case I'm all for it.

If they think they're going to do it to close down current ISPs, all I have to say is ACK!

 

[KPOM]

So now Ajit Pai is the good guy.

 

[v0lume4]

This administration has been superbly incompetent thus far

I don't know, I've seen a ton of positive feedback regarding the new tax bill. I've seen companies dishing out bonuses and wage increases. Hm...

Nothing will get done in three years, and by 2020 we’ll be under new management.

Poll numbers are way up for the current president month over month, we'll see!

 

[cocky jeremy]

Anyone else concerned over privacy issues here if this were to happen?

Privacy? What privacy?

 

[Swampthing]

I would think many liberals would love this because it brings us one step closer to nationalizing industries and communication services. They will claim it takes profiteering out of services and lowers costs. Some also claim we need to do this to electricity as well. The idea of nationalizing industries is one of the pillars of socialism. It's funny that Trump is touting it. I’m not in favor of this at all for many reasons, but I’d think it would get support from many on the left.

This is the problem with all the fake news liberal stereotyping. You're sooooooooooo far off base about liberal thinking that you are completely out of the ball park.

 

[JRobinsonJr]

While I am not thrilled with the notion of government-owned, I am a proponent of separating ownership of physical and logical carriers. i.e. Company A should own and maintain infrastructure while Companies B, C and D rent access and provide services on top of that. This approach would, IMO, address two big gaps in service.

1. Everyone would have access to the same infrastructure. No more issue with AT&T customers having great coverage in a given location while Verizon customers don't. It would also simplify rollout, growth and upgrades.

2. Carriers would be able to compete strictly on value-add service... which should drive competition and additional services.

Everyone wins!

 

[PG(Austin)]

It's funny that Trump is touting it.

He changes his mind between Tweets.
[doublepost=1517242164][/doublepost]

I don't think the government contracting process would work this way. They would put it out for bid, and the winner would build the network in that location.

At a 10x markup, and the winning company would have ties to someone in Washington and have all parties involved lining their pockets. I'm sure they'd figure a way out to get lifetime healthcare for the contractor too.
[doublepost=1517242692][/doublepost]

I don't know, I've seen a ton of positive feedback regarding the new tax bill. I've seen companies dishing out bonuses and wage increases. Hm...

Yes, the tax bill is great for business and a nice bonus check coming to employees of companies who can afford to give them. And permanent tax breaks for them whereas we the people have an expiration date on ours. Once again, those of us paying for everything get screwed.

 

[lederermc]

If they do this then we will probably see sector wide implementation of end-to-end encryption (like iMessage) of voice phone calls which would mean no phone call could be tapped in real time... even with a search warrant.

 

[KPOM]

This administration has been superbly incompetent thus far besides brute forcing a justice that they stole from the previous administration. Nothing will get done in three years, and by 2020 we’ll be under new management.

Relax. This was just an idea that the president hasn’t even seen yet. The FCC Chairman is opposed to it.

 

[filmantopia]

The opinion you quoted is not “correct,” it is political trolling in the form of an uneducated generalization.

Out of curiosity, do you also think that repealing Net Neutrality is going to “help more people (lower class) gain access?”

No, Net Neutrality helps people gain access, and 90% of the population support it. I don't know why you think government broadband and repealing Net Neutrality are politically aligned. They're from completely different schools of thought. This 5G initiative is opposed by the current FCC and wireless lobby. The NN repeal is supported by them.

 

[AsherN]

While I'm in favour of a government initiative to deploy high speed access to airwaves and internet in general, I'm scared of the government having complete control over such a network. Want to suppress information coming from somewhere? No problem, the government can shut down THEIR network.

 

[KPOM]

He changes his mind between Tweets.
[doublepost=1517242164][/doublepost]

At a 10x markup, and the winning company would have ties to someone in Washington and have all parties involved lining their pockets. I'm sure they'd figure a way out to get lifetime healthcare for the contractor too.
[doublepost=1517242692][/doublepost]

Yes, the tax bill is great for business and a nice bonus check coming to employees of companies who can afford to give them. And permanent tax breaks for them whereas we the people have an expiration date on ours. Once again, those of us paying for everything get screwed.

The individual tax cuts will be made permanent later, by whichever party is in charge in 2025. Remember the Bush tax cuts were “temporary,” too, but Obama and the GOP made most of them permanent when they were set to expire.

 

[webbuzz]

Relax. This was just an idea that the president hasn’t even seen yet. The FCC Chairman is opposed to it.

I’ll bet this ends up being a proposal from a contractor or infrastructure manufacturer.

 

[sbailey4]

This administration has been superbly incompetent thus far besides brute forcing a justice that they stole from the previous administration. Nothing will get done in three years, and by 2020 we’ll be under new management.

Guess you are not really paying attention huh?

 

[Blackstick]

Guess you are not really paying attention huh?

Oh I’m seeing it. Alabama going blue for the first time in decades. Time to wake up and realize what complacency brings.

 

[SuperCachetes]

No, Net Neutrality helps people gain access, and 90% of the population support it. I don't know why you think government broadband and repealing Net Neutrality are politically aligned. They're from completely different schools of thought. This 5G initiative is opposed by the current FCC and wireless lobby. The NN repeal is supported by them.

Not sure I said the two issues were politically aligned. Quite the opposite; I reacted to your apparent support of a trollish comment trying to make this government 5G involvement a left-vs-right political issue.

In any case, what I think is that government control of a vital communications network is just as anti-consumer as is repealing controls to prevent monopolistic and exploitative behavior by ISPs.

 

[Blackstick]

I don't know, I've seen a ton of positive feedback regarding the new tax bill. I've seen companies dishing out bonuses and wage increases. Hm...


Poll numbers are way up for the current president month over month, we'll see!

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/29/ver...es-or-raises-from-the-republican-tax-law.html

Not seeing the same as you...

 

[DakotaGuy]

If they do this then we will probably see sector wide implementation of end-to-end encryption (like iMessage) of voice phone calls which would mean no phone call could be tapped in real time... even with a search warrant.

They could just ban encrypted information from being passed across the network. This would be done in the interest of national security. Liberals trust the Government to run stuff so if you have nothing to hide you shouldn't be worried about the Government monitoring all data across their network. Right now any US Govt. data system already makes you ok to an agreement like this if you access it. I don't see this as any different except you'd be subjecting all of your data flow to these requirements. I guess if it brings 5G to the poor it would be worth it? Right?

 

[0007776]

My guess is this will be like the Obama claim that they would bring high speed internet access to rural areas....it'll never happen. It's been a year and they don't even have an immigration bill passed, do we really think they can get THIS done? No way....

I have usable internet speeds thanks to the programs that Obama’s implemented to achieve that. It may not have reached everywhere, but to just ignore it and pretend it never happened is going a bit too far.

 

[KPOM]

Oh I’m seeing it. Alabama going blue for the first time in decades. Time to wake up and realize what complacency brings.

That wasn’t Trump. That was Alabama GOP primary voters wasting two opportunities to nominate an electable candidate.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

This is why it's dangerous to support these ideas no matter who is in charge because leadership changes and you never know who is going to be the next person in charge.

Imagine how easy data collection on Americans will be if the Government owns and controls it all.

On the flip side of the coin, look how easy data collection and manipulation is on Americans is right now for non-U.S. governmental entities. Is that a better outcome? I'm neither condoning nor condemning governmental ownership of 5G, but the reality is privacy is pretty dicey already. I can't say government operation would be any worse than what we now have. The devil is always in the details - to which we have none to even analyze how why it would be necessary for national security, how it would be licensed, cost to build & who pays upfront, etc. Generally, I do believe the marketplace is more efficient than the government, but I'm not going to close my mind without a hearing.

Also, this really isn't all that new regarding airwaves. Even now the government owns and then licenses the airwaves. Long before Internet the government tried (and some inside still try) to censor speech on the TV and radio airwaves. Phone taps have been happening as long as their have been phones. And the Internet itself was built by... the government. Businesses later commercialized it.

Back to airwaves, some of the airwaves the government keeps for itself. In a national emergency the government has the right to "kill" civilian use to give governmental operations more bandwidth. In all of this the U.S. Constitution still reigns supreme regarding search and seize. But it's up to citizens to uphold the Constitution. Otherwise we are just another 3rd world banana republic. 5G or no 5G, citizens' rights have always only been as secure as the integrity of our public servants who took an oath to uphold them.
[doublepost=1517248902][/doublepost]

Oh I’m seeing it. Alabama going blue for the first time in decades. Time to wake up and realize what complacency brings.

Right and remember when Scott Brown won Ted Kennedy's seat, turned it red for the first time in 50+ years. Under your logic that should have meant MA was turning red. But that's not what was going on. It was a fluke special election where the state GOP was amped up because of the healthcare debate and the DEM candidate was lackluster and arrogant. (BTW Coakley also lost her gubernatorial bid to a republican to show how unloved by electorate she was). We know the history from here. Scott served the rest of Kennedy's term and then booted.

Alabama was similar. 3 GOP candidates. The two high profile ones split the vote giving Moore the nod. But Moore was not liked by the GOP in the state much less the rest of the electorate. When the pedo news came out, even fewer GOP were going to vote for him. They'd rather lose. But that is not a harbinger AL is turning blue. It's another fluke we see from time to time with absolutely no meaning at all.