Hacker News Reader

Comment by codingdave | Hacker News Reader

I don't know either - but that makes the choice simple. I'll stay away. This kind of dichotomy is almost always fed by financially interested parties, so I'll pick the safer choice - avoiding the possibility of harm until/unless everyone gets it sorted (by parties without financial interests in the answer) that it is definitively safe.

View on HN

> until/unless everyone gets it sorted (by parties without financial interests in the answer) that it is definitively safe.

This has never happened with anything. You're just pretending Pascal's Wager becomes a valid argument when applied to 5G radiation.

Since when was it not?

The difficulty is that with 5G, there is no option to stay away or pick the safer choice (save moving to some remote area), as the 5G base stations will transmit to everyone indiscriminately with no possibility of opting out.

True. Most of the fight I've seen has been at the city level, debating the regulations for where the base stations can be placed, and what ROW is granted to support them. But if people fail to engage with their local government when the topic is discussed, it would be difficult to fight after the fact.

It's one thing if you use a phone yourself, but the energy hitting you from the base stations is far less than what you get in that area of frequencies from the sun.

If that's true, how does the phone manage to pick the signal out from all that solar radiation?

frequency filtering.

You can filter out a stable amount pretty easily but oops I just checked the blackbody math again and an exponent flipped when I changed one of the ranges while everything else stayed almost the same, I screwed up and ignore everything I said.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com