Wait until 5G rolls out into mass adoption where an IoT modem is built into every TV for “diagnostics”
We need to kill these companies and their business models. As fun as it is for smart people like us to perform one-off lobotomies, it doesn't solve the problem.
Some Chromecast products already won't function unless they can talk to Google DNS servers[1].
But the fact that doing so is severely limited to those with the technical knowledge and ability means it's still not a forgivable situation.
It also scares me as to what the future holds when such devices are hard coded with a DNS server using DoH.
I've dug into this, and this is true for certain models and firmware versions, but not for others.
The real downside of course would be the cost. Shit, maybe I'll need to get a real job again after all...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451
Montag awakens ill the next morning. Mildred tries to care for her husband but finds herself more involved in the "parlor wall" entertainment in the living room – large televisions filling the walls.
Beatty recounts the history of how books lost their value and how the firemen were adapted for their current role: over the course of several decades, people began to embrace new media (in this case, film and television), sports, and an ever-quickening pace of life.
Just reinserted them all back in and voila.
The LEDs or drivers sometimes die, but replacements are usually available from ebay or aliexpress.
Funny how one of the repairers found that his 120V only LCD TV had a 120/240 power supply board nonetheless.
Another tv had some bad joints on the panel, but remote diagnostics weren't going to help with big giant vertical lines.
This was a little under ten years ago.
It’s wider bandwidth and faster nitrate so it should be cheaper.
All things equal with both factors above it should take less power (if for nothing else radio is on shorter time).
If not part of the spec itself, it likely will coincide with from the get go.
I have to agree that IoT (bleh. Coming from someone with an in-development connected device) will only become bigger with 5G.
I'm pretty sure this is exactly the opposite: the shorter wavelength signals in 5G are line of sight, much more so than 4G.
Its slightly subtle, but not so much, in the commercials - but you can see that its there - and I believe its a CYA thing.
Now imagine when 5G is mature, and coverage is blanketed AND the Drone ID legislation is passed.
Until regulators force them to become dumb pipes; as they often have for physical infrastructure.
In other words, you don’t need your antennas to be as tall to get around curvature of earth (or that building in the way) with higher frequencies.
So one tall tower and a bunch of receivers on the ground in the desert: 5.8ghz is probably a better choice than 2.4.
Of course there are other factors.
Hah, love it! I’m buying a TV today actually, I’ll use this when I have to convince the Micro Center guys that a dumb TV is really what i want
But I agree, on a technical level, 5G isn't necessary for this. In fact, given the low data rate and non-interactivity of it (it doesn't really matter if the screenshot takes 10 minutes to transfer) they could even get away with GPRS or EDGE.
I think the real push for 5G is that it could replace physical infrastructure and regulators only have policies for forcing availability of physical infrastructure. At least in Canada anyway.