Pulling apart a £339 anti-5G USB stick

Laws against false advertising on the other hand...

~~~

(1) A person commits an offence if he uses apparatus for the purpose of interfering with wireless telegraphy.

(2) This section applies—

(a) whether or not the apparatus in question is wireless telegraphy apparatus;

...

~~~

Obviously, the "purpose" of the person using the anti-5G USB stick would need to be established. Given the law doesn't mention anything about having any effect on wireless telegraphy, presumably as long as mens rea is established the offence is made out.

There are also other potential offences around consumer misselling, false advertising, etc.

---

[0] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/36/part/3/crosshead...

I understand that the Council set up a 5G Advisory Committee, and the person mentioning these anti-5G USB sticks is a member of the advisory committee but isn't an elected councillor.

Did you hear about the homeopath that died of an overdose? He forgot to take his pills.

I understand what you were getting at just thought I'd give my 2c about chakras because I thought some people would bundle them in with healing crystals when they can be separated out as tools for meditation.

Not there.

The claim is not supported by the article you cite. The article uses a lot of words about "security" but the truth is 5G has no worse security compared to 2G 3G etc.

The claims about 5G in China "used for surveillance" from the article are also false, as China started installing 5G equipment just very recently, like a few months ago, and the number of 5G-capable phones in China is minimal. Whatever they needed for "surveillance" they could have used the older technologies just as well.

Edit: To answer "Is your point..." question below: neither nor, to both of your constructs. The article simply doesn't support its major claim, because all the "problems" they cite (security, surveillance) are completely not specific to 5G, and their claims of existing relation to 5G technology are obviously false, just as I wrote.

Some people have always been susceptible to quackery, there seems to be something seductive about the idea that you’ve found a wonderful solution the mainstream have rejected or don’t understand. I don’t think fringe claptrap is somewhere faulty logic leads them to, I think it’s the destination they are attracted to and the pretext they latch on to doesn’t matter that much.

So, take a second. We don't understand fully how the brain's memory system works. There are some people who have an extreme ability to recall autobiographical details about literally every single day they ever lived. What the weather was like, what clothes they wore, who they talked to, things that happened. That's far beyond most people. But that establishes that clearly the brain has both the capacity and wiring to this at some level, and it can actually be turned on. We only need to be open to the idea that perhaps all brains do this at some level, recording our whole experience at some level of fidelity, below our conscious mind. I say, "at some level of fidelity" because we don't really know how detailed our memories really are. If it was just a heartbeat counter, it would only take 33 bits (!); if it was a transcript of the words we spoke, it would fit in less than 100mb. Of course it is probably not a full dump of any kind, but a patchwork of cross-referenced, reinforced, compressed, maybe slightly damaged things. Sometimes just emotions. It really doesn't matter what format it is, because the following will always be true.

At some point in your life, there will come a "midpoint" where more you have already experienced more before that point than you will afterwards.

Before the midpoint, there are still more events in your future than in your past, so you are fundamentally not capable of imagining all the future events--not only their nature, but the weight of their existence. The fidelity of your memories really doesn't matter here; you cannot fully appreciate 20 years of experience when you have lived only 10.

After the midpoint, one of two things is true:

Either,

1. We cannot remember all of the details about our lives. We have a radically simplified and compressed form which pales in comparison to the real moment-to-moment experience (i.e. low resolution). 2. We can remember all of the details about our lives (i.e. high resolution), but we don't have enough time left to replay them all in full quality.

Either way, our past life, in its full glory, is beyond our capacity to imagine.

So that means before the midpoint and after the midpoint it is subjectively infinite; there is always more, even in our own experiences, than we can experience or re-experience.

And that's just our own minds! If we aren't completely solipistic and believe all the rest of this vastly complicated world really does exist, then its doubly infinite, because every time we learn something new about how it works, we have to reimagine and reinterpret the complexities of the past with the new information. Like learning about people. Sometimes you seem them do things that make no sense; only when you get to know them later do you understand why they might have done that, and what they might have been thinking. Or looking at an old photograph you see someone you didn't know then but know now, and the past is even more detailed and rich than what you knew.

So I don't know who told you that consciousness is a hallucination, and that it must be meaningless and trite. Maybe they just lived a boring life, because TBH you're missing a hell of a good show as this whole thing unfolds.

Try LSD sometime.