U.S. Efforts To Block Huawei Gives China An Advantage

February 21, 2019

For several centuries China had a monopoly on silk. It was exported along the silk road to Persia and from there to Europe. Silk production was highly profitable. The export of silkworms and their production method was prohibited. in the mid 6-th century two monks made their way from Europe to China and found out how silk was produced. They reported back to the Byzantine emperor Justitian I who induced them to secretly acquire silkworms and to smuggle them back home. The monks managed to do that and soon thereafter the Chinese silk monopoly, and Persia's monopoly of silk trade with Europe, were no more.

The U.S. fears that China will soon be able to compete with it in computer chip design and fabrication. It is trying to block China from building its own chip factories and Congress even wants to block chip exports to specific Chinese companies. It is race that the U.S. will lose. Technology and the means of producing it inevitably proliferate.

The 5G mobile data networks will use new frequencies and algorithms to deliver gigabit data streams from, to and between mobile devices. This will allow for completely new applications like direct communication between (semi-)autonomous cars at any road crossing. Worldwide a number of companies are working to provide 5G technology. That involves antennas, base stations, new hard- and software in the periphery and in the core telecommunication systems. Main providers of such systems are U.S. companies like Motorola, Qualcomm and Cisco. Others are Ericsson and Samsung. One of the largest one is the Chinese company Huawei.

Currently Huawei is the most advanced company in the 5G field. It started early and invested huge sums into research and development for 5G technology. It owns some 15% of all relevant patents. It is currently the only provider that can deliver an end-to-end solution for 5G networks. As it serves the huge market of China it can produce on a large scale and sell its equipment for less than other companies do. The other dominant telecommunication equipment provider, including those in the United States, are lagging in 5G technology. They did not invest early enough and are now late to deliver.

Instead of investing in faster development and better technology the U.S. is trying to block Huawei from selling its goods. This hurts the development of other countries that want to provide 5G networks to their people.

The U.S. has long pressed its allies not to use Chinese equipment in their phone networks. It falsely claims that Huawei equipment is a security threat.

Australia and New Zealand followed the U.S. order and prohibited the use of Huawei equipment in their 5G networks. The U.S. also tried to press the big European countries to shun Huawei. So far it failed. Germany resisted U.S. pressure to not use Huawei stuff. It fears delays in 5G deployment should it ban Huawei. Yesterday Britain also pushed back:

Britain is able to manage the security risks of using Huawei telecoms equipment and has not seen any evidence of malicious activity by the company, a senior official said on Wednesday, pushing back against U.S. allegations of Chinese state spying.
…
“Our regime is arguably the toughest and most rigorous oversight regime in the world for Huawei,” [Chiaran Martin head of Britain’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which] is part of Britain’s GCHQ intelligence agency, said at a cybersecurity conference in Brussels.

Asked later whether Washington had presented Britain with any evidence to support its allegations, he told reporters: “I would be obliged to report if there was evidence of malevolence … by Huawei. And we’re yet to have to do that. So I hope that covers it.”

If Britain, a member of the Five Eyes intelligence sharing group, sees no danger in using Huawei then the U.S. has lost the case.

It is likely that Britain's announcement yesterday prompted this double-pronged U.S. reaction today:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump – 13:55 utc – 21 Feb 2019
I want 5G, and even 6G, technology in the United States as soon as possible. It is far more powerful, faster, and smarter than the current standard. American companies must step up their efforts, or get left behind. There is no reason that we should be lagging behind on………

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump – 13:59 utc – 21 Feb 2019
….something that is so obviously the future. I want the United States to win through competition, not by blocking out currently more advanced technologies. We must always be the leader in everything we do, especially when it comes to the very exciting world of technology!

Within the same hour that Donald Trump claimed he wants "fair competition" over new mobile technology, his Secretary of State Mike Pompeo attempted to blackmail U.S. allies into not using Huawei systems:

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Thursday warned that the United States would not be able to partner with or share information with countries that adopt Huawei Technologies Co Ltd systems, citing security concerns.

In an interview on Fox Business Network, Pompeo said nations in Europe and elsewhere need to understand the risks of implementing Huawei’s telecommunications equipment and that when they did, they would ultimately not use the company’s systems.

“If a country adopts this and puts it in some of their critical information systems, we won’t be able to share information with them, we won’t be able to work alongside them,” Pompeo said.

Pompeo's thread sounds harsh. It is certainly not in the spirit of "winning through competition" that his boss promotes. It is also useless.

U.S. secret services exchange information with many other countries. The Five Eyes cooperation with Canada, Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand involves a gigantic world wide data acquisition effort known to "collect it all". The results are shared within the group. U.S. services also exchange data with many other spy services on a more limited base. This includes exchanges even with 'enemy states' like Russia or Syria. But these are all two or more sided deals. They are based on give and take. If the U.S. stops providing, for example, information about Islamic State terrorists, others will stop to provide similar information to the United States.

Exchange of intelligence is always done to the advantage of both sides. If the U.S. would stop to provide what it does it would also lose access to the information the counterparts provide. Besides that the use of this or that mobile phone system or technology is irrelevant for exchanging data about security threads. Pompeo's threat is meaningless and will be rejected.

Huwaei is no more a security threat than any other telecommunication equipment provider. The greatest danger from all of them are quality issues with their code that allows various secret services and other criminals to hack into such equipment. The Snowden files provided that the U.S. regularly hacks into and bugs U.S. provided communication equipment. In 2012 the NSA tried to install an exploit on the Cisco routers that run the central Internet node of Syria. It made an error that 'bricked' the routers and cut Syria off the Internet.

Unlike many U.S. companies Huawei gives foreign governments access to the source code for its equipment. It supports special laboratories in Germany, Britain, Singapore and elsewhere, that can inspect and test the code and equipment before its use. It recently announced that it would also open its central 5G development process in China to foreign government inspection.

The only issue that these labs have found so far is that the Chinese programmers at Huawei are as sloppy and error prone as programmers elsewhere are. Their coding is neither more elegant nor of higher quality. The NSA will have little problems hacking into it.

The U.S. attempt to block the deployment of Huawei equipment is obviously made for economic reason. The building of the Internet provided a huge boom to the U.S. telecommunications industry. A move into the 5G markets is supposed to prolong that. Unfortunately U.S. companies dropped the ball. Their leadership wanted to show short term profits and wasted it on share buy backs. The companies invested too little in research and development. Huawei beat them fair and square by being the first to offer the full line of the next generation products.

With hindering Huawei the Trump administration is playing for time so that U.S. companies can catch up. But that is again stupid short term thinking. The real profits in 5G networks will not be made with communication equipment but with the products enabled by it. The U.S. developed the Internet and sold it to the world. Cisco and other hardware manufacturers got rich. But there are also Google and Amazon which became even richer by providing the applications that run on top of the net.

If "the west" delays 5G deployment while China implements it, Chinese companies will have the time advantage to create the products which will run on top of the new global communication layer. It would allow China to incubate the next Google and Amazon like giants before other countries can even test the basic technology. That is the very reason why European countries do not follow the U.S. lead.

It was short term thinking that let the U.S. drop the ball on next generation telecommunications. If it wants to regain the lead it will have to change that attitude.

Posted by b on February 21, 2019 at 20:03 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Robert Snefjella @100–
I’m all for the utilization of the Precautionary Principle, but for it to have any bearing on humanity’s health, it ought to have been invoked in spades when coal first started being used to boil water. Clearly, we are way beyond that point and essentially we are well beyond any reasonable point of no return when it comes to fatally soiling our one and only nest, as the book Our Stolen Future attests. I was extremely fortunate and born with few important birth defects; my wife, unfortunately, has several dozen; my daughter was lucky and only has @8; my wife’s children have several dozen each–all these birth defects are directly related to the fantastic amounts of industrial pollution unleashed into our environment. If we actually valued a clean, healthy environment and wholly embraced the Precautionary Principle, then we’d have none of the technologies we take for granted today and be living on farms tilling the soil and fashioning handicrafts in a much simpler, likely more peaceful, less populated world–a world I wouldn’t mind at all.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 22 2019 19:02 utc | 101

@karlof1 | Feb 22, 2019 2:02:24 PM | 102
Thanks for the thoughts. My perspective is somewhat different. I think that we are all and everywhere located somewhere along the ‘journey’ far from clean towards terminally toxic. I think that the resilience of life is amazing, though, and to honour and protect it, and salvage what we can, we should be adopting a far more skeptical and careful approach to the introduction of new technologies of dubious environmental impact. Also. we should be attempting to clean up what we can.
@ hopehely | Feb 22, 2019 1:39:37 PM | 101
No one in their right mind, and certainly not lili and snake, are arguing that ” all wavelengths and … all intensities” are harmful. What are you smoking 🙂

Posted by: Robert Snefjella | Feb 22 2019 20:08 utc | 102

@ hopehely
(facepalm)

Posted by: lili | Feb 22 2019 20:14 utc | 103

Posted by: Robert Snefjella | Feb 22, 2019 3:08:28 PM | 103

No one in their right mind, and certainly not lili and snake, are arguing that ” all wavelengths and … all intensities” are harmful. What are you smoking 🙂

Nothing. Even if it is now legal here to smoke some of that stuff that numb your mind…
Because I believe smoking is not good for health.
And I do not have wireless router at my home. Wired is just fine.
What about you? Surfing @ 2.4GHz or 5 GHz Wifi?

Posted by: hopehely | Feb 22 2019 20:28 utc | 104

Posted by: lili | Feb 22, 2019 3:14:01 PM | 104
(facepalm)
Put your cellphone in airplane mode. The EMR interferes with calcium and potassium channels in your neurons. 😛

Posted by: hopehely | Feb 22 2019 20:35 utc | 105

Wow, the number of commenters who are totally ignorant of physics, as well as 5G, is quite impressive.
1) Speed of the wave is irrelevant. The cell spectrum waves all are much the same speed regardless of the specific band.
2) It is energy that matters. One wave (from a microwave oven) with a lot of energy may well be harmful, millions of really low energy waves are not. Think microwave vs. a radio controlled car (or a thousand of them). Broadcast at microwave oven energy levels is literally impossible across any amount of distance – too much energy to put in and it also dissipates too fast.
3) 5G is about communication speed: 490 mbps to 1400 or more. It means already pathetically slow WiFi and wired internet connections across most of the US will be ridiculously slow in comparison (as opposed to somewhat slower than 4G).
4) There is very much a national security issue with Huawei and 5G: access to central controls in American companies like Cisco or Juniper is very different than access to Huawei. The code isn’t the only issue – so are the support and distribution centers. More importantly, if Huawei/Chinese employees are servicing local telco service centers – that’s a lot different than American/Cisco/Juniper/3 letter agency employees servicing.
I actually don’t have any issue with the present US policy discriminating against Huawei – it is both an excellent business tactic by Cisco/Juniper and preserving a comms backbone access which I can understand.
It is highly hypocritical, but then again, no one is going to say “Don’t use Huawei because we’ve been tapping comms for years and are more trustworthy”.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 22 2019 21:12 utc | 106

There are a number of dynamics that support Huawei winning this little tussle with the Empire of Chaos, as Pepe Escobar refers to the United States and its European vassals, and of course these dynamics favor China. As Passer by pointed out above @59 what countries need is a pipeline of skilled workers, and that includes engineers and scientists. America’s pipeline in all skill domains is running dry. America experienced a massive surge in skilled labor after WWII when the GI Bill made post-secondary education practically free for many Americans. This happened to coincide with a very forward-looking and optimistic attitude across the entire American population, and attitude that was the result of rapid economic growth. This skilled workforce is now dying off and increasingly being replaced by talent harvested from abroad. As an instructor teaching washout calculus I see firsthand that more than half of my students are international, yet most of my students who end up washing out are the domestic ones. My international students are by far better prepared for the rigorous study that tough courses demand. Most American students now either fall back on the post-secondary equivalent of Special Education like Business Administration or some variant of Minority Studies, or they start off their college experience with those kinds of programs and never even try to do the hard stuff. I think it is pretty obvious that most of the workforce in America’s STEM pipeline are not Americans at all.
Relying heavily on foreign talent for our highly skilled workforce isn’t necessarily a problem in and of itself, but it is worth asking why Americans are not crowding that pipeline. You can assert that it is because of the sorry condition of America’s public primary and secondary schools, but that doesn’t stand up to reason. America spends more than almost any other country in the world on public education, yet the academic attainment of America’s youth doesn’t reflect that. Something that I mentioned a few sentences up offers and explanation. While the post-war boom in America spawned tremendous optimism that formed a solid foundation for students’ intrinsic motivation, incomes and quality of life have been stagnant, or even declining, in the US since the middle of the 1970s. This, as well as a few other factors like seemingly insurmountable corruption in the political system and endless warfare, have resulted in a deep and enduring cynicism within the American population. That cynicism robs students of motivation, leaving them incapable of achieving real any academic success and taking collegiate Special Education.
China now has unbridled optimism like what America had back after WWII, perhaps even more. For people who allow themselves to be open enough to sense it, the difference between American cynicism and Chinese optimism is palpable. The difference is breathtaking.
So, what does that have to do with foreign students fulfilling America’s needs for a STEM workforce?
As I said, the exuberant optimism in China is palpable for an American visitor. Just being in that environment is energizing and exhilarating. But the opposite is true as well. For the Chinese student in America the general cynicism results in a dark and unpleasant atmosphere. While most Chinese students hope to spend a few years in the US after graduation learning the ropes in their chosen industry, more and more intend to head home for the better opportunities.
And it is not just the better opportunities elsewhere that are increasingly drawing graduates away from the US. America’s toxic culture plays a part as well. While that Wild West culture might be exciting for a college student, who in their right mind and with workable alternatives would want to raise their children in a place like America? As China cleans up and leapfrogs past America, the attraction of staying long term in the States dwindles.
Basically, as America’s quality of life continues to stagnate, and toxic aspects of America’s culture metastasize, America loses its ability to retain foreign talent in its workforce “pipeline”. This transition may not be perceptible in the short term, but China didn’t where it is today with short term changes.
With America not generating new talent domestically and losing its ability to retain foreign talent, we are now less than a single lifetime from America descending to technological insignificance.

Posted by: William Gruff | Feb 22 2019 21:27 utc | 107

@hopehely
You are right, but people who don’t understand physics – you can’t convince them of facts.
Energy of sunlight: 1367 watts per square meter (changes by latitude, season, etc but this is a reasonable average)
LTE cell tower broadcast power: 20 watts per radio, 3KW to 6KW per tower
Average cell tower coverage area in a dense urban area: 1/4 square mile = 160000 square meters (note this distance is up to 2 miles or more in rural settings, or 8 times more area)
Energy of cell signal: 0.0375 watts per square meter (6000/160000)
So in other words, sunlight is over 36000 times stronger than a cell signal (1367/0.0375)
For the benefit of the still unconvinced (and numbers ignorant), a microwave oven tops out around 1.9 cubic feet = 0.0538 cubic meters. Doing a cube root yields = 0.3775 meters, meaning the 1.9 cubic foot microwave has a cross section (if it is a perfect cube) of 0.14 square meters. In turn meaning a 1000 watt microwave is powering at 7000 watts per square meter which is 5 times stronger than sunlight.
The only impact being microwave vs. (largely) visible radiation is that the microwaves transfer energy better into water and metals vs. skin.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 22 2019 21:33 utc | 108

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 22, 2019 4:33:03 PM | 109
There is one more aspect of this that actually the EMR is quantum in nature, so the energy of the wave is proportional only to its frequency E=f*h where h is Planck constant. Only photons of UV frequency and higher are energetic enough to do the damage by ionization.
RF frequency photons carry to little energy but the ones of ~2.5GHz are absorbed by water molecules, which make them excited and emit infrared photons, meaning they heat up.
What you are referring to is the flux of the EMR which is number of photons streaming through a cross section so higher flux means more photons are absorbed by water and that adds up to more heat. That is how microwave oven works, and that is why the range of 2.4GHz transmitters drops when is foggy or rainy.
Now maybe, just maybe, it is possible that certain radio waves could induce electric currents in our bodies, acting as receiving antennas – but I am not sure how strong the field has to be to induce currents at harmful levels.

Posted by: hopehely | Feb 22 2019 22:11 utc | 109

Well, physics ……Safety standards based on physics exist for radio frequency (RF/EMF) radiation emissions, but these standards are only based on thermal heating effects. They only consider these exposures to be harmful if they heat tissue. Like with solar radiation, some frequencies making up a minority of the total radiation energy are more damaging biologically (UVA, UVB). These safety standards were set decades ago and do not protect us from adverse biological effects
https://es-ireland.com/5g-5th-generation-greater-dangers/
“Some research on non-thermal effects has shown that millimeter wavelengths target cell membranes and have adverse biological effects as well as clinical effects such as cataracts, immune system alterations and physiological effects on the heart and blood pressure. Betzalal et al (2018) have demonstrated that the sweat glands which are coiled structures in the upper layers of the skin can act as antenna receiver for 5G sub-THz band wavelengths. If not stopped, there may be a serious illness explosion.”
Scientists and Doctors are concerned
https://www.5gappeal.eu/about/

Posted by: Pft | Feb 22 2019 22:27 utc | 110

“Relying heavily on foreign talent for our highly skilled workforce isn’t necessarily a problem in and of itself, but it is worth asking why Americans are not crowding that pipeline..”
This has always been the case, since colonial times. Employing foreign tradesmen, intellectuals, scientists etc while Americans concentrated on money making is a very old tradition. It once made a certain amount of sense, it no longer does but learning to think honestly and measure exactly are skills which do not mix well with hypocrisies, misrepresentation and bullshitting. And these, as a casual glance at any newspaper or five minutes listening to Congressional debates will confirm, are central to the culture.

Posted by: bevin | Feb 22 2019 22:29 utc | 111

William Gruff @108–
Thanks for putting flesh on the bones I often provide on the topic of the USA’s dysfunctional culture and its wide-ranging affects. I taught in San Jose, heart of Silicon Valley, and helped numerous immigrant engineering students learn English. I was also a key member of an experimental tutoring program aimed at improving student’s academic performance and retention rates. Like you, I watched the decline of academic abilities by native-born Americans from the inside and discussed causation with other profs. All too often, behind their smiles and laughter kids were scared of the future for they knew how difficult it is to make ends meet in that region. I rarely ever write about the epidemic of learning disabilities and how that threatens national security. Indeed, I rarely go into great detail because it’s often depressing and off topic.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 22 2019 22:50 utc | 112

@ hopehely #105

And I do not have wireless router at my home. Wired is just fine.

The other day I had an internet issue and the tech guy at the other end asked me about my wireless router. He was obviously surprised when I told him everything here runs through a wire. In the past I hadn’t given a thought to the radiation from the routers – this was an issue of me being too lazy to bother learning the bafflegab involved in the setup. Turns out the radiation levels from the routers is worthy of notice, especially since mine is only about two feet from me as I type this. I’ve also looked into the story of Smart Meters from the electric company, and have concluded they’re not anything I need to worry about. My meter is at least fifty feet away, and it seems these things are “calling home” less than 1% of the time.

Posted by: Zachary Smith | Feb 23 2019 0:32 utc | 113

@Zachary 114
Zachary, I like it that you have internalized the issue of distance from EMR emitters. I kept saying that EMR power drops with the square of distance, but what does this mean? Let us quickly look at two alternative scenarios of using a mobile/cellular phone:
1) keep it on your ear, let us say on average about 1 mm from your face; the radiating antenna is on the back of the phone and along its outer edge, you are protected a little by the phone itself, but you probably absorb around 50% of its radiation meant to reach the base station;
2) you keep your phone in your hands in front of you; on average it is 1 m away from your head; 1 mm versus 1 meter means 10,000 times lower power and this does not even take into account the much smaller spacial angle that absorb radiation; with narrower spatial angle you are probably absorbing around 1,000,000 times lower power than when the phone is next to your ear. Does this top-of-an-envelope make sense?
However, in your consideration you are still missing the second part of the formula which is the power of the emitter. In general, when a transmitter and receiver are close to each other, the transmitter does not have to radiate much power/energy to talk to the receiver. This applies to the forthcoming 5G base stations as much as it applies to your wireless router. The power that your router emits is so low that it is a totally irrelevant health consideration. I wish I could somehow illustrate to people how sensitive EMR receivers are – they say that some dogs can smell one molecule of an important substance among billions of other molecules. When energy is concerned, EMR receivers are similar. Your in-house wifi devices, including your mobile phone, are close to your wifi router, which means that neither has to radiate much power to each other. But do not forget that your mobile/cellular phone has to reach a base station currently hundreds sometimes even thousands of meters away, which means that it needs to pump out some serious power to get there considering that its power will diminish at the square of the distance. Remember that with 5G the power will lower because the base stations will be only 10-200 meters away, although there will be more of them.
In short, I personally do not worry at all about in-house bluetooth and wifi routers, because they are of extremely low power and because I am not putting them next to my freaking head. As long as you do not sleep with your head next to one, no issue at all in my opinion.

Posted by: Kiza | Feb 23 2019 3:51 utc | 114

Posted by: Kiza | Feb 22, 2019 10:51:28 PM | 115

In short, I personally do not worry at all about in-house bluetooth and wifi routers, because they are of extremely low power and because I am not putting them next to my freaking head.

OTOH bluetooth headphones and earphones are quite close to the head. Maybe they transmit only when you talk on the microphone, but I am not sure.
Now about those killer 5G waves, you would think that if they are so dangerous and detrimental for health there would be reports of increased number of R&D engineers and technicians from Erickson and Huawei working on 5G stuff getting sick. The word would spread that people are falling ill, whistle blowers would tweet and chirp (at least from Erickson and Nokia)…

Posted by: hopehely | Feb 23 2019 4:42 utc | 115

@hopehely #110
Sure, EMR and quantum matters, but not that much.
The point was that there is 4 orders of magnitude (10000x+) difference between sunlight and cell signals. Does the materials difference compensate for that? I am highly dubious.
As another example: a nuclear power plant. 1 cubic centimeter of nuclear material generates about 64 watts per hour – which would translate to about 10x greater energy density vs sunlight (actually higher since there are significant losses from total power output from nuclear fuel vs electricity generated).

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 23 2019 4:43 utc | 116

@Zachary Smith #114
WiFi may generate more power than cell signals, but it still isn’t much.
Look at the power rating of your WiFi router. I have a 300Megabyte/sec transfer capacity and its power rating is 1.2V times 1 amp = 1.2 watts. 100% of this is not turned into WiFi radio; cell towers have about 40% radio to tower power consumption, but let’s say 100% of the WiFi router power is converted to radio signal.
Secondly, not all of that signal goes into (through) you – the radio signal is at least hemispherical if not a globe. But let’s assume 100% goes into your body.
If you’re 5 feet tall and 1 foot wide, that’s about 1.5 meters by .33 meters or 0.5 square meters. 1.2 watts / 0.5 square meters = 2.4 watts per square meter. Yes, almost 10x what cell signal is but 0.175% of sunlight.
Meh.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 23 2019 4:47 utc | 117

@hopehely 116
Ok, your comment highlights the third factor, after distance and power, which is the duration of exposure. The bluetooth headsets for mobile phones do radiate a very small amount but less than a wifi router because bluetooth’s range is only up to 10 meters. If you were to use your two-way bluetooth headset for 18 hours per day, 7 days a week over 20 years, perhaps you would suffer some significant exposure risk. Personally, I use bluetooth receive-only headset to receive sound from the tablet in front of me and do not think about it.
To make the really, really final comment on this topic – if it was not obvious from my numerous previous comments not all human tissues/organs are equally sensitive to EMR effects. Brain is by far the most sensitive and the piece that the smart people should never take a risk with.

Posted by: Kiza | Feb 23 2019 5:55 utc | 118

I didn’t see it mentioned so I’ll add that signal strength of radio waves decreases with the square of distance. The signal strength at the tower (the highest output) is not what you get hit with and the output if user devices is pretty low (but I still wouldn’t put them up to your head much). As 5G relies on dense base station deployments, output power is reduced (less range is needed). The use of massive MIMO antenna systems means lower output power and less radiation because you can point/direct signals using electronic steering and phase summing. In traditional dumb systems your only real option to deal with a problematic signal path is increasing power within accepted regulations.
One of the biggest issues in radio communication and especially in cellular systems is interference. Every time someone transmits the noise floor increases (theory alleged otherwise but this is the case). More interference means lower signal to noise and less system capacity because you must reduce modulation rate (number of bits per second per hertz of radio spectrum).
Reducing interference is a major goal of 5G. That means reducing radiation too.they want less output power radiated whenever possible and they are doing it in frequency bands that are less able to penetrate your skin

Posted by: Alaric | Feb 23 2019 16:06 utc | 119

@kiza #119
Yes, there is energy generated by Bluetooth.
Is it significant?
Coin cell batteries are 1.5V or 3.0V
Current consumption for Bluetooth low energy transmission (i.e. radio wave output) is around 20 microamps = 0.00002 amps
Power is thus 0.00003 watts to 0.00006 watts.
For regular bluetooth headsets, the energy used is 100x to 2x what BLE consumes – basically the first generation would be closer to 100x and the latest ones are closer to 2x.
Either way, regular bluetooth power would be, at most, 0.003 watts to 0.006 watts.
Or put another way: the human body generates about 0.085 watts in electrical energy firing off neurons in the brain.
Saying Bluetooth is dangerous is like saying 7% of the brain’s activity is dangerous.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 23 2019 18:53 utc | 120

@Alaric #120
Agreed.
My point was very simple: even if we ignore major effects like actual signal strength at distance, transfer ratio from wave to human body, etc – the actual energy in absolute terms is really small.
I’m not saying that radio waves, EM waves, magnetic waves, whatever can have no effect – but I am saying that the burden of proof is on the panic-mongers to show some believable mechanism by which such enormously low levels of power can cause harm.
Radio waves are completely different than say, hard radiation. The individual radiating particles or waves in radiation are extremely energetic – they cause isotopes to form, transfer heat, etc. Radio waves don’t do this except at really, really powerful levels (think standing 1 foot in front of a major AM radio station – up to 500,000 watts of transmission power, although you’re more likely to just get electrocuted)
The problem is that it seems people think that anything that is a wave must be as dangerous as radiation.
A radio wave is not the same as a surfing wave is not the same as radiation.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 23 2019 19:03 utc | 121

By ALL accounts, 5G will be a disaster for everyone. An Appeal signed by more than “180 scientists and doctors from 35 nations was submitted to the European Commission [in Sept, 2017] demanding a moratorium on the increase of cell/mobile antennas for planned 5G expansion. Concerns over health effects from higher radiation exposure include potential neurological impacts, infertility, and cancer. [The Appeal states that] “5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, etc. for telecommunications already in place. RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment… ” “. https://es-ireland.com/5g-5th-generation-greater-dangers/

Posted by: Rob | Feb 26 2019 23:25 utc | 122

Some years ago i was tasked to make a report on EMF hazardous.
People should actually study more into 50Hz long wave length EMF hazardous effect that could penetrate everything including walls, lead & steels of few meters thickness, traveling km of long distance. This come from the high power cable transmission 110KV or higher, in neighborhood 2~66kv, power transformer, substations, inside household 220V/110V power grid and various gadgets.
These are constantly radiating our body 24hrs, proven to be most harmful than any HF EMR, even at above 0.5mG small dosage constant radiation is found to cause cancers & various illness(just Google, thousands of independent studies done over last 50yrs with millions of people data colected). There is nothing that can block this harmful long wavelength magnetic wave, other than staying far away from sources.
Another hazard of such ultra high power transmission lines(above 110KV) is it will energized pollutants ions and spread with windward breeze, when breath in, can penetrate deeply into lung causing cancers. This is why even some staying faraway from transmission lines(within sights) are found to have lung cancers. Hence LF EMR is the most dangerous source.
Whereas for HF EMF, they are easily blocked off by walls, trees and any obstacles. They travel in short distance due to short wavelength. As long you don’t put your phone next to your ear, using phone where coverage is too low forcing to the phone to highten signal up to 5~15mG, you are pretty safe.
Its the phone transmitter that is harmful when operating in low coverage area, while holding close to body. It usually drop significantly beyond 1ft. Same for wifi & hotspots. If 5G is well design for energy efficiency, it might be “safer” than 3/4G, since only strong pulse is shot for data transmission instead of 4G diverse radiation. But if you happen to get on the way of that intense ray, than it might cause more harm but for a short instance.
IMO, the best is to get a good senstive 3D EMF measuring meter, and you can figure out accurately what is truly radiating you most exceeding in hazardous level. It might change your life, where you slerp, how you run your home cable & electronic gadgets usage habits..

Posted by: DrTT | Mar 4 2019 10:58 utc | 123

Sorry this comment is so late…just hit this article today…
Also, apologies if I’m covering something that somebody else has already said…
Apparently, Trump’s 2 main people – Bolton and Pompeo are both rabid neo-cons.
Apparently, Trump put both of them into office as campaign favors.
Pompeo seems to be the iron fist in the velvet glove.
Whereas Bolton is simply the Iron Fist.
The story on Huawei that I read…sorry I don’t have a link for it…is that Bolton & the CIA are demanding that Huawei adds a CIA backdoor into all of their equipment…and ‘she’ said ‘no’. So all of that ‘security’ story is apparently us looking in the mirror and accusing the other guy of what we’re seeing-doing!!! a la HRC?! I don’t think Trump knew anything about this move…the news came out as he-Xi-Bolton were at dinner. As I understand it, Bolton cooked the whole thing up and got lackey Trudeau to execute it. Maybe it was also done with an intent to hurt T’s tariff negotiations with Xi???!!! The LAST thing the DS-MIC wants here is friendly US relations with China & Russia!!!

Posted by: Margret Head | Mar 4 2019 17:06 utc | 124

Re: 5G. The Netherlands is testing it out in airports…the story is around 6:07 into this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1sooiA-brw

Posted by: Margret Head | Mar 4 2019 17:08 utc | 125

A comment from Sputnik…
edover3
11:46 08.03.2019
The reason why the US is imposing sanctions and tariffs is because it cannot effectively compete anymore. This isn’t due to any kind of theft, unfair practices, etc. It is due to US simply falling behind and not offering value compared to others. The US wants other countries to shoot themselves economically in the foot and drag down their economies so US can catch up. US wants a kind of economic ‘affirmative action’ for itself.
hehehhehe

Posted by: denk | Mar 8 2019 10:06 utc | 126

Back to Main