Can you hear me now? My experience in going wireless is don’t go cheap. I hosted karaoke with wireless mics. The first time out, we were picking up half a telephone conversation from a home based remote telephone. Yikes! Solution: replace the mics with cabled mics. Also, a friend hosting karaoke got the same thing when someone with a smartphone in the audience turned Bluetooth on. Maybe the technology has improved since last year. Test, test, test.
I swore off BlueTooth 2 years ago. Did a lot of testing, and even if it is really improved, I don’t need to worry about dropouts and latency problems. I have too many other things going on during performance without the added inconsistency of an outdated technology…just my 2 cents.
Amen, Corky. Reading up on 5G lately made me wonder where all this is going. At one point, there was a concern that the signals could alter a body’s DNA, causing cancer. Maybe we need to work smarter, like why are we getting updates to everything every week?
5G is proposed to change the world. I was a naysayer on the future claims of the internet, and how cell phones would be the new computers, so I stand neutral on 5G. Apparently my futures skill is very weak. I personally think my DNA could use a good shakeup.
Could be 5G will solve many communication downfalls, but can’t help wondering what nightmares it might create.
Not having done it myself, I can only regurgitate what I have read about 5G. A cell tower will need to be within line of sight, every 2 to 3 houses! I’ve already mentioned the DNA damaging concern. The other info is that lots – lots – of data will be available for transfer (up or down), so the “device” will need to be able to send and/or receive data at that speed in order to take advantage of it. Time to buy another shirt, nothing wrong with the old one, it’s just that the laundromat’s coat hangers just don’t support it anymore.
Maybe this will be the technology they promised a year ago. Wifi will be transmitted from a light bulb. I read about it and it was another of those “hmmmm” moments.
Just to be clear, the technical issues I mentioned in the original Bluetooth MIDI post had nothing to do with wireless technology. Instead they were related to the .NET Async method invocation method and cancelling a in-progress method call.
In general wireless will be different to wired however that doesn’t make it useless. It mightn’t suit a particular on-stage situation, but for the kid in practicing his bedroom where the keyboard is on the other side of the room to his PC it’s probably perfectly fine.
Bluetooth 2 is pretty old now and even Bluetooth 4 has been out for at least a couple of years. When I was doing mobile development in this area the difference between BT4 and BT2 was obvious. Since then I haven’t have much experience with it, but I suspect it’ll be a lot better than you found with BT2.
For a good discussion of risk vs hazard, potential upsides and downsides of technology and the medical impacts of 5G and technology in general, this is an excellent article but here’s the take away:
Currently the only proven biological effect of exposure to EMF, even at 5G frequencies, is slight tissue heating. There are many other effects hinted at in the research, but none have been reliably replicated and therefore are not established. Further, many of the biological effects are simply looking at changes in markers of biological activity. They don’t show actual hazard, just the potential for hazard if we make a chain of assumptions about what the markers mean.
btw: the author of that article, Steve Novella, is also the host of the podcast Skeptics Guide to the Universe which I highly recommend.
I think that might be an exaggeration but even so, aren’t they much smaller devices that can be attached to existing street lights/power poles? They’re not “towers” per-se.
It’s not just you. Until a new technology is rolled out and people get to use it, play with, find innovative ways to leverage it, no-one really knows how it’ll end up being used.
Here’s a link to the YT vid where I got my info on G5 from. He has actually done it, so Marques Brownlee’s word is more credible than anybody’s IMO. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CTUs_2hq6Y I do understand that new technology is hard to “get” at first (remember cell phones cause brain and hip tumors?). I’m still trying to figure out Quantum Computing, so far it’s smoke and mirrors.
We need to expose ourselves to hazardous stuff or we’ll never evolve
Nice video. Basically he’s saying it has great potential but that it’s bleeding edge right now - as expected. He doesn’t say anything about towers every 2 to 3 houses.
Again, I refer you to Science Based Medicine - “ultimately do not support the idea that cell phones can cause cancer”
I read an interesting article of dueling PhDs on these effects. Most of the negative info seems to br traceable to one source, with great credentials in physics and radio. A number of folks, also with great credentials, but in biology and medicine, pointed that the former’s studies didn’t take biological factors into consideration. For example, radio waves at these frequencies do not penetrate skin. I guess there was “Deeper Magic from beyond time” he didn’t know about.
Behind the pay wall.
Good article. That’s why scientific consensus is so much more important than the opinion of one person or a small group of people - no matter their credentials. I also like this point:
“If phones are linked to cancer, we’d expect to see a marked uptick,” David Robert Grimes, a cancer researcher at the University of Oxford, wrote recently in The Guardian. “Yet we do not.”
We’d also expect to see a lot more UFO photos, yet we do not.
It seems there is no shortage of Dr. Curry(s). Decades ago I read an article exposing these The-Sky-Is-Falling types. Someone stated in one case that, by calculation, if a train ever exceed 40 miles per hour all of its passengers would suffocate! Personally, I trust what I have actually done, but there has to be a way for the introduction of new ideas. So on we go, trying to separate the real from the imagined.
I am the sole survivor from that test. The air was indeed moving too fast at 40mph and killed everyone aboard but myself. Nowadays, trains employ air brakes to avoid such disasters. All trains have 'em now.
Great info, Terry. This was a simpler world once. Why just recently while approaching a stop sign downhill from me, I noticed the “No Engine Braking” road sign. I understand that in England as part of getting a license one must stop a car by downshifting. So air brakes, engine brakes, friction brakes, regenerative brakes, ¡ay!, It’s all too much. For my part, I drive with all windows closed and the AC on.