You Can't Do Autonomous Vehicles Without 5g...
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Display list of topics
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog Buy Sarah's Pictures
Full-Text Search & Archives
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.


The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2018-05-15 11:21 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 147 references Ignore this thread
You Can't Do Autonomous Vehicles Without 5g...
[Comments enabled]

That was the claim put forward on CNBS this morning -- and it's outrageous.

It's also dead-flat stupid literally beyond words.

Folks, local jamming of signals is trivial.  It's very hard to jam them over wide distances, but very easy to do so over short ones.  A device that is actually reliant on a permanent, always-on high-speed, low-latency connection over the air is an unsafe device.


This sort of stupidity is going to get people killed, and lots of them.  Leaving aside the capacity issues that always come up from time to time, and DDOS attacks and similar that always come up from time to time, and failures of hardware (and software) that always come up from time to time the very premise that we should allow any firm to build devices that impact public safety and rely on such always-on, always-low-latency, always-available networks is so stupid that anyone buying into that, supporting it or building such a business model should be roasted medium-well and eaten.

In fact the very premise and promotion of such a thing is solicitation of and fomenting manslaughter on a mass scale.

Leave aside the surveillance outrage that comes from a network of cameras that can tell your car that you're about to walk out into a crosswalk but aren't in your car, they're on the telephone pole next to the crosswalk, and the obvious and rampant abuse that will be implemented immediately.  That's bad enough.

This is the difference in building technology that operates autonomously but takes input and allows monitoring from elsewhere (such as my HomeDaemon-MCP code) and that which relies on and will not function without a connection to that "elsewhere" and compute resources present in that "elsewhere."

The former is reasonable.

The latter is a combination of suicide (for those who embrace it) and homicide (for those who wind up victimized by it.)

View with responses (opens new window)