The Global Cities Team Challenge Smart Agriculture and Rural SuperCluster, which is facilitated by NTIA and NIST, is hosting a webinar on the Rural Health Initiative on December 13 at 1pm ET. The webinar will discuss the launch of the Rural Health Intuitive (RHI) to improve access to high-quality healthcare in rural America. CoBank, WTA Foundation, and Perry Health are the founding sponsors of the Initiative, which seeks to help healthcare providers, including hospitals, clinics and behavioral/mental health agencies to bring high quality care into patient homes. Tailored for rural settings, Perry’s software offers providers the ability to deliver digital care plans, remotely monitor health metrics, and provide interventions via telemedicine through an app-based platform. The RHI intends to work with various stakeholders to address a community’s specific health issue challenges, such as diabetes, opioid abuse, heart failure, and lung-related diseases. The scheduled webinar speakers include Sarah Tyree, Vice President, Policy and Public Affairs, CoBank; and Anshu Vaish, CEO, Perry Health. NTIA’s Jean Rice will moderate. For more information, contact firstname.lastname@example.org. WebEx Webinar Site No pass code needed. Meeting code is 740128910. Call in: 866-860-0870; passcode: 74729120
Do you want to show off your 5G knowledge to your friends? Or seem like the smartest person at a party? Check out C|NET’s 5G glossary below.
The 5G bit is pretty obvious, but the NR stands for New Radio. You don’t have to know a lot about this beyond the fact that it’s the name of the standard that the entire wireless industry is rallying behind, and it just came out in December.
That’s important because it means everyone is on the same page when it comes to their mobile 5G networks. Carriers like AT&T and T-Mobile are following 5G NR as they build their networks. But Verizon, which began testing 5G as a broadband replacement service before the standard was approved, isn’t using the standard — yet. The company says it’ll eventually adopt 5G NR for its broadband service, and intends to use NR for its 5G mobile network.
All cellular networks use airwaves to ferry data over the air, with standard networks using spectrum in lower frequency bands like 700 megahertz. Generally, the higher the band or frequency, the higher the speed you can achieve. The consequence of higher frequency, however, is a shorter range.
To achieve those crazy-high 5G speeds, you need really, really high-frequency spectrum. The millimeter wave range falls between 24 gigahertz and 100 gigahertz.
The problem with super-high-frequency spectrum, besides the short range, is it’s pretty finicky — a leaf blows the wrong way and you get interference. Forget about obstacles like walls. Companies like Verizon are working on using software and broadcasting tricks to get around these problems and ensure stable connections.
Traditional cellular coverage typically stems from gigantic towers littered with different radios and antennas. Those antennas are able to broadcast signals at a great distance, so you don’t need a lot of them. Small cells are the opposite — backpack-size radios can be hung up on street lamps, poles rooftops or other areas. They can only broadcast a 5G signal at a short range, so the idea is to have a large number of them in a densely packed network.
Some cities have this kind of dense network in place, but if you go outside of the metro area, that’s where small cells become more of a challenge.
Given how troublesome really high-band spectrum can be (see the “millimeter wave” section above), there’s a movement to embrace spectrum at a much lower frequency, or anything lower than 6GHz. The additional benefit is that carriers can use the spectrum they already own to get going on 5G networks. T-Mobile, for instance, has a swath of 600MHz spectrum it plans to use to power its 5G deployment. Prior to sub-6GHz, that would’ve been impossible.
That’s why you’re seeing more carriers embrace the lower-frequency spectrum.
But the lower-frequency spectrum has the opposite problem: While it reaches great distances, it doesn’t have the same speed and capacity as millimeter wave spectrum.
The ideal down the line will be for carriers to use a blend of the two.
You’re hearing more about Gigabit LTE as a precursor to 5G. Ultimately it’s about much higher speeds on the existing LTE network. But the work going toward building a Gigabit LTE network provides the foundation for 5G.
For more on Gigabit LTE, read our explainer here.
An abbreviation of “multiple inputs, multiple outputs.” Basically, it’s the idea of shoving more antennas into our phones and on cellular towers. And you can always have more antennas. They feed into the faster Gigabit LTE network, and companies are deploying what’s known as 4×4 MIMO, in which four antennas are installed in a phone.
Wireless carriers can take different bands of radio frequencies and bind them together so phones like the Samsung Galaxy S8 can pick and choose the speediest and least congested one available. Think of it as a three-lane highway so cars can weave in and out depending on which lane has less traffic.
This is a term that’s so highly technical, I don’t even bother to explain the nuance. It stands for quadrature amplitude modulation. See? Don’t even worry about it.
What you need to know is that it allows traffic to move quickly in a different way than carrier aggregation or MIMO. Remember that highway analogy? Well, with 256 QAM, you’ll have big tractor trailers carrying data instead of tiny cars. MIMO, carrier aggregation and QAM are already going into 4G networks, but play an important role in 5G too.
This is a way to direct 5G signals in a specific direction, potentially giving you your own specific connection. Verizon has been using beamforming for millimeter wave spectrum, getting around obstructions like walls or trees.
Cellular networks all rely on what’s known as licensed spectrum, which they own and purchased from the government.
But the move to 5G comes with the recognition that there just isn’t enough spectrum when it comes to maintaining wide coverage. So the carriers are moving to unlicensed spectrum, similar to the kind of free airwaves that our Wi-Fi networks ride on.
This is the ability to carve out individual slivers of spectrum to offer specific devices the kind of connection they need. For instance, the same cellular tower can offer a lower-power, slower connection to a sensor for a connected water meter in your home, while at the same time offering a faster, lower-latency connection to a self-driving car that’s navigating in real time.
— Lawmakers are broadly receptive to concerns Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) is raising about the accuracy of FCC broadband maps. But most are not ready to commit to supporting Wicker’s attempt to hitch language to the year-end government funding bill to force the FCC to revisit the mapping. Congress is looking to wrap up its final fiscal 2019 funding measure by Dec. 21, and John had reported last week that Wicker is pursuing the broadband amendment.
— Although Senate appropriator Jon Tester (D-Mont.) quickly endorsed the idea, others say they are still assessing. “Senator Wicker’s going to be the chairman of the Commerce Committee next year, and if I was the FCC, I’d be listening closely, and I would hope we could send a strong message and some ability to get the mapping to where it’s reliable,” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), a senior appropriator and member of GOP leadership, told John on Tuesday. “It’s just so unbelievably unreliable.” Blunt said he would want to talk to Wicker about specifics but seemed potentially open to the right measure.
— Sen.Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), another appropriator, “still has concerns” about the FCC’s initial mapping aimed at determining eligibility for Mobility Fund subsidies, “but he looks forward to seeing how the challenge process may have improved the map,” a spokesman said when asked about a funding rider. House Energy and Commerce Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) will “certainly be reviewing the challenge process with my colleagues,” he told POLITICO in a statement. “The fact of the matter is we can’t just rely on carrier submitted data, which is why I supported mapping funds for NTIA in the appropriations package last spring.”
Source: POLITICO Morning Tech
In a blog post, Brad Smith gives an early introduction to his presentation at 9:30 PST today at a luncheon in the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center.
Every day the world is becoming more digital. Cloud computing combined with new productivity, communication and intelligent tools and services enable us to do more, do it more quickly and in ways that were simply unimaginable a generation ago. But participating in this new era requires a high-speed broadband connection to the internet. While it’s a service that is as critical as a phone or electricity, according to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) broadband is unavailable to roughly 25 million Americans, more than 19 million of which live in rural communities. That’s roughly the population of New York state.
Over the past five years, the FCC and the U.S. Department of Agriculture provided more than $22 billion in subsidies and grants to telecommunications carriers to sustain, extend and improve broadband in rural America. Despite these efforts, the country’s adoption of broadband hasn’t budged much since 2013. This inability to build out the last mile of the 21st century’s digital infrastructure has exacerbated the country’s growing prosperity and opportunity divides — divisions that often fall along urban and rural lines.
The full presentation is HERE.
Airband is a more rural-friendly technology than 5G, rural communities need to embrace this interim technology until they can afford fiber to the home or office.
William Briggs Statistician
In the New York Times, Á Pinillos’s demonstrated his ignorance of climate science.
According to NASA, at least 97 percent of actively publishing climate scientists think that “climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely caused by human activities.” Americans overwhelmingly agree that the federal government needs to take significant action. In a recent poll [of citizen’s who can’t say why the sky is blue, let alone delineate the intricacies of climatology]…
The canard about “97 percent” is particularly stupid. First, 100% of scientists agree that man influences the climate. How could we not? But that in itself, as Á does not understand, does not call for any specific action. And 97%? Did Á even read “Climate Consensus and ‘Misinformation’: A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change“, which shows that the consensus over doom is more like 1%? No, sir, he did not.
Did Á even know to look for this paper? No, sir, he did not. He knows so little about the subject, he doesn’t know what he doesn’t know.
He knows less about probability. Which is even more embarrassing, because nobody was expecting him to discuss the limitations of high-altitude cloud parameterizations. But we did think a professional philosopher would know the difference between decisions, knowledge, and probability. He doesn’t.
Suppose you observe a shopper at the convenience store buying a lottery ticket. You are aware that the probability that he will lose the lottery is astronomically high, typically above 99.99 percent, but it’s hard to get yourself to sincerely say you know this person will lose the lottery.
Look here, Á, if the shopper knew he would lose, he wouldn’t buy the damn ticket. We don’t know the shopper is going to lose. We only know it’s likely. Which means we also know he might win.
We can only know what is true. But we can believe anything. Right, Á?
If I had to bet whether the shopper would win, I’d have to think about the consequences about what would happen if I win or lose the bet, and the probability I calculate the shopper has the winning numbers. Probability is thus not decision. And my bet the shopper would lose is not knowledge he would. It’s a guess: a prediction.
Á does not grasp these distinctions, which are basic. He makes the same blunders in an example about his grading homework. I leave casting light on these as my own homework exercise for you, dear reader.
According to social psychology, climate change deniers tend to espouse conservative views, which suggests that party ideology is partly responsible for these attitudes. I think that we should also think about the philosophical nature of skeptical reactions, an apolitical phenomenon.
The standard response by climate skeptics is a lot like our reaction to skeptical pressure cases. Climate skeptics understand that 97 percent of scientists disagree with them, but they focus on the very tiny fraction of holdouts. As in the lottery case, this focus might be enough to sustain their skepticism.
Only a nincompoop uses the term “climate change denier”. Nobody denies the climate changes (I except lunatics). Knowing man influences the climate does not indicate any particular action, nor does it even imply that any such change is necessarily bad. Plus, climate skeptics (many of them) do not understand that 97% nonsense.
The full article is HERE.
A consensus is a political term, it is not a scientific term. Apparently, the New Your Time writer does not know the difference.
A message from Microsoft: Broadband is essential to the way we work, live, learn, and play today. More than 19 million people in the rural U.S. don’t have a broadband connection. Lack of broadband prevents students from completing homework and research, limits agriculture and small-business opportunities, and results in less access to healthcare.
Technology offers an affordable solution. Microsoft has been working to close the broadband gap. Join Microsoft President Brad Smith, Packerland Broadband, Declaration Networks and nonprofit partners for an update on the Microsoft Airband Initiative Tuesday, Dec. 4, at noon EST/9:30 a.m. PST. Learn more here.
Source: POLITICO Morning Tech
— Bipartisan interest is growing on Capitol Hill in using a year-end funding bill to force the FCC to take stock of the accuracy of its broadband data. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) is leading the effort, as John reported Thursday . “I’ll be very frank: I’m going to try to stick something on the spending bill to make the FCC take another look at this,” said Wicker, the likely incoming chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee in the new year. He called the FCC’s mapping “fatally flawed.”
— And count Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) in, too . Tester “would certainly be interested in addressing this issue during the appropriations process,” a spokeswoman said. Although Wicker has broad support in his frustrations, hitching an amendment could still be a heavy lift. Government funding expires Dec. 7, which gives Wicker and his allies little time to try to slip that in. Either way, Wicker tells John he plans to stay focused on his FCC frustrations as Commerce chair: “I would want to look at a way to get an accurate measurement so that we can distribute $4.5 billion in a way that’s meaningful.”
Source: POLITICO Morning Tech