Teorije zavjera, bre.... pa opletite

[MrShadow]

www.id2020.org

uz 5G pametnom dosta.

[CPT]

Ti, valjda, kontas da si 5G mrezi izlozen samo kad koristis neki uredjaj koji je spojen na nju... Aferim

Uoptste ne sumnjam da si programer i IT strucnjak al da ti ovu temu malo istrazis? Jer lupas zestoko...

[drag_gost]

Prica s nekim ko je programer i IT vec preko 20 godina, al' dobro... Pravicu se blesav

Frekvencija na kojoj 5G radi je stetna ako se intenzivno istoj izlazes, ali stetna je i kafa ako se intenzivno njoj izlazes. Naravno, pricamo o ekstermnim slucajevima, ne o svakodnevnoj upotrebi.

Da li bi mi mogao pojasniti na koji nacin neces biti izlozen globalnoj 5G mrezi, tj. mrezi koja pokriva cijelu planetu? Sta znaci :intenzivno se izlagati" necemu sto je svakako svuda oko tebe...?
Za razliku od kafe koju popijes kad hoces, zrazenju 5G mreze ces biti izlozen 24/7/365, isto kao sto si sada izlozen zracenju 3/4G mreza.

Iz ooga zakljucujem da zapravo nemas blage veze o cemu se ovdje prica... Ti, valjda, kontas da si 5G mrezi izlozen samo kad koristis neki uredjaj koji je spojen na nju... Aferim

Onda smo kolege, makar na papiru. Obzirom da si programer i to preko "20 godina", u kojim si jezicima radio/radis, ili imas li nesto iz tog polja cime se mozes pohvaliti? Ja posljednjih 10 godina radim u autoindustriji (Njemacka), iskljucivo istrazivajuci algoritme autonomnih vozila i primjene istih, pri tomu bazirajuci se na Autosar runtime-u. Brzina obradjivanja stvaranja vjestackih neurosinaptickih mreza pri obrazcima masinskog ucenja kod donosenja odluka u 5G tehnologiji ce biti uvecana za preko 100 puta. Ako cemo da pricamo o frekvenciji, imam vise mini-robotica uz pomoc Arduina gdje sam se igrao sa frekvencijom, naravno to je za moj cejf.

Kada vec pricamo o kredibilitetu. Sta si konkretno uradio u tih 20 godina programiranja? Sjecam se da si na temi IT Poslodavci jednom postavio neki zastarjeli CMS i kako se prave stranice. Otprilike staro 10+ godina.

Stetnost 5G je mit, kao i tih tvojih 20 godina iskustva.

[Benjo34]

Greška je 5G mrežu posmatrati kao "Brži internet", 5G mreža je najmanje potrebna za surfanje, downloade i nebitne stvari. Već imate slučaj u Kini gdje su operacije pomoću VR headseta vršene na pacijentima, zahvaljujući 5g mreži, znači cilj što brža i stabilnija mreža je potrebna za takve stvari, gdje će doktor preko robota, vr headseta vršiti operacije iz kuće npr. Autonomna vozila, dronovi umjetna inteligencija, sve su to sektori za čiji napredak je jedna takva mreža neophodna, 6g je u fazi planiranja u Japanu. Svijet je sve više povezan i za njegov razvoj ovakve mreže su neophodne, iako smatram da bilo kakvi talasi signala ne pogoduju čovjeku, ali je činjenica da zadnjih 50 godina tehnološki strašno napredujemo i nilo se nije spreman odreći tog napretka, ni po koju cijenu.

[Optimus09]

Svadja IT-ovaca,idem po kokice

[drag_gost]

Svadja IT-ovaca,idem po kokice

Ma necemo se svadjati, zavrsio sam sa njim. Izvinjavam se ako sam nekoga uznemirio, ali na ove nebuloze sam morao odgovoriti. Ko iole zna osnove fizike zna kakve su ovo gluposti.

Svako dobro.

[Ci-Nick]

Ne tvrdim da će 5G zračiti više od 4G ali bilo bi zanimljivo kada bi se izračunalo ukupno izlaganje elektromagnetskim talasima današnjeg čovjeka koji živi u gradu. Od električnih provodnika u kući, električnih potrošača, mobitela, kineskih routera koji dobace i 100 metara od stana, pa routeri komšija, pa tek onda zračenje mobilnih operatera.
Dobro smo i zdravi...

[CPT]

Ne tvrdim da će 5G zračiti više od 4G ali bilo bi zanimljivo kada bi se izračunalo ukupno izlaganje današnjeg čovjeka koji živi u gradu. Od električnih provodnika u kući, električnih potrošača, mobitela, kineskih routera kkji dobace i 100 metara od stana, pa routeri komšija, pa tek onda zračenje mobilnih operatera.
Dobro smo i zdravi...

I ti mislis da takvo istrazivanje ne postoji jel?
https://perosh.eu/launch-of-a-european- ... ic-fields/

[Ci-Nick]

Ne tvrdim da će 5G zračiti više od 4G ali bilo bi zanimljivo kada bi se izračunalo ukupno izlaganje današnjeg čovjeka koji živi u gradu. Od električnih provodnika u kući, električnih potrošača, mobitela, kineskih routera kkji dobace i 100 metara od stana, pa routeri komšija, pa tek onda zračenje mobilnih operatera.
Dobro smo i zdravi...

I ti mislis da takvo istrazivanje ne postoji jel?
https://perosh.eu/launch-of-a-european- ... ic-fields/

Pa ko ga plaća, koliko je objektivno, kod mene u stanu mreža od bar deset routera iz komšiluka.

[CPT]

Ne tvrdim da će 5G zračiti više od 4G ali bilo bi zanimljivo kada bi se izračunalo ukupno izlaganje današnjeg čovjeka koji živi u gradu. Od električnih provodnika u kući, električnih potrošača, mobitela, kineskih routera kkji dobace i 100 metara od stana, pa routeri komšija, pa tek onda zračenje mobilnih operatera.
Dobro smo i zdravi...

I ti mislis da takvo istrazivanje ne postoji jel?
https://perosh.eu/launch-of-a-european- ... ic-fields/

Pa ko ga plaća, koliko je objektivno, kod mene u stanu mreža od bar deset routera iz komšiluka.

Pise ti sve, cak i rezultati su javni. Sazetak:

Vrijednosti u EU vrijednosti su pod 1% (dozvoljenih). Tu su bazne stanice (62%), radio&tv (23%), druga TK oprema (11%), WiFi (manje od 4%). Najveci problem su zapravo mobilni telefoni (cak i do 80% granicne vrijednosti).

[Ci-Nick]

I ti mislis da takvo istrazivanje ne postoji jel?
https://perosh.eu/launch-of-a-european- ... ic-fields/

Pa ko ga plaća, koliko je objektivno, kod mene u stanu mreža od bar deset routera iz komšiluka.

Pise ti sve, cak i rezultati su javni. Sazetak:

Vrijednosti u EU vrijednosti su pod 1% (dozvoljenih). Tu su bazne stanice (62%), radio&tv (23%), druga TK oprema (11%), WiFi (manje od 4%). Najveci problem su zapravo mobilni telefoni (cak i do 80% granicne vrijednosti).

Ne sumnjam da je mobitel najgori, ipak je on tijelu najbliži.
A na kraju,.. od nečeg se mora umrijeti.

[Ajatolah_]

Je li to Bill Gates novi Soroš?

[escobar__]

Cca. 1800. godine kad ljude nisu ubijale telekomunikacijske mreže i mobiteli prosječan životni vijek bio je oko 30 godina. 2020. godine kada svijet ubijaju 5G mreža, Soroš, Bill Gates, iluminati i sl. životni vijek je preko 70 godina.

1800. godine je populacija brojala oko milijardu ljudi, danas oko 7,5 milijardi.

Toliko.

[Neregistrirani]

Is UK 5G Mobile Dangerous to Human Health? A Fact Check

Lately we’ve heard a lot of remarks like this: “5G harms human health“, “5G kills bees“,”5G causes cancer“, “overwhelming evidence says 5G is dangerous” and “we have no evidence this technology is safe.” Such statements are often being repeated in opposition to new UK mobile masts, but are they right and should we be concerned.

The issue has become particularly prominent of late, not least because some anti-5G campaign groups have managed to gain traction by causing several UK local authorities to take a position against future 5G mobile broadband deployments (e.g. Totnes in Devon, Glastonbury and Frome in Somerset).

Sometimes it’s best to answer concerns like this by first covering the basics of how mobile, and wireless communication signals in general (aka – radio waves), actually work. Such signals form one part of what’s known as the Electromagnetic Spectrum, which reflects a range of frequencies of electromagnetic (EM) radiation and their respective wavelengths / photon energies.

Sadly many people don’t fully appreciate what this is or how it works, which is perhaps partly reflected by the way that the anti-5G campaigns concentrate so much effort on one technology. However the issues they raise are by no means isolated to a specific radio technology and thus denigrating 5G so specifically tends to confuse the argument.

What is EM Radiation?

EM radiation is essentially energy that travels and spreads out as it goes, at different wavelengths (think ripples on the surface of an ocean), although you could also say that it reflects different kinds of light (most of them are invisible to human eyes but some animals and cameras can see more than we do). How we perceive or experience this radiation depends a lot on the wavelength, distance and energy behind it.

For example, the Sun produces all of the different kinds of electromagnetic radiation, although 99% of its rays are in the form of visible light, ultraviolet and infrared (the latter is also known as heat). The heat (thermal energy) you feel on your face from the sun on a cold winter’s morning is mostly infrared and so too is that heat you feel from somebody else’s body when in close proximity, while ultraviolet is what gives your skin a tan (or burn, if your exposure is too high) and visible light is obviously what you see. Without all this heat and light we would not exist.

NOTE: When an object absorbs any kind of light it heats up as it now has more energy than before, but often this effect is so small that you can’t feel it unless it’s very energetic.

We are quite simply bathed in a soup of all the different types of EM radiation (light), which is a part of our natural environment and life on this planet thrives alongside it. Similarly humans have also found ways of manipulating this for various different purposes, although some of it can be harmful, particularly when wavelengths become very short and massively more powerful (e.g. ionizing gamma rays from exposed nuclear power cores).

Take note that the illustration above is not to scale as the differences are huge (e.g. ultraviolet frequencies are 10,000 times higher than sunlight and sunlight is 1,000 times higher than microwaves etc.).

Ionizing vs Non-Ionozing EM Radiation

Science generally classifies everything from radio waves, microwaves, infrared and visible light as non-ionizing radiation, which means it doesn’t normally have enough energy (low energy) to knock electrons off the atoms that it interacts with and won’t do damage, such as breaking chemical bonds in molecules (i.e. it’s not usually harmful to humans).

By comparison ultraviolet (only the top end from around 3000 Terahertz), X-rays and gamma rays are all classified as ionizing radiation, which is more of a health hazard to humans because it involves changing the basic makeup of atoms in cells (e.g. the DNA molecules inside of cells).

However it normally takes a higher dosage of ionizing radiation before any negative health impacts start to show. For example, your skin will burn from ultraviolet if you spend too long in the sun without protection, but a thin layer of sun cream is all it takes to prevent this and brief expose is not really a concern. Likewise it would take a fair few body scans or flights abroad before you’d need to worry about X-rays.

Crucially the above is not to say that the various different types of non-ionizing radiation cannot still cause you harm, although officially the only recognised health effect is heating and, judging by our inbox, this is where a lot of people tend to get very confused.

Dr Richard Findlay, Society for Radiological Protection’s EMF and Optical Radiation Committee, said:

“There are two types of radiation. Ionising is the kind that you get in hospital when you have radiotherapy. Non-ionising radiation is what comes out of phone masts and TV towers. People get confused about adverse health effects.

Cancer is not a recognised health effect as a result of exposure from masts, for example. The only health effect is heating. In terms of a 25 metre mast, that is far enough away from people who are at ground level.”

The other big problem here is that the news media often talks about “radiation” in general terms as a negative, which is unhelpful without some definition as to its type and energy or dosage level. For example, Gamma rays are always harmful but we are naturally surrounded by them, except our daily dosage is minuscule (i.e. not particularly harmful at natural levels) and not even remotely like the colossal dosage levels of an exposed nuclear power core (e.g. see Sky’s Chernobyl TV services).

Wait.. So Are Radio Waves Safe or Not?

When we talk about radio waves here we’re generally covering non-ionizing wireless communication systems like Bluetooth, WiFi, Fixed Wireless Links and Mobile (2G to 5G). However ISPreview.co.uk has had plenty of emails from people who suggest that 5G is dangerous because, for example, a military weapon system may be designed using some of the same frequencies (this highlights a fundamental confusion in understanding).

The key consideration, in health terms, for any technology using radio spectrum (not just 5G) is the combination with power and distance. This is a bit like how Microwave Ovens (2.45GHz) use the same sort of band as WiFi but obviously they cook (i.e. HEAT) food by using lots of power (800 Watts+) and focusing it at ultra-short-range (a few centimetres).

Such ovens are shielded for safety but a small bit of their radiation will escape during use, which is why they tell you not to touch the oven when it’s running. Obviously you’d need to have a truly horrific death-wish to put your head inside a Microwave Oven while it’s running, although such devices are designed not to work if the door is ever left open.

By comparison WiFi only uses a minuscule fraction of that power (often only a few hundred milliwatts but busy multi-band devices can gobble c.1-2 Watts) to send a signal over an extremely wide area (e.g. your entire house or flat), while most of us sit many metres or even miles away from the source of similar Mobile signals. WiFi signals are thus very weak (energy wise) and soon degrade over a few tens of metres to the point of being unusable (especially if you have a few rooms / walls between you and the router – these reflect and absorb some of the signal, weakening it).

NOTE: At any given moment your body will only be interacting with a klix portion of the aforementioned WiFi signal as its widely distributed (i.e. the energy you receive is less than the source output).

Confusing these two types of scenario (Microwave Oven vs WiFi or Mobile) is a bit like equating petrol to water because both are clear liquids, even though they’re both radically different in their use, impact upon human health and the environment. As such a military weapon that uses tens or hundreds of Kilowatts of power to focus on a narrow target area within a few close feet or metres via a common radio band is thus completely different to the wide coverage and extremely low power of WiFi or mobile signals.

NOTE: Devices like some baby monitors, DECT phones, TVs, wireless alarms and even some household lights may emit more powerful EM radiation within your home than Mobile.

This is largely why the World Health Organisation (WHO) has long said there is no proven risk of cancer from mobile phone use, while at the same time classifying all radio frequency radiation (not only mobile or WiFi etc.) as “possibly carcinogenic” (i.e. the potential exists to cause harm but you’d generally need to put lots of power behind the signal and use it in a deliberately harmful way) and hence the confusion that a lot of people have.

Crucially the Mobile and WiFi networks that are all deployed today must conform to strict scientifically agreed rules for power and signal. As stated earlier the only known health effect in humans from such signals is heating and for the most part this is so weak as to be imperceivable (note: if you feel heat from your mobile or router when in close proximity then that’s just infrared from the chipset and NOT WiFi or Mobile!).

Margot James MP, Former Digital Minster, said:
“A considerable amount of research has been carried out on radio waves and Public Health England have concluded that exposures of radio waves to the public are well within the international health-related guideline levels that are used in the UK.”

Matt Warman MP, UK Digital Minister, said:
“[The] government will support work to bust health myths over 5G, which WHO say poses the same risk as talcum powder and pickled vegetables. There is no credible evidence to back up concerns and huge evidence for the economic benefit of gigabit-capable networks.”

An Ofcom spokesperson told ISPreview.co.uk:

“We work with Public Health England and take their recommendations into account in how we manage airwaves. They have found no evidence that 5G poses any new health risks compared to previous mobile technologies.

There are international guidelines to ensure mobile airwaves are transmitted safely, and the airwaves that will be used for 5G have been used safely in telecoms and other services for many years. We will continue to work with health bodies and monitor any developments to the evidence in this area.”

Check out the NHS and Public Heath England for some more guidance. Speaking of which, radio waves are generally so weak that even lower frequency digital TV signals (usually operating from upwards of 470MHz) can easily be disrupted by changes in atmospheric temperature and pressure (i.e. different weather systems), which may cause such signals to be refracted or bounce off an inversion overhead.

One of the reasons for mentioning TV signals here is that some such radio spectrum bands have been in used by mobile operators for years. The 800MHz band (currently used for 4G) was previously harnessed for analogue TV services, while the soon-to-be-auctioned 700MHz band for 5G was until recently used by digital TV signals.

We’ve lived with these TV bands for more than 70 years, often at a higher power levels than mobile signals, and yet they haven’t wiped us all out. The same is true for many other bands with different uses.

We should point out that modern mobile handsets and related equipment tend to contain additional shielding and must conform to strict standards, which must factor in the risks (mobile signals tend to be very safely within this guidance).

Nevertheless most people agree that you should still observe some common sense when handling such things, so no sleeping on top of your mobile phone at night and don’t strap that WiFi router to your head 24/7 with tape (we’ve yet to see anybody do this but there’s always.. somebody).

Not that you’d suffer any ill health impact from the signal itself if you did the above, but keeping some distance between yourself and the device just helps to minimise any perceived risk, however small that may already be. At this point it may help if we try to answer some of the most common concerns about 5G health fears.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2 ... eck.html/2

[Neregistrirani]

ICNIRP Impose New Limits on Radiation from 5G Mobile Handsets

The International Commission on Non‐Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) has completed a review of recent scientific evidence and imposed some new limits for the protection of humans exposed to radio frequency electromagnetic fields. The main change applies to 5G handsets operating in bands of 6GHz of more.

We recently published our own fact checking article on 5G (mobile broadband) health fears (here), which debunked many of the misleading claims about the technology that tend to circulate online. Similarly Ofcom last month reported on the results of their own measurements of electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions at UK mobile sites (here), which found that the tested sites were all outputting EMF radiation safely and at many times lower than the ICNIRP’s own guidelines.

The big change today is that the ICNIRP has issued new exposure guidelines, which is not something they often do (this update replaces their 1998 and 2010 guidelines), for the protection of humans exposed to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF) in the range 100kHz to 300GHz. We should point out that these actually apply to all sorts of wireless services and applications including mobile (4G etc.), WiFi, Bluetooth, base stations etc.

The main changes relate to EMF exposures above 6GHz, which is mostly focused on future 5G centric spectrum bands. These include additional restrictions to ensure that whole body and brief (under 6 minutes) local RF EMF exposures will not result in excessive exposures. Within this 6GHz+ EMF frequency range, the averaging area for local exposure has also been reduced, by a factor of 5 relative to the ICNIRP (1998) restrictions.

Crucially the changes are focused more on the mobile handsets and related kit that we all carry (e.g. Smartphones), rather than base stations and antennas which, as above, already tend to operate safely within both the existing and new guideline levels. We don’t expect this to have too much impact since 5G handsets are already quite conservative in this department and fall very safely within even the new rules.

Dr Eric van Rongen, ICNIRP Chairman, said:

“We know parts of the community are concerned about the safety of 5G and we hope the updated guidelines will help put people at ease. The guidelines have been developed after a thorough review of all relevant scientific
literature, scientific workshops and an extensive public consultation process. They provide protection against all scientifically substantiated adverse health effects due to EMF exposure in the 100 kHz to 300 GHz range.”

When we revised the guidelines, we looked at the adequacy of the ones we published in 1998. We found that the previous ones were conservative in most cases, and they’d still provide adequate protection for current technologies.

However, the new guidelines provide better and more detailed exposure guidance in particular for the higher frequency range, above 6 GHz, which is of importance to 5G and future technologies using these higher frequencies. The most important thing for people to remember is that 5G technologies will not be able to cause harm when these new guidelines are adhered to.”

Other minor changes to the guidelines include additional means of assessing compliance with the guidelines and greater specification of how to assess complicated exposure scenarios. We should also point out that, at present, most mobile operators in the UK are only able to harness part of the 3.4-4GHz bands for 5G and more of that will be released by Ofcom this year (4G and other wireless services have been using these for years).

Further down the road we expect that Ofcom may also release new spectrum above the 6GHz range for use by 5G, but higher frequency bands tend to make for much weaker mobile signals that don’t travel as far and struggle to penetrate through objects or the environment in general. The advantage of such bands is that they allow more spectrum frequency to be harnessed by operators, which means faster mobile broadband speeds.

Crucially the ICNIRP reiterated that they couldn’t find enough solid and reliable scientific evidence for them to conclude that radio waves (i.e. those operating within their guidelines) could result in any truly negative health effects, such as the development of cancer in the human body.

The organisation said they considered all scientific literature of “good scientific quality” to set the new guidelines. This was based on major reviews by the World Health Organization (2014), the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (2015, 2016, 2018), the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (2015), as well as individual studies identified following those reviews.

“The literature included research searching for effects of both brief and long-term exposures to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF), on both immediate (e.g. pain) and delayed (e.g. cancer) health outcomes. This included evaluation of self-reported hypersensitivity to RF EMF exposure. Importantly, the research that focused on potential adverse health effects of RF EMF exposure did not make any assumptions about the mechanisms of action of the RF EMF (e.g. thermal versus non-thermal), but merely looked for any verified (substantiated) adverse health effect, and where identified, instigated protective measures regardless of mechanism,” said the ICNIRP.

None of this is likely to change the opinion of those who passionately believe that 5G is dangerous and reject nearly all proper research to the contrary.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2 ... dsets.html

[Diwan]

Ja recimo, ovdje večina zna o čemu pišem, nisam uopšte pobornik te priče o 5G koja se sada pušta u krugovima zavjera. Za mene je to spin kojim poslušnici igrača iz sjene žele da skrenu pažnju sa drugih stvari. Eto vidite 5G je kriv, nismo mi, majke mi )

[Dozer]

Onda smo kolege, makar na papiru. Obzirom da si programer i to preko "20 godina", u kojim si jezicima radio/radis, ili imas li nesto iz tog polja cime se mozes pohvaliti? Ja posljednjih 10 godina radim u autoindustriji (Njemacka), iskljucivo istrazivajuci algoritme autonomnih vozila i primjene istih, pri tomu bazirajuci se na Autosar runtime-u. Brzina obradjivanja stvaranja vjestackih neurosinaptickih mreza pri obrazcima masinskog ucenja kod donosenja odluka u 5G tehnologiji ce biti uvecana za preko 100 puta. Ako cemo da pricamo o frekvenciji, imam vise mini-robotica uz pomoc Arduina gdje sam se igrao sa frekvencijom, naravno to je za moj cejf.

Kada vec pricamo o kredibilitetu. Sta si konkretno uradio u tih 20 godina programiranja? Sjecam se da si na temi IT Poslodavci jednom postavio neki zastarjeli CMS i kako se prave stranice. Otprilike staro 10+ godina.

Stetnost 5G je mit, kao i tih tvojih 20 godina iskustva.

Tacno ovakav odgovor sam ocekivao, princip - ciji je duzi, uz obaveznu ironiju i cinizam. Smijesno... Joomla, Drupal ili Wordpress su daleko od zastarjelih CMS-ova, ali OK. Svako ima pravo na svoje misljenje.
C#, Linq, SQL, ali ne radim to konkretno vec godinama. Medjutim, nije uopste poenta u tome ko sta zna ili ko je na cemu radio ili radi, nego je poenta u tome da znam o cemu pricam.
Drago mi je da si se snasao kod starih Germana i da imas fin posao, ali ono sto i dalje ne kontas jeste da si zapravo potvrdio ono sto sam i ja rekao - 5G je najmanje bitna za GSM telekomunikacije. Daleko je bitnija za sve ostalo. A, posto vec radis s tim s cime radis, onda ti je jasno da je ta visoka frekvencija vrlo bitna za pristup mikro i nano tehnologijama.

Tehnologija napreduje, to je sasvim jasno i normalno, ali mislim da smo vec odavno u povecem problemu sto se tice koristenja iste, tj. ljudi koji stoje iza mnogih tehnologija koje se sve vise koriste za stvari koje, najblaze receno, spadaju pod frapantno krsenje ljudskih prava i privatnosti. Ako je to nekome uopste bitno...

A stetnost 5G nikako ne moze biti mit, bog te ne ubio... zracenje od 30GHz po tebi nije zracenje, niti je opasno za bilo sta? Pa nisu se dzaba nadigli onoliki ljudi izvan industrije...

[drag_gost]

Nije princip - ciji je duzi, vec si ti potegao tu pricu o programiranju, nebitno.

Kao sto sam napisao, necu se upustati dalje, ali cu napraviti iznimku cisto zbog price o privatnosti. Privatnost je iluzija i to ne zbog 5G. Tako je odavno.
Ostalo ne mogu, samo eto savjet kolege - malo se apdejtuj. Nije zaista cinizam, ni ironija. Sa tobom bih se slozio prije nekih 7-8 godina i to slijepo...

Svako dobro i nemoj zamjeriti nesto.

PS. Naravno da je Joomla zastarjela jebo ga ti...

[Ajatolah_]

Riječ zračenje se uvijek uvuče s negativnom konotacijom, jer je dosta needukovanih ljudi poistovjećuje sa (manje ili više) štetnim jonizirajućim zračenjem, koje je karakteristika frekvencija viših od vidljivog spektra (X od 30PHz, pa do game u desetinama EHz). Recimo vidljivi spektar boja predstavlja zračenje pokriva frekvencije ispod ovih, ali mnogo viših od onih koje koriste telekomunikacijske mreže, oko 400 do 800 THz naspram tih nekih 30-tak GHz.

I zašto bi se sad neko trebao frapirati kad čuje 30GHz? Kad su već svi odavno okruženi ruterima koji rade na 2.5GHz i 5GHz, pored radio-signala, 4G-a, TV signala, "zračenja" iz vidljivog spektra koje stalno gledamo, zašto su baš eto ove frekvencije problematične?

[allem_77]

Kina se protiv koronavirusa bori uz pomoć aplikacije za pametne telefone
http://www.klix.ba/clanak/200416010

[konektovan]

Kina se protiv koronavirusa bori uz pomoć aplikacije za pametne telefone
http://www.klix.ba/clanak/200416010

Hebem ja kinezima od......do, sve redom...

[allem_77]

Kina se protiv koronavirusa bori uz pomoć aplikacije za pametne telefone
http://www.klix.ba/clanak/200416010

Hebem ja kinezima od......do, sve redom...

Ovako će biti kod nas, kada neki dedo krene u trgovinu.

Barkodovi upravljaju životima ljudi. U mnogim kineskim gradovima građani bez aplikacije ne mogu napustiti stambene objekte ili ući u većinu javnih mjesta, iako zakonodavstvo još uvijek ne nalaže korištenje aplikacije kao obavezu

[Dozer]

Nije princip - ciji je duzi, vec si ti potegao tu pricu o programiranju, nebitno.

Kao sto sam napisao, necu se upustati dalje, ali cu napraviti iznimku cisto zbog price o privatnosti. Privatnost je iluzija i to ne zbog 5G. Tako je odavno.
Ostalo ne mogu, samo eto savjet kolege - malo se apdejtuj. Nije zaista cinizam, ni ironija. Sa tobom bih se slozio prije nekih 7-8 godina i to slijepo...

Svako dobro i nemoj zamjeriti nesto.

PS. Naravno da je Joomla zastarjela jebo ga ti...

Ma ja to spomenuo samo u kontekstu price, ne da se naduravamo, jbg ti...
A nikad ne zamjeram. Razmjena misljenja kod mene nikad ne povlaci zamjeranje. Nekad sam u pravu, nekad nisam, nekad sam napola...kao i svi.

Naravnoo da je privatnost iluzija. Onog momenta kada je pokrenut Internet, a zatim i SmartPhones, privatnosti je izrecena smrtna presuda. Naravno, ovo se odnosi na sve one koji koriste ove tehnologije. Mtumba iz Zimbabvea koji se jos ganja sa zebrama nije ni svjestan koliko je sretan i rasterecen

Ali, i ta ugrozena privatnost mora imati svoje granice. Cipovanje ljudi iz nekih SF filmova od prije 10-20 godina je nesto na sta ljudi niposto ne smiju pristati. Problem je sto se protiv ovoga moze boriti iskljucivo masovnom narodnom/gradjanskom silom. Nazalost, ali tako je. Mirni bunt nece to sprijeciti.

[zforumas]

Pa svi smo mi pristali da dijelimo svoju privatnost (neko vise, neko manje) onoga momenta kada smo onomad kliknuli Connect pa slusali onu finu melodiju Dial-Up modema, pa onda poslije toga godinama klikajuci "I Agree" i ne citajuci onaj pamflet iznad. Trebamo biti zahvalni sto nam ne pokucaju na vrata i ne traze bubreg koji smo im obecali onomad instalirajuci mIRC ili ICQ.

[cyprus]

Privatnost je po mom mišljenju prilično overrated...