NASA, NOAA, and the Navy Tell The FCC Its 5G Plan Will Harm Weather Forecasting

from the ill-communication dept

The Ajit Pai FCC has pissed off yet another subset of the population still reliant on factual data.

Scientists and researchers at NASA, NOAA, and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) have been warning that the wireless industry's use of select bands for 5G could interfere with transmissions of weather-satellite imagery. In a letter (pdf) sent to the FCC last month, warning that the industry's plan to use 24GHz band could severely hamper weather forecasting. The FCC recently auctioned off spectrum in this band for private companies, but a growing roster of scientists say precautions weren't taken first:

"NOAA and NASA have conducted studies that show interference in passive collection at the 23.6-24 GHz band from the adjacent 5G band (24.25 GHz); as such it is expected that interference will result in a partial-to-complete loss of remotely sensed water-vapor measurements. It is also expected that impacts will be concentrated in urban areas of the United States first."

More plainly, water vapor emits radiation at 23.8GHz. Both the NOAA and NASA say monitoring these vapors won't be possible if the neighboring band is too noisy. Things like hurricane forecasts, they say, could take up to two to three days longer if adequate protections aren't put in place. There's far more detail in this recent article in Nature, where academics note that while far more scientific study is needed, the interference potential here is a very real threat.

AT&T and other industry players recently gobbled up spectrum in the band at auction, and have an obvious vested interest in getting the spectrum in place quickly as they look to cash in on fifth generation wireless (5G). This being Ajit Pai, his response to the concerns has been to tell the NOAA, NASA, Navy, and AMS that they don't know what they're talking about. Senators have since pressed Pai to provide insight into exactly what his agency did to mitigate the potential harm:

"Explain and provide supporting documentation related to the FCC's public interest analysis, including any cost-benefit analysis, on the FCC's emissions limit. In particular, explain how the FCC addressed the costs to taxpayers from the loss of billions of dollars of investment in weather-sensing satellites, the costs to public safety and national security, and to the nation's commercial activities that rely on this critical weather data."

As if on cue, representatives of the "American Consumer Institute" (a non-profit pretending to be a consumer advocacy firm but actually backed by big telecom companies) has been pushing editorials trying to claim the problem doesn't actually exist either, and that the Navy, AMS, NASA, and NOAA are all somehow suffering from some form of scientific delusion. Meanwhile a separate but similar controversy has emerged over the FCC's plan for the 1675-1680MHz band. There too the American Geophysical Union (AGU), American Meteorological Society (AMS), Boeing, Accuweather, and National Weather Association (NWA) have all been warning the FCC that its spectrum sharing plan for that band could also cause forecasting problems.

It's yet another example of the discord created when you have a regulatory agency driven by ideology, alternative facts, and a blind fealty to big companies involved in overseeing issues that require nuance, objectivity, and at least a fleeting regard for science and data.

Filed Under: 5g, ams, fcc, interference, nasa, noaa, weather forecasting


Reader Comments

The First Word

Meanwhile a separate but similar controversy has emerged over the FCC's plan for the 1675-1680MHz band.

For more information on that, that band is used to allow anyone with a receiver to get realtime weather data from the GOES weather satellite system. Aviation, shipping logistics, environmental monitoring, disaster response all rely on these systems. All they need to run is a power source.

The main company pushing for the auction is calling itself Ligado, and wants that adjacent spectrum to run 5g IoT devices. They claim, agaominst evidence, that "there's no reason to be concerned" about interference with weather satellite transmissions.

While claiming there's no risk of interference, they also claim that the interference isn't their problem.

Ligado urged the FCC to make it clear that "non-federal users have no legal claim to continue to listen in on this spectrum."

"They are, quite simply, eavesdroppers—and are therefore not entitled to any protections licensees or even registrants might receive," Ligado said.

Ligado also argues that an Internet-based system could provide data to weather researchers "in a faster and more reliable way than they currently receive it."

Ignoring the "eavesdropping on public information" stupidity, an internet-based system is absolutely not a valid solution. How often does the internet go down during a major natural disaster?

Ligado was formerly known as "LightSquared," the company that bought spectrum adjacent to GPS, similarly swore that there would definitely be no interference, proceeded to cause interference, and blamed the problem on the GPS receivers for obeying physics.

—Toom1275

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Baron von Robber, 3 Jul 2019 @ 7:00am

    The fuck with science! We have consumers to screw over! - Telecoms

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 7:25am

    Voters in FLA will not be pleased to find out how little our government cares.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Michael, 3 Jul 2019 @ 7:27am

    It does not look like Pai has responded at all, but I think this comment from the linked Ars article says it best:

    "I mean it isn't some libtard making this up. It is the friggin US Navy who considers weather forecasting to be pretty damn critical to doing their job."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Thad (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 8:16am

      Re:

      He has; here's a more recent Ars article: Ajit Pai says NOAA and NASA are wrong about 5G harming weather forecasts

      It's about what you'd expect.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        JoeCool (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 8:45am

        Re: Re:

        He rushed through the auction knowing that studies would take time to complete, knowing what they would say, and then when they are finally done, he has the gall to call them "bad data" and promptly use bad data as part of his argument.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2019 @ 10:32am

        Re: Re:

        If it means stopping those bastards from seeding the atmosphere with aluminum sulfides and barrium and God knows what else.. and boiling the ionosphere with HAARP and stopping them from dumping crap in the earth's oceans and bodies of fresh water from their tanker spraying jets then go 5g.. you go NOW.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2019 @ 8:31am

        Re: Re:

        Pai said that "the assumptions that clearly underlay that study were so flawed as to make the study, in our view at least, meaningless. I mean all it had was those pesky, fact things, and they were mixed in with the scientific data that explained why there would be a problem.

        I mean there was no cash flow analysis showing how the money would go from Carrier A to my pocket, or from Carrier B to my wallet. There were no appeals to irrelevant anecdotes ("think of the children" or a "war on weather") to glom onto and repeat endlessly.

        Based on my standards, I think you can all see why this study was so flawed ("It didn't say what we wanted it to say" basically, so it's "bad data" for our purposes and we will just continue to repeat that no matter what).

        Now all your bases are belonging to us... muahahaha

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Optical Point (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 8:13am

    Turns Out Mother Nature Isn’t So Bi-Polar After All

    So that’s why my Weather App screws up from time to time? Forecast calls for screw-ups and 5Gs of t-bagging the American taxpayer, while FCC’s sucking the sausage of the corrupt practices of the 21st century.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 8:25am

    What we're missing is the long term plan the telcoms are putting into play here.
    They want to get 5G up and rolling, and screw up forecasting.
    They want more super storms to wipe out their copper lines & the FCC to give them a pass on having to rebuild.
    They they will have everyone on cellular data & be able to rake in more profits than every before.

    Whats a few more dead people when corporate profits are at stake?

    I mean its not like there are rules that make sure landlines can still function during power outages for a period of time & that locating a landline when someone calls for help is much easier than hoping the cellphone can ping the GPS satellite through the 5G haze...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 8:40am

    While NASA, the Nava and NOAA have completely ligitmite arguments in the science arena: to they have a crediable reason to believe 5G device will actually be deployed in proximity to weather sensors (I mean: do they have credible evidence that teleco will ... build? ).

    Of course that's not a reason to ignore their agument, but it's probably the most credible defense Pai could raise

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JoeCool (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 8:50am

      Re:

      to they have a crediable reason to believe 5G device will actually be deployed in proximity to weather sensors

      They'll have to build anywhere there's a large group of customers, so cities and suburban areas WILL be saturated. That means you'll only get useful data from sensors in areas that the phone companies don't care about - the most rural of rural areas. But you need sensor data in inhabited areas, too. After all, that's where the weather will have the greatest affect.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Michael, 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:08am

        Re: Re:

        "That means you'll only get useful data from sensors in areas that the phone companies don't care about"

        That appears to be "everywhere", so perhaps it isn't such a big issue.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:11am

        Re: Re:

        While I am loath to do this: I shall explain my remark, and destroy it's subtilties.
        I was implying that telecos wont actually invent in deploying 5G on insignificat scale (because that will require spending money)

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:16am

        Re: Re:

        Space-based networks are great for desolate areas, but in cities it's not hard to add ground-based sensors. Would that help get around interference?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:24am

          Re: Re: Re:

          No, not at all. Ground-based sensors are useful but they don't tell the whole picture, not even a significant portion of it. Satellite-based sensors provide a much broader view of weather systems and can help parse weather patterns for longer-range forecasting. Longer than a few hours that you're lucky to get from ground-based sensor data.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 10:02am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            You'd combine the two. Space-based sensors would still work in the rural areas without 5G, and ground-based forecasting might be able to check the local atmosphere if the 5G towers aren't broadcasting upward.

            It may not be enough, and then there's the cost of deployment (the FCC made a boatload of money from the spectrum auction but NASA and the NOAA didn't).

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 4:24pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Yeah, afterall what's a few days of prior notice that a hurricane is going to wipe you out ... no need to hurry as the traffic will not be so bad will it

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2019 @ 9:14am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                We don't (or I don't) know that losing a few days notice is the only way this can go. Maybe, instead, NASA and the NOAA are forced to spend some money to work around the interference. Maybe that amount is so ridiculous we should reject the 5G usage outright. One way or another, we definitely need a solution before letting the telcos create a public-safety problem.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2019 @ 10:05am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Maybe, instead, NASA and the NOAA are forced to spend some money to work around the interference.

                  Because they are using a natural signal, the one generated by water vapour, they cannot do anything about interference, other that asking the interfering source to improve their system to avoid it.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2019 @ 1:53pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Because they are using a natural signal, the one generated by water vapour, they cannot do anything about interference

                    The point was that there are, in principle, other ways to measure water vapour. The question is whether any are practical. (If so, one expects the telcos would have mentioned it.)

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2019 @ 3:05pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      Satellites are remote sensing, and give the moisture measurement in a column of atmosphere, while other methods only measure the moisture of the air surrounding the sensor, which is effectively a point measurement. So, there is no replacement for the microwave measurement technique.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2019 @ 4:48am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      What other ways are you suggesting or are you simply hoping it is possible?

                      Sure, one could fly a plane into the storm to take measurements like we have been doing for some time, and as pointed out in articles written on the subject, that could potentially cost two days of prior notice.

                      Since they want to roll out 5G yesterday we have no time to dream about some futuristic solution.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2019 @ 8:36am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Come on, just ask the water to "nerd harder" and I'm sure it can change the frequency at which it's vapor dissipates...

                    We just don't think the water is trying hard enough at this time...

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2019 @ 10:09am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  "Maybe, instead, NASA and the NOAA are forced to spend some money to work around the interference"

                  What a silly response .... lets just waste more taxpayer resources because that is much easier than getting people to agree upon the more efficient and logical answer.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Toom1275 (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:21am

      Re:

      to they have a crediable reason to believe 5G device will actually be deployed in proximity to weather sensors (I mean: do they have credible evidence that teleco will ... build? ).

      The sensors are up in orbit. It's the proximity to what they're sensing that's the problem. The satellites measure the very faint amounts of radiation that water vapor emits in order to measure the vapor content of the air. What Pai wants is to put high-power emitters (5G) next to the low-power emitter (vapor) and say everything will be fine because techomagic. It'll like trying to watch the flickering of a candle flame next to a car flashing its highbeams at you. Experts predict at least 77% data loss if Pai's sellout goes through as planned.

      And it doesn't matter that 5G won't be deployed absolutely everywhere. Hurricane prediction relies on being able to monitor what the weather's doing on the land; weather systems that move west-to-east end up crossing and influencing the hurricane's track.
      Blind the monitors over the US, and it becomes irrelevant that nobody put 5G over the ocean.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Toom1275 (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:06am

    Meanwhile a separate but similar controversy has emerged over the FCC's plan for the 1675-1680MHz band.

    For more information on that, that band is used to allow anyone with a receiver to get realtime weather data from the GOES weather satellite system. Aviation, shipping logistics, environmental monitoring, disaster response all rely on these systems. All they need to run is a power source.

    The main company pushing for the auction is calling itself Ligado, and wants that adjacent spectrum to run 5g IoT devices. They claim, agaominst evidence, that "there's no reason to be concerned" about interference with weather satellite transmissions.

    While claiming there's no risk of interference, they also claim that the interference isn't their problem.

    Ligado urged the FCC to make it clear that "non-federal users have no legal claim to continue to listen in on this spectrum."

    "They are, quite simply, eavesdroppers—and are therefore not entitled to any protections licensees or even registrants might receive," Ligado said.

    Ligado also argues that an Internet-based system could provide data to weather researchers "in a faster and more reliable way than they currently receive it."

    Ignoring the "eavesdropping on public information" stupidity, an internet-based system is absolutely not a valid solution. How often does the internet go down during a major natural disaster?

    Ligado was formerly known as "LightSquared," the company that bought spectrum adjacent to GPS, similarly swore that there would definitely be no interference, proceeded to cause interference, and blamed the problem on the GPS receivers for obeying physics.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:26am

    "Things like hurricane forecasts, they say, could take up to two to three days longer if adequate protections aren't put in place."

    If the sensors are in space and hurricanes form over oceans, I'm confused at how hurricane forecasts will be impacted.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:30am

    The ephemeral elephant in the room

    If transmissions in the 23.6-24 GHz are subject to interference from a band separated by 0.25 GHz why didn't NASA/NOAA secure a band from 23.35-24.25 GHz? Did they expect that the neighboring spectrum would remain unused forever?

    Pai is a dick, for sure, and 5G is maybe the biggest boondoggle to come along in a generation but this seems like bad planning on NASA/NOAA's part. Not something they're known for. They also could have participated in the auction to lock down neighboring bands.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Toom1275 (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:44am

      Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

      Yeah, sure, and it's the firefighters' fault Verizon throttled them.

      :rolleyes:

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 9:51am

      Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

      Technical detail: it's not transmission that NASA/NOAA/Navy are concerned about it's emissions.
      The difference being transmissions are controlled (at the origin) by humans.
      However we currently don't have the ablity to control the emission frequency of water vapor.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 10:29am

      Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

      Maybe because of power levels? It's possible NASA/NOAA don't need to stop all use of those frequencies, but only those at high power levels like 5G. Highly directional transmissions might be OK too. Traditionally it's been the FCC's role to avoid interfering with licensed users.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Toom1275 (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 10:39am

        Re: Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

        You don't get "directional" any more than a streetlight is directional.

        But NOAA says if the FCC were to just tighten limits on out-of-band leakage from the currently-required -20dB to -50dB, the problem would pretty much disappear. But that would cut into telco profits just too much for Pai's liking.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 11:36am

          Re: Re: Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

          Ah, so this is a repeat of the GPS interference concern of a few years ago—nearby bands unavoidably interfering with each other—and of course LightSquared/Ligado are still involved.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 11:36am

          Re: Re: Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

          You don't get "directional" any more than a streetlight is directional.

          [Citation needed]

          There's nothing to prevent a satellite from directing its transmission at a specific ground-based location, particularly with modern technology. What makes you think "you don't get directional"?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Toom1275 (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 3:15pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

            I was referring to the 5G transmitters, not the satellites. Specifically, Ajit Pai's technologically ignorant excuse:

            For example, it ignores the fact that 5G will involve beamforming, essentially adaptive antenna arrays that will more precisely send 5G signals—sort of a rifle shot, if you will, instead of a shotgun blast of 5G spectrum.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          That One Guy (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 1:40pm

          Re: Re: Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

          But that would cut into telco profits just too much for Pai's liking.

          Which is to say 'at all', because to Pai anything that negatively impacts telco profits is too much.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 10:52am

        Re: Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

        It's possible NASA/NOAA don't need to stop all use of those frequencies,

        Those are the frequencies emitted by water vapour, and by measuring the emissions, satellite sensors can measure the water vapour in the atmosphere. If NSA/NOAA cannot use those frequencies because of interference, they cannot measure water vapour in the atmosphere, and weather forecasting becomes less accurate.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2019 @ 10:40am

        Re: Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

        Once they crank up the cell tower power and boil every living brain cell on earth, IT WON'T FUCKING MATTER.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2019 @ 2:37pm

          Re: Re: Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

          It would take more power and MUCH larger cell tower equipment than currently available to do that.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Russ Kinner, 3 Jul 2019 @ 4:12pm

      Re: The ephemeral elephant in the room

      The article says "More plainly, water vapor emits radiation at 23.8GHz. Both the NOAA and NASA say monitoring these vapors won't be possible if the neighboring band is too noisy."

      It's physics that determines this, not a frequency band that could be assigned.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 10:54am

    What? Water vapor is illegally using spectrum near ours! How dare it? Call the FCC.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2019 @ 11:34am

    floridian snow days here we come!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    alternatives(), 3 Jul 2019 @ 12:54pm

    Not like the consumers have a choice

    and you can buy from vendors not using that RF space.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 1:49pm

    'It's just a little wind and rain, what's the big deal?'

    Things like hurricane forecasts, they say, could take up to two to three days longer if adequate protections aren't put in place.

    No worries, I mean it's not like hurricanes are capable of massive levels of destruction and high potential for death, and a few days could be the difference between being able to evacuate an area so only property is destroyed versus not having enough warning leading do significant loss of life.

    I gotta say, I'm almost impressed, albeit for all the wrong reasons. I've known Pai was an asshole with a complete indifference to the public and serving it for years now, but to raise that to the level of ignoring experts on a matter that could literally be the difference between life and death for thousands or tens of thousands of people because listening to them might impact telco profits...

    I didn't think it was possible for my view of him to get any lower, but it would seem he went above and beyond in proving me wrong.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 2:33pm

    MW bandwidth

    Microwave bandwidth starts..
    100mhz low power..
    Ends
    100ghz..
    And they want to be in the upper end of this???

    ANYONE?? want to place a device near their heads that is sending a Signal in EVERY DIRECTION...from 23-25ghz??
    Do you want children??
    Do you want a head ache for the next 6 months??

    https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/2003-allochrt.pdf

    NOPE, I aint going there...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Toom1275 (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 3:18pm

    The kicker? There's plenty of frequency bands that 25G isn't even needed at all. Countries smarter at this than the US are moving ahead just fine without sacrificing vital systems.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Toom1275 (profile), 3 Jul 2019 @ 3:19pm

      Re:

      And of the bands, it's probably the least-useful, because it's the one most heavily absorbed by water vapor.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2019 @ 1:44am

        Re: Re:

        No problem, the telcos will just up the power output to overcome the loss of transmission in humid climates. It's all OK because hurricanes don't thrive in humid conditions, they thrive in hot & dry desert conditions. /S

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Gerald Robinson (profile), 4 Jul 2019 @ 9:06am

    The problem is congress

    The FCC is an invention of Congress and is a bipartisan mess. Psi deserves to be a target but the FCC is a bipartisan committee! The problem is regulatory capture and Congressmen who are paid off.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2019 @ 10:18am

      Re: The problem is congress

      The problem is greedy know it all dumbasses that somehow got put in charge of shit they know nothing about and refuse to ask those who know better.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Gerald Robinson (profile), 4 Jul 2019 @ 9:27am

    I agree

    5G is a Telco fraud! They should make good on their promises and commitments before being allowed if they don't then the subsidies and tax breaks which they have should be reclained. Like wise any band width that they bought and don't use!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Bill Bical, 6 Jul 2019 @ 5:47am

    The ironing is delicious

    Wait, doesn't NOAA usually get the heads up on major rain events?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.