This.theultimateend said:He's probably telling the truth. Financially there is no benefit to lying in this manner, he runs a business, so I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
If you want to make money you say you have MORE restrictions not less.
That's how you trick folks.
Those that make cellphone will sure not try to stop it, for such network basically mean hardline phone lines are gonna join the telegraph, due to such wireless network been good enough to fully replace the wired one, so they will sell even more cellphones.Jabberwock xeno said:This.theultimateend said:He's probably telling the truth. Financially there is no benefit to lying in this manner, he runs a business, so I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
If you want to make money you say you have MORE restrictions not less.
That's how you trick folks.
All we can do know if hope cell phone and service providers don't try to stop it.
oh i was just curious if it was a regional thing in your area where people don't have cell phones or if might have been just you, but you have your reasons and i was just curious i suppose, i see you get annoyed by unnecessary social interactions more than the average person..JMeganSnow said:Where I live has nothing to do with why I refuse to get a cell phone. I don't have or want one because I refuse to interact with people whenever it happens to enter their tiny brains that they know my number. So why should I have an expensive device to carry around when I'd never voluntarily answer it? If I'm going somewhere and I feel the need for portable entertainment, I bring a book. I'm capable of keeping track of my appointments myself. I have no children that require supervision.gmaverick019 said:refuse to get a cell phone...?JMeganSnow said:It sounds cool. However, I still refuse to get a cell phone.
where do you live and why do you refuse to get a cell phone...
hell 80% of the people i know don't have home phones anymore because they only have a cell..
If I actually needed to be in touch with people on short notice, I'd probably get a cell phone. But I don't. So I won't.
I don't quite think so. They'd probably buy license to use it if anything, as it would be a MUCH cheaper infrastructure to operate.Cronq said:I got $50 bet that AT&T and Comcast join up to buy these guys out and take that new invention and put it on the first rocket to the Sun.
You might want to check the internet speeds in Japan. They are much, MUCH faster than Europe/USA.kouriichi said:I can believe it. But only barely.
The fact is, "Shannon's Law" was made over 50 years ago. Technology has evolved hundreds of times since then. We have yet to tap into the true power we humans can harness.
I believe its possible, to an extent. While i doubt "Everyone will get 100mbs", im sure 20-60mbs are possible. That even that would be a massive step up.
Thats not really true; many physical barriers are longstanding and have no indication of breaking. And since science rarely deals in "impossibility," at least as far as credible science goes, it's hard to hold that these things are the regular of tomorrow.Veloxe said:I don't claim to understand what he's talking about, but I know science changes and "impossible" today is the regular of tomorrow.
This is exactly the heart of the issue. We're claiming that this is "impossible" because it violates a law that was invented more than 25 years before the first cell phone. Radio was great and all, but show me whoever came up with and tested that law, and let's see how qualified they are to even comprehend the advances in wireless technology since, let alone technology in general. Their old methods and assumptions are inferior.kouriichi said:The fact is, "Shannon's Law" was made over 50 years ago. Technology has evolved hundreds of times since then. We have yet to tap into the true power we humans can harness.