Operators divided on 5G strategies

first_img Tags Author Steve Costello Related Steve works across all of Mobile World Live’s channels and played a lead role in the launch and ongoing success of our apps and devices services. He has been a journalist…More Read more Previous ArticleTelegram boss accuses China over DDoS attackNext ArticleCanadian operators make unlimited moves Home Operators divided on 5G strategies Telstra earmarks $116M to boost rural coveragecenter_img Asia Telenor advances multi-vendor SA 5G AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to LinkedInLinkedInLinkedInShare to TwitterTwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookFacebookShare to MoreAddThisMore 13 JUN 2019 Telenor books loss on $780M Myanmar write-off LIVE FROM 5G WORLD, LONDON: Discussions by operators around 5G deployment strategies highlighted key differences in approach, with some aiming to be pioneers and others taking a more measured approach.Channa Seneviratne, executive director for network and infrastructure engineering at Telstra (pictured, second right), said it wanted to be a technology leader, but the “compelling reason was that our 4G network data growth has been 60 per cent to 70 per cent year-on-year” making capacity offset “the very first obvious use case”.In contrast, Paul Berriman, group CTO at PCCW in Hong Kong (pictured, left), noted high fibre penetration and sufficient mobile capacity left little incentive to push ahead: “Our first stage will be some time next year when we put 3.5GHz base stations into dense urban areas.”Kirsi Valtari, VP of telco efficiency for Elisa in Finland (pictured, centre), said 5G is a good fit with the company’s existing business model. “We offer speed-based tiers with unlimited mobile data, and now with 5G we can offer even higher speeds”.Telenor Norway CTO Ingeborg Ofsthus (pictured, right), said it is “busy trialling, piloting, testing out” the technology with different vendors, focusing on “testing overlays, we are testing swaps” to ensure it is “well equipped when it comes to knowledge and experience”.She also noted key differences “around use cases, around the ecosystem, how we work with business partners and industry partners”. The operator plans to “quite aggressively decommission legacy technology”, meaning 5G will need to fill their roles, including providing fixed wireless services to replace the copper (DSL) network: “It’s the most rock-solid part of the case,” she said.Haithem Alfaraj, SVP of technology and operation at STC (pictured, second left), noted Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 programme, intended to diversify its economy, is a major driver in its 5G plans, while also highlighting ecosystem as a factor.“I think it’s going to create a great opportunity for the digital transformation move that telcos have been trying for the last four or five years. I think that will accelerate”.The company is looking to wrap-up its testing phase in the coming months, with commercial services following after. “The technology maturity remains a challenge for all the operators,” he noted.Seneviratne said: “Each week we have new software in the network, and we expect that as par for the course. Even in the devices we’re seeing updates from the chipset manufacturers pretty much every two or three weeks. It is very early, but we want to learn the lessons.” It provides information to its vendors to help drive maturity.IndustryWith early 5G deployments centering on enhanced mobile broadband and fixed wireless use cases, there was also a discussion of the impact of next-generation networks on industrial customers.Ofsthus noted much of the talk is about latency, the need for a 5G core and edge computing: “we can see that those components won’t be there when we launch 5G.”“For sure we have a lot of interested parties, but then how do we then make that into scale, not only working with one or two, but making something that can really scale and is sustainable?”Likewise, Valtari said while Elisa plans trials later this year, it is unsure about timelines: “We will be experimenting with the industrial customers to find what will actually be the first realistic use cases.”Berriman said the biggest challenge for PCCW is a hike from around 3,000 to 30,000 base stations and from 4 million smartphones to 40 million devices,“The question is where is the business case to support that, and from an operating point of view, how can we get down to zero-touch provisioning, because at the end of the day, if we have to have any form of human intervention to support all those devices, it’s going to kill the business case.” Subscribe to our daily newsletter Back ElisaPCCWSTCTelenorTelenor NorwayTelstralast_img read more

Defining Dignity Up

first_img Medicine Defining Dignity UpWesley J. SmithFebruary 10, 2018, 1:48 AM TagsAlzheimer’sanxietyassisted suicidebrain cancerBrittany MaynardCNNdignitydying naturallyexistential fearshospiceillnessIra Byockold agesufferingsuicideTheosVeterans Hospital,Trending Recommended Mom died of Alzheimer’s disease in my home after receiving months of excellent and truly compassionate hospice care that alleviated her physical, mental, and existential symptoms significantly. Mom even had a slight smile on her face at the end.Dad died naturally of cancer in a Veterans Hospital hospice after receiving months of excellent in-home hospice care that helped him live his last months substantially pain free and able to contemplate life’s deepest meanings.Sure, both had difficult times — particularly my mother — as did I in caring for and worrying about them. But that’s part of life.Neither committed suicide by prescribed poisoning nor administered a lethal injection — which we are now told ubiquitously in the media and popular culture, encouraged by assisted suicide advocates, are the true means to “death with dignity.”I bring this up because we rarely see a strong defense of the inherent dignity in natural dying these days. But Theos has published a fine essay in that regard that I hope readers will ponder. From,  “What Does Dignity Really Mean?” (my emphasis):Many of us fear the loss of independence which old age and illness bring. We fear that when we need other people’s help to move around, wash ourselves, feed ourselves we will lose our dignity. That we will lose control of our bladder or bowels and feel humiliated. Of course we do.That fear is a reason for defending the fuller, deeper concept of dignity. Dignity cannot and should not rest wholly or mainly in our ability to make self-optimising choices, or be totally ‘together’, impervious to pain or suffering. If we continue to let the concept of dignity be high-jacked to mean choice and independence we will add to the sufferings of those at the end of life.A non-assisted death is not undignified. No one should feel ashamed of becoming incontinent. Needing the love and care and help of others should be seen as a normal part of the human lifecycle, part of our embodied adventure, not a cause for mental distress. Dignity can be protected and enhanced through tailored, thoughtful, personal palliative care, reassurance, and a sense of humour. Many of our hospices provide dignified deaths day in, day out, helping people feel loved and valued no matter their physical or mental limitations.Absolutely true.When you look at the studies of why people decide to commit assisted suicide or be euthanized, a consistent pattern emerges. It is very rarely about pain that can’t be controlled — despite the euthanasia movement’s fear-mongering about that being the reason to legalize euthanasia.Rather, it involves deep existential fears — primarily (but not exclusively) of losing dignity, meaning a profound worry that we are less worth loving when impaired than we were when healthy.Even the poster woman for legalizing assisted suicide, Brittany Maynard, gave that as one of two primary reasons for her self-termination.Sure, with brain cancer, she worried about suffering. Who wouldn’t? But she never tried hospice and apparently accepted a worst case scenario about what her experience would be — which I suspect the suicide pushers whispered in her ear.And then, she and the assisted suicide movement reacted angrily when good hospice doctors — such as Ira Byock — tried to alert her and the country that death from brain cancer could be peaceful and didn’t have to be a time of uncontrollable suffering.But also note that she worried deeply about being thought of less well by her family after they witnessed her time of dying. From a column by Maynard published by CNN:Because the rest of my body is young and healthy, I am likely to physically hang on for a long time even though cancer is eating my mind. I probably would have suffered in hospice care for weeks or even months. And my family would have had to watch that.I did not want this nightmare scenario for my family, so I started researching death with dignity. It is an end-of-life option for mentally competent, terminally ill patients with a prognosis of six months or less to live. It would enable me to use the medical practice of aid in dying: I could request and receive a prescription from a physician for medication that I could self-ingest to end my dying process if it becomes unbearable.I quickly decided that death with dignity was the best option for me and my family.In other words, she was terrified that dying naturally would not have been dignified, and therefore — bluntly stated — she felt the need to put herself out of her family’s misery as an act of love! Imagine how awful that must have felt.And imagine what kind of an abandoning society we will establish if we allow fears of losing dignity or being a burden to become substantially grounded in reality and accepted as the norm to justify support for suicide.How often do we hear the ill, elderly, and people with disabilities worry about being a burden or losing dignity? Isn’t that another way of saying we worry that we are no longer worthy of being loved unconditionally? Isn’t it a fear of being considered of reduced value when we need care or if our condition causes our family grief and anxiety? Isn’t it to accept that once we are not as good looking as we were when healthy and may have some odor issues, the time has come to go?And then, when such concerns make people suicidal, we coldly offer “choice” instead of suicide prevention and other ameliorating interventions.That’s not on people who have those fears. It is on us for creating a society in which people so readily believe that suicide, rather than dying naturally with proper care, is the “dignified” way out.Photo credit: Jan McLaughlin, via Flickr.Cross-posted at The Corner.  Requesting a (Partial) Retraction from Darrel Falk and BioLogos Jane Goodall Meets the God Hypothesis Email Print Google+ Linkedin Twitter Share Email Print Google+ Linkedin Twitter Sharecenter_img Wesley J. SmithChair and Senior Fellow, Center on Human ExceptionalismWesley J. Smith is Chair and Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism. Wesley is a contributor to National Review and is the author of 14 books, in recent years focusing on human dignity, liberty, and equality. Wesley has been recognized as one of America’s premier public intellectuals on bioethics by National Journal and has been honored by the Human Life Foundation as a “Great Defender of Life” for his work against suicide and euthanasia. Wesley’s most recent book is Culture of Death: The Age of “Do Harm” Medicine, a warning about the dangers to patients of the modern bioethics movement.Follow WesleyProfileTwitterFacebook Share “A Summary of the Evidence for Intelligent Design”: The Study Guide Origin of Life: Brian Miller Distills a Debate Between Dave Farina and James Tour Congratulations to Science Magazine for an Honest Portrayal of Darwin’s Descent of Man Culture & Ethics A Physician Describes How Behe Changed His MindLife’s Origin — A “Mystery” Made AccessibleCodes Are Not Products of PhysicsIxnay on the Ambriancay PlosionexhayDesign Triangulation: My Thanksgiving Gift to Alllast_img read more