It absolutely could handle compressed audio from a mic in every room of every household with room to spare. Audio, especially when compressed, takes so little bandwidth, and is still immensely effective for surveillance.
Yes, but 4G is limited in number of clients for each base station. so, you will have to somehow aggregate them to one data stream and then transmit from dedicated mobile station. With 5G you can have a lot more mobile devices for single base station.
How will it be stored? Where will it be stored? That is an astronomical amount of data. We do not have that much storage.
That is why there was huge plans on all that multilevel SSDs and tiled HDDs along with unwinding 5G plans, that could store much more data than conventional devices. But now it seems they have problems with that tech, it is appeared to be less reliable than supposed.
The RF isn't dangerous to us.
It could have some health issues, but definitely not at the scale of all that 5G bullshit circulating around talking about. At least if you are not really concerned about danger of 2G/3G/4G, there are no reasons to be concerned specifically about 5G health ussies.
Aggregate them to one data stream and then transmit from a dedicated mobile station.
This would be dead easy. And if there is as much incentive to do this as to facilitate rolling out a whole new, borderline intrusive system, there is no reason this wouldn't be done. This would be a far easier option than rolling out 5G, and raise far fewer eyebrows, as it would be completely hidden.
Multilevel SSDs and tiled HDDs
Still not enough data. What you're speculating requires so much data that we could not possibly have with anything close to the current tech.
This would be a far easier option than rolling out 5G, and raise far fewer eyebrows, as it would be completely hidden.
It is possible, but all home aplliance manufacturers have to make an agreement on some protocols and hierarchy of selection some master device who will be connected with base station and collect data from other devices of other manufacturers. I think that it could be as complex as rolling out next generation.
Still not enough data. What you're speculating requires so much data that we could not possibly have with anything close to the current tech.
Overestimating tech advances is usual thing. Do you remember Moore's law? And many top parties make decisions on it. Or that hype around magneto-resistive RAM? And so on.
At the time of planning total surveilance, they take a storage capacity growth as constant. Many years later, when it comes to real implementations, that prognosis failed. So they forced development of ANNs and other stuff to reduce amount of data to store.
With the same probability they could have been failed with bandwidth expectations, or cameras resolution, f.e.
They failed whole plan of total surveillance, but still got an ability to surveil any choosen person on demand. Not that bad for them. From the other side, they occasionally succeded with marketing of that shitty voice assistants.
But no less complicated than implementing surveillance into every device.
That is not what complicated. To simplify example, let's limit with audio and assume that it is modern electric kettle, dishwasher and fringe with bluetooth module and fancy smartphone app. All of that devices permanently connected to power grid. So there are no problems with power. Every device have a board with MCU and Bluetooth module. Manufacturers use ready-to-use BT modules to avoid certification of every model in FCC and other local RF agencies. They just use already certified modules.
Now we need microphone. It is a tiny part that could be directly connected to device MCU or BT module. All you need to do - is to add a part and few trace to existing PCB design. Then, it just a matter of changing firmware to add audio processing to MCU or setting few registers in BT module to turn on audio inputs.
Now we need a permanent channel to BigBrother. It is not hard too. Since we use ready-to-use BT modules, we just replace them with pin-compatible BT+5G/4G modules.
And now, if we use BT+5G modules we are done. 5G have larger user capacity, so there should be no problems with additional cellular network users.
With 4G modules, we have 4 devices that demand channel to base station instead of one. 3 times more users. Cellular network will become out of capacity and smartphone users will be angry when they will not be able to do a call or connect to internet.
So, to avoid that we have to somehow negotiate between devices and choose one who will connect to cellular network and become a master. So, we need some special protocol, that will combine BT and 4G with negotiations, master selection, channel division, and so on. All that already implemented in the base of cellular protocols, but unuseable for 4G. And the most awful part - we have to make all that different modules and devices compatible and able to negotiate. When you have a cellular standard it is easy. You make the module, check against single testing base station and you are done. The same is with BT, WiFi, etc. But with new protocol, you have to be shure, that all devices will work in identical way. It took a decade to make all BT modules compatible with each other, but there still some problems. In case of open and known to user activity you have at least a way to debug and improve that stuff in real environment using user feedback. But in case of surveillance there is no way to get feedback, f.e. there is nobody present to tell manufacturer that electric kettle could not connect to dishwasher. And this is unresolveable in easy way.
And so on.
With 5G, you just move to next generation, adding demand for higher number of users and higher bandwidth. And you have all basic features borrowed from previous generation. In any case you will eventually replace 4G with something newer, just to utilise new bands, make it more power efficient, add some capabilities and so on.
With 5G work on the new generation is inevitable. With using 4G, you have to desing new system from the ground with doubtful perspectives to get it working in reasonable time due to the problems with finding bugs.
Yes, but 4G is limited in number of clients for each base station. so, you will have to somehow aggregate them to one data stream and then transmit from dedicated mobile station. With 5G you can have a lot more mobile devices for single base station.
That is why there was huge plans on all that multilevel SSDs and tiled HDDs along with unwinding 5G plans, that could store much more data than conventional devices. But now it seems they have problems with that tech, it is appeared to be less reliable than supposed.
It could have some health issues, but definitely not at the scale of all that 5G bullshit circulating around talking about. At least if you are not really concerned about danger of 2G/3G/4G, there are no reasons to be concerned specifically about 5G health ussies.
This would be dead easy. And if there is as much incentive to do this as to facilitate rolling out a whole new, borderline intrusive system, there is no reason this wouldn't be done. This would be a far easier option than rolling out 5G, and raise far fewer eyebrows, as it would be completely hidden.
Still not enough data. What you're speculating requires so much data that we could not possibly have with anything close to the current tech.
It is possible, but all home aplliance manufacturers have to make an agreement on some protocols and hierarchy of selection some master device who will be connected with base station and collect data from other devices of other manufacturers. I think that it could be as complex as rolling out next generation.
Overestimating tech advances is usual thing. Do you remember Moore's law? And many top parties make decisions on it. Or that hype around magneto-resistive RAM? And so on.
At the time of planning total surveilance, they take a storage capacity growth as constant. Many years later, when it comes to real implementations, that prognosis failed. So they forced development of ANNs and other stuff to reduce amount of data to store.
With the same probability they could have been failed with bandwidth expectations, or cameras resolution, f.e.
They failed whole plan of total surveillance, but still got an ability to surveil any choosen person on demand. Not that bad for them. From the other side, they occasionally succeded with marketing of that shitty voice assistants.
Something like that.
But no less complicated than implementing surveillance into every device.
That is not what complicated. To simplify example, let's limit with audio and assume that it is modern electric kettle, dishwasher and fringe with bluetooth module and fancy smartphone app. All of that devices permanently connected to power grid. So there are no problems with power. Every device have a board with MCU and Bluetooth module. Manufacturers use ready-to-use BT modules to avoid certification of every model in FCC and other local RF agencies. They just use already certified modules.
Now we need microphone. It is a tiny part that could be directly connected to device MCU or BT module. All you need to do - is to add a part and few trace to existing PCB design. Then, it just a matter of changing firmware to add audio processing to MCU or setting few registers in BT module to turn on audio inputs.
Now we need a permanent channel to BigBrother. It is not hard too. Since we use ready-to-use BT modules, we just replace them with pin-compatible BT+5G/4G modules.
And now, if we use BT+5G modules we are done. 5G have larger user capacity, so there should be no problems with additional cellular network users.
With 4G modules, we have 4 devices that demand channel to base station instead of one. 3 times more users. Cellular network will become out of capacity and smartphone users will be angry when they will not be able to do a call or connect to internet.
So, to avoid that we have to somehow negotiate between devices and choose one who will connect to cellular network and become a master. So, we need some special protocol, that will combine BT and 4G with negotiations, master selection, channel division, and so on. All that already implemented in the base of cellular protocols, but unuseable for 4G. And the most awful part - we have to make all that different modules and devices compatible and able to negotiate. When you have a cellular standard it is easy. You make the module, check against single testing base station and you are done. The same is with BT, WiFi, etc. But with new protocol, you have to be shure, that all devices will work in identical way. It took a decade to make all BT modules compatible with each other, but there still some problems. In case of open and known to user activity you have at least a way to debug and improve that stuff in real environment using user feedback. But in case of surveillance there is no way to get feedback, f.e. there is nobody present to tell manufacturer that electric kettle could not connect to dishwasher. And this is unresolveable in easy way.
And so on.
With 5G, you just move to next generation, adding demand for higher number of users and higher bandwidth. And you have all basic features borrowed from previous generation. In any case you will eventually replace 4G with something newer, just to utilise new bands, make it more power efficient, add some capabilities and so on.
With 5G work on the new generation is inevitable. With using 4G, you have to desing new system from the ground with doubtful perspectives to get it working in reasonable time due to the problems with finding bugs.