Slowly but surely, the era when cars will be able to talk to each other and prevent accidents and traffic jams is dawning. A 36 mile highway (https://www.telecoms.com/iot/orange-telefonica-and-partners-create-connected-cars-5g-highway) between Metz, France and Saarbrucken, Germany will receive new masts to enable 5G communication among the vehicles using it.
QuoteIt will enable the development of innovative mobile services linked to the connected vehicles market, such as cooperative lane changing, collision anticipation and prevention, and automatic traffic jam alerts. It will also support the testing of partially autonomous vehicles.
Construction will start "imminently" and should finish by the end of 2027
Quote from: kernals12 on January 16, 2025, 01:34:54 PMnew masts to enable 5G communication among the vehicles using it
That's the way I learned the difference between 'between' and 'among' in school too, and it's wrong. The determining factor is not whether it's two or more things. Rather, if you're dealing with three or more things, then it's more nuanced.
For example, it would be wrong to say that the city of College Station is
among Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston. Rather, College Station is
between those three cities.
Similarly, "A large white dog was
between the four children and their parents for more than an hour" has a different connotation than "A large white dog was
among the four children and their parents for more than an hour". In the first case, 'between' implies that the dog was physically in the middle of a family, probably menacingly. In the second case, 'among' merely implies that the dog was in their midst, perhaps frolicking.
If you're having a game night with a dozen junior high kids, you might play a game of Telephone, during which the goal is to successfully pass a message
between thirteen people. But during play, someone might pass gas, at which point there might be a foul smell
among those same thirteen people.
The cars driving in Europe that you described will each be communicating directly (more of less) with each other. So you should say that the new masts will "enable 5G communication
between the vehicles". The number of vehicles is irrelevant to that word choice.
Quote from: kphoger on January 16, 2025, 02:33:07 PMQuote from: kernals12 on January 16, 2025, 01:34:54 PMnew masts to enable 5G communication among the vehicles using it
That's the way I learned the difference between 'between' and 'among' in school too, and it's wrong. The determining factor is not whether it's two or more things. Rather, if you're dealing with three or more things, then it's more nuanced.
For example, it would be wrong to say that the city of College Station is among Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston. Rather, College Station is between those three cities.
Similarly, "A large white dog was between the four children and their parents for more than an hour" has a different connotation than "A large white dog was among the four children and their parents for more than an hour". In the first case, 'between' implies that the dog was physically in the middle of a family, probably menacingly. In the second case, 'among' merely implies that the dog was in their midst, perhaps frolicking.
If you're having a game night with a dozen junior high kids, you might play a game of Telephone, during which the goal is to successfully pass a message between thirteen people. But during play, someone might pass gas, at which point there might be a foul smell among those same thirteen people.
The cars driving in Europe that you described will each be communicating directly (more of less) with each other. So you should say that the new masts will "enable 5G communication between the vehicles". The number of vehicles is irrelevant to that word choice.
Wow, 5 paragraphs devoted to one grammatical error
Except it changes the context of your misleading post completely. There are already plenty of highways lined with 5G towers—whether they are for low, mid, or high-frequency bands and whether or not they are connected to a fiber backhaul link. Just because there are 5G towers doesn't mean that cars suddenly become smart and connected. It changes nothing. No mass-market car technology, enabled by 5G or any other system, allows them to "talk" to each other. No mass-market project is currently in development, either.
Quote from: kphoger on January 16, 2025, 02:33:07 PMQuote from: kernals12 on January 16, 2025, 01:34:54 PMnew masts to enable 5G communication among the vehicles using it
That's the way I learned the difference between 'between' and 'among' in school too, and it's wrong.
I know it because of the game Among Us - it's not "there's an impostor between us", it's "there's an impostor among us".
Anyways, another thread about wishful thinking with regards to technology by kernals. What else is new? Not the 5G towers, that's for sure, because those have existed for ages without any smart car bullshit attached to them.
Not sure what's notable about this story (other than the EU being really far behind in their 5G rollout), carriers locating towers along freeway right-of-ways is very commonplace. V2X has been tossed around as a future technology for ages but it's not gotten anywhere because automakers have struggled to find a use case for that isn't better served by a managed cloud service.
5G is available in most places in Europe. However true 5G speeds (not just a 5G reception icon on your phone) for connected driving requires a very dense network of cell towers compared to 4G. That's why they're going to install or upgrade 22 cell towers along 55 kilometers of highway.
Apparently 5G only has a range of 0.6 - 1 kilometers and up to 2 kilometers with a good line of sight (meaning no hills or urban areas). So you need far more towers to get a good coverage compared to 4G.
Germany used to have notoriously lacking digital infrastructure. While most places had fast 4G reception for years, Germany had a large amount of areas, including along major highways & railways, with no or very limited reception. They have a name for it: Funklöcher (reception gaps or dead spots). It has improved markedly in the last 4 years or so.
I'm surprised that this topic hasn't been moved to International Highways. I guess the conversation swung towards general 5G coverage and how it isn't uncommon.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 20, 2025, 04:31:00 PMI'm surprised that this topic hasn't been moved to International Highways. I guess the conversation swung towards general 5G coverage and how it isn't uncommon.
I posted it here because it has implications globally.
Quote from: kernals12 on January 20, 2025, 05:36:55 PMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on January 20, 2025, 04:31:00 PMI'm surprised that this topic hasn't been moved to International Highways. I guess the conversation swung towards general 5G coverage and how it isn't uncommon.
I posted it here because it has implications globally.
Well not really but keep doing your thing.
Quote from: Chris on January 20, 2025, 03:44:27 PMApparently 5G only has a range of 0.6 - 1 kilometers and up to 2 kilometers with a good line of sight (meaning no hills or urban areas). So you need far more towers to get a good coverage compared to 4G.
It depends on the band. Low-band transmits in the 600 to 700 MHz range. While its speeds are capped at around 50 Mbps, it's ideal for this type of automation communication, with each tower offering transmission capability for hundreds of square miles. It's distance from the tower can Mid-band is around 1.7 GHz to 2.5 GHz, delivering 100 to 900 Mbps speeds while offering a distance of several miles from the tower. High-band (millimeter wave) is around 24 GHz and offers 1 to 10 Gbps speeds while offering just a distance of one mile from the tower.