«First  ‹Previous   Page 3 of 758   Next›  Last» 

Apple Dodges IPhone Radiation Class Action Suit
USA Created: 7 Nov 2020
A federal judge Thursday nixed a class action claiming Apple failed to warn consumers about dangerous radiation from iPhones, finding it has twice demonstrated that its smartphones comply with the Federal Communications Commission’s radiation exposure limits.

Impelled by a Chicago Tribune article indicting iPhone and Galaxy smartphones for surpassing federal safety limits, lead plaintiff Andrew Cohen sued cellphone makers Apple and Samsung in August 2019. Samsung was voluntarily dismissed as a defendant in the case in January.

The plaintiffs commissioned their own independent tests in 2019 and cited tests conducted by the Canadian Broadcasting Company in 2017 and French National Frequencies Agency in 2018, all of which found radiofrequency radiation exposure from iPhones exceeded federal safety limits.

In response to the Tribune’s investigation, the FCC’s lab tested commercially-available iPhones as well as a model iPhone at separation distances of five millimeters, pursuant to federal guidelines, finding they fell well within the safety limits. It published the results of those tests in December 2019.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup sided with Apple in a ruling issued late Thursday, since the FCC has broad authority under the Federal Communications Act of 1934 to enact uniform regulations for wireless radio communications devices and any related emissions.

“If successful, plaintiffs’ claims could set the stage for a patchwork of state-required testing procedures, increasing the burden on manufacturers and thereby upsetting the efficiency that the uniform standards and testing procedures provide,” Alsup wrote.

Alsup also found a jury trial unnecessary, as the FCC’s lab tests indicated that Apple’s smartphones meet its RF exposure standards.

“The Lab found no evidence of violations of the technical standards. Apple’s iPhones have thus demonstrated compliance with its exposure limits not once but twice,” Alsup wrote. “Allowing a federal jury to now second-guess the agency determinations would interfere with the balance struck in the equipment-authorization program. The federal regulations must displace plaintiffs’ claims.”

Attorneys for Apple and the class did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment Thursday evening.

The ruling follows a judgment in favor of a wireless industry trade group rendered by U.S. District Judge Edward Chen earlier this year on similar grounds.

The Cellular Telephone Industries Association had challenged the city of Berkeley’s ordinance requiring cellphone retailers to provide guidance on avoiding radio-frequency exposure. Chen agreed that the FCC’s regulatory actions on radio frequency emissions preempt the local law.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Court House News, MARIA DINZEO, 29 Oct 2020

Trust Us, Men: Move the Phone from Your Front Pocket
USA Created: 3 Nov 2020
When they aren’t using it, most guys drop their cellphone into a front pocket of their pants. It’s convenient and, really, where else can you put it?

But some research suggests that stashing your phone so close to particularly vital and valued organs may not be the safest place.

Cellphones emit radio frequency (RF) waves that are known to have negative effects on living tissue. RF waves have been linked to sleep disturbance, headaches, increased blood pressure, DNA damage and difficulty in concentrating.

Until recently, most research has focused on the effect RF waves have on the brain, because we hold cellphones close to our heads. The good news, so far, is that data from the National Cancer Institute and other health agencies have not scientifically established that the use of cellphones causes cancer.

Over the past decade, however, scientific research has migrated farther south, assessing the effects of RF waves on sperm. And, guys, a significant amount of the literature cautions that cellphones probably shouldn’t be anywhere below your belt line.

Let’s be clear: Some studies are older and there is no consensus or smoking-gun study that says cellphone RF waves damage sperm. For every study that says “maybe” or “could be,” there has been another that says, “nah” or “probably not.” Nevertheless, several studies conducted by reputable researchers in the past 10 years seem to connect RF waves with lower sperm counts.

For instance, a 2018 study found evidence that “RF-Electromagnetic exposure negatively affects sperm quality,” while another concluded that “long exposure” to electromagnetic waves from mobile phones was associated with a decrease in the number of mature sperm. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29789776

And in 2014 researchers at the University of Exeter in the UK reviewed the findings of 10 studies, which included 1,492 sperm samples. While acknowledging their review had limitations, the authors found that the overall result “strongly suggests” that tucking your cellphone into your front pocket “negatively affects sperm quality.” The researchers noted that men with “borderline infertility” issues were probably more likely to be affected.

That same year, the Central European Journal of Urology concluded that a “correlation” exists between cellphone radiation and decreased sperm motility.

Lest we forget: The first mobile phone was introduced in 1973. Sperm counts have been dropping over the past few decades.

Just saying.

Before you panic, note that the two important words to take from those scientific papers are “suggests” and “correlation.” Still, several other studies “suggest” that pocketing your cellphone is associated with a decrease in semen quality (the fluid that carries the sperm), low sperm motility and viability, a decreased sperm count, lower acrosin (an enzyme needed for egg binding and penetration) activity, increased sperm DNA fragmentation (related to sperm viability), and increased expression of the gene that helps with seminal clustering, important in clearing cellular debris.

If you don’t have a PhD in chemistry or biology, let’s put that in plain English: The sperm taken from the men in those studies were more like belly floppers than Olympic breast stroke swimmers. They were much less likely to get the job done.

If you want to play it safe, several companies now make lines of protective underwear that they say block wireless, electromagnetic field (EMF) radiation.

In at least one such product, the cotton fabric is interwoven with threads of silver. Silver is one metal commonly used to shield against electromagnetic radiation.

If silver-lined underwear isn’t your style, you can protect your brain and your genitals with an RF wave, anti-radiation phone case. Several companies manufacture such cases; at least one company states that its cases block 99% of RF wave radiation.

RF waves may not be the only threat your cellphone poses to sperm. You know how people say, it’s not the heat; it’s the humidity. The same is true of cellphones. We know that the slightest increase in scrotal temperature can reduce sperm production. Anything that raises the temperature -- working with a laptop on your lap, wearing tight underwear or clothing, sitting at a desk all day, and even the heat the cellphone generates in your front pocket -- can reduce sperm viability and motility.

Cellphones are a part of modern life. If you or your significant other is worried about the threat it poses to your progeny, there are a few simple things you can do: Buy shirts with a breast pocket to carry your cellphone; buy some silver-lined, loose-fitting underwear; and invest in an anti-radiation phone case. Then relax. That afterglow you’re feeling is radiation-free.

Robert Calandra is an award-winning journalist, book author and playwright. His work has appeared in national and regional magazines and newspapers.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Medical Daily, Robert Calandra, 02 Nov 2020

SpaceX installation continues to rankle residents
USA Created: 31 Oct 2020
The Colburn SpaceX Services gateway antenna array continues to jangle the nerves of residents.

Bonner County commissioners were peppered with questions Tuesday from Selle Valley residents who contend the installation poses a public health risk which hasn't been properly evaluated.

"There’s no U.S. agency that takes into consideration the cumulative effects from microwave radiation exposure and that our total exposure amount is unknown, especially when you consider the multiple sources of microwave radiation we are being bathed in daily," Robin Hunding told commissioners.

Federal Communications Commission records indicate a radiation hazard analysis was done. The analysis concluded the gateway is not a radiation hazard because it does not exceed the maximum permissible exposure limit of 5 megawatts per square centimeters when averaged over a six-minute period in generally-accessible areas.

"This radiation hazard analysis demonstrates that SpaceX Services gateways will not result in unacceptable radiation exposure levels," the report to FCC concludes.

The report also holds the near-field region creates no concern for the general public as they lie in an area where only authorized personnel may enter. The far-field region create no concern for the general public because it develops 130 meters from the antenna at a minimum elevation angle of 25 degrees, an area which also cannot be accessed by the public.

But residents are not swayed by the conclusions in the FAA report

The near field region creates no concern for the general public as they lie behind signage where only authorized personnel may enter. Likewise, the far field region creates no concern for the general public because it develops 130 meters from the antenna at a minimum elevation angle of twenty-five degrees where the general public cannot access.

This analysis demonstrates that the SpaceX Services gateway is not a radiation hazard because it does not exceed the MPE limit of 5 mW/cm2 averaged over a six-minute period in generally-accessible areas.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Bonner County Daily Bee, KEITH KINNAIRD, 25 Oct 2020

The 4Gotten generation: An open letter to India’s youth: Get off that smartphone. It can destroy you
India Created: 24 Oct 2020
Dear friends, I don’t know if this letter will even reach you, despite being published in a big newspaper. Many of you are so busy with your phones, watching videos, playing video games, chatting with your friends, commenting on social media, or just scrolling through the feeds of beautiful celebrities, reading an article falls way down on the priority list.

However, if you do happen to chance on this, please read this fully. This is important and this is about your life. You are wasting your life on your phone. Yes, you are the first young generation in India’s history that has access to smartphones and cheap data, and you are spending hours on it, every day.

Check your screen time, which often averages 5-7 hours a day for young people. Retired or established people can spend so many hours on their devices. A young person, who has to build his/ her life, just can’t.

Five hours is one-third of your productive waking hours, or one-third of your life. Like cigarettes or other drugs, this phone addiction is eating away a part of your life. It’s damaging your career prospects and messing up your brain. If it stays this way, your entire generation will become a 4Gotten generation, an entire generation addicted to 4G, aimless in their life and clueless about the nation.

These are the top three negative effects of this phone addiction.

Number one, of course, is the absolute waste of time, which could be utilised on more productive things in life. Imagine saving three hours a day from your phone, and spending it on anything – fitness, learning a skill, studying more, a more intense job search, opening a business. Imagine if you did this consistently, where it would take you.

Two, watching mindless stuff dulls your cognitive brain. Our brain has two areas – cognitive and emotional. A good mind is where both work well. When you watch junk, the cognitive brain disengages and is used less. You soon lack the ability to think, reason or argue something logically. You can no longer see different points of view, process multiple scenarios, evaluate pros and cons or make the right decisions.

You function with your emotional brain alone as your cognitive brain is numb. The constant anger on social media, the polarisation, the intense fandom and intense hate for celebrities or politicians, the popularity of certain screaming TV anchors all point to a generation where the emotional brain is in control, and the reasoning mind is not engaged.

People who work only with an emotional brain don’t do well in life. The only way out – stop numbing your brain and engage your mind in more productive things.

Three, constant hours on the screen kill your motivation and energy. Success in life comes from setting goals, staying motivated and working hard towards your goals. However, watching a screen makes us lazy. Deep down, a fear of failure sets in as you’re not sure if you can put in the work anymore.

To cope, you try to find a reason why you can’t find success in life. You try to find an enemy – bad current politicians, bad past politicians, Muslims, Bollywood nepotism, rich people, famous people, any villain to be made responsible for your life not being what it could be. Yes, the system is unfair and rigged. However, wasting time venting on social media won’t help you. Working on yourself will.

Stop complaining. Start creating. Create a better life for yourself, and create a better person. Are you doing your maximum? Are you working as hard as you possibly can? Keep that wretched phone away until you make something of your life. Winners find a way out of the unfairness. You can too.

Unlike hard drugs, 4G phones are legal. Kids can keep one in their pocket. The phone is also immensely useful – for information, shopping or online classes. It can be used to grow and learn. But it can also literally destroy a young person’s life, and even an entire generation.

For it’s up to the youth to take India where they want to take it. Imagine the generation that got us Independence. How cool were they? They were out there, fighting to make India free. I still remember the Mandal Commission protests, or the 2011 Anna protests. The youth cared about national issues. Today, does the youth actually care about what truly impacts us? Or do they emotionally react to news based on how sensational, entertaining or crazy it is?

The super important, urgent priority is to make our economy grow again. China is five times richer than us. Google pictures of Chinese cities on the Internet. We have to do so much to get there. Should we focus on that? Or should we outrage over harmless ads that show an inter-religious couple? Should you focus on your career, or should you waste your time on never ending historical Hindu-Muslim issues? You want to build a good life or solve Bollywood conspiracies?

You, the youth of today, will decide the answers to these questions. No leader, no actor, no celebrity will do it for you. Take yourself and this country where you want it to go. Don’t aim to make India poor and proud. Aim to make India and yourself rich and humble. Get off that stupid phone, engage your mind in productive and creative things and make something of your life and country.

Be the generation that 4Ges India ahead. Don’t end up as the 4Gotten generation.


Chetan Bhagat
Click here to view the source article.
Source: The Times of India, Chetan Bhagat, 24 Oct 2020

A geek researches 5G: Letter to Greta Thunberg: how 5G contributes to climate change
USA Created: 24 Oct 2020
Last Spring, after I spoke about the Internet’s footprint on a teleconference, I met Miguel Coma, a Belgian engineer. Thanks to the Internet, we have corresponded regularly and taught each other a lot about 5G, the fifth generation of mobile networks. The way he takes responsibility for his part of climate change really inspires me. Let me introduce you.

Dear Greta,

I’ve been a geek from the age of ten, when I started using and programming some of the first personal computers. I am 47 now. I am an engineer because I love technology, but living beings and nature also mean very much to me. I’m married, and I have three children, including two teenagers.

I was very lucky to be raised in a caring family with good values, however my parents did not teach me to think about the environment. At school, our planet’s future was never discussed, either. Meanwhile, I inherited my uncle’s passion for science and technology. I have always loved electronics, space exploration, astronomy, robots and supercomputers. Technology and science never bore me. (Chemistry does—nobody’s perfect.) Technology drives my will to understand and improve the world. Seeing the miracles that people can achieve when technology is used well gives me comfort.

In college, I learned how to build machines, systems and processes. I specialized in electronics and telecommunications. Whenever I talked with other engineers, we never discussed the ecological impacts of building, using or disposing of electronic devices. We focused on making attractive, reliable and affordable products and services. Innovation was all about technology, and only technology. As a student and then an engineer, working for the telecom industry (until twelve years ago), I never met experts in environmental or biological sciences.

At 33, I met my wife. She works for an environmental organisation. Through her, I started to realize the extent of environmental problems like global warming, pollution, e-waste and their impacts on living beings. I also started to connect with nature and got energized by observing tiny insects, flowers and the stars. (I have a telescope.) I increased my efforts to reduce our household’s waste, use renewable energy and buy energy efficient devices.

But I was still in the dark about problems caused by my own industry.

Then came the Covid-19 global pandemic. For the first time in my life, I had no job for several months. I used the time to do research. I remembered my wife telling me, in 2018, that she worried for our family’s health because of radiation emitted by 5G. At first, I considered the idea that 5G could harm us a conspiracy theory. My training taught me that only ionizing radiation is dangerous, and that exposure to the non-ionizing radiation levels used in telecommunications is perfectly safe. (Nonetheless, the industry recommends that mobile phone users keep a safe distance from their devices. Katie Singer and I will write about this in other letters. For now, you can read the fine print in your owner’s manual.)

I believe that technology should benefit our society. It should co-exist harmoniously with all living beings and ecosystems. But I have learned recently that technology can harm everything I care for, on a very large scale. Only a few years back, the odds that I would write to someone like you about re-thinking how to build the Internet would have been slim. Now, I want everyone to know 5G’s footprint. I want you to learn the key facts and have the widest possible picture about 5G so that you can make your own opinions. I encourage you to check and research the facts for yourself.

I researched 5G’s advantages and impacts—the applications it could make possible, the energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, worker hazards; its impacts to wildlife, public health, the economy and democracy. People call me a perfectionist. I wanted numerous viewpoints, so I cross-checked studies, reports and essays. I contacted scientists, engineers, non-profit associations, and even a philosopher.

As an engineer, I naturally started to read about 5G‘s technology and potential applications. Compared to 4G, 5G is designed to offer faster wireless connections. It aims to connect many more devices than 4G can, and, when necessary, to respond faster and more reliably. For mobile network operators as well, 5G means technical progress. The industry promotes 5G as a digital revolution, where every person and every device will be connected, enabling applications that we have not yet imagined. The industry claims that 5G will provide the backbone of a connectivity-based future economy.

But we already have billions of devices connected to the Internet. We call this the Internet of Things, and it is growing, rapidly, even without 5G. Moreover, alternative technologies already enable autonomous vehicles and tele-surgery, smart cities and more. To my surprise, I found publications from engineers, analysts and even a mobile operator who report that smartphone users are satisfied with 4G and will experience no substantial benefit from 5G. (The people who had the courage to reveal this give me courage.)

5G mainly stands to benefit large industries. For example, 5G can help robots use Artificial Intelligence (AI) to speed construction, modification, painting and the movement of parts along an assembly line. It could make some factory floors more efficient with nearly instantaneous interactions, and enable automated quality control. By replacing network cables and Wi-Fi with 5G, many more robots could connect in the same space. However, we do not need an extensive, public 5G network to connect a factory or other industries. Each manufacturer could have their own, private 5G network.

Unemployment, food insecurity, Covid-19, education, climate change and so many other issues already burden governments and taxpayers. Nevertheless, 5G manufacturers seeking higher profits are pressuring governments to facilitate the deployment of massive numbers of 5G antennas in every city and rural area. If consumers are already satisfied with 4G, and if industries can use a private 5G network, I wonder: given our global economic and environmental crises, is deployment of 5G public networks justified?

When I started looking at 5G’s environmental footprint, I had several shocks. First, I realized that the information-communication-technology (ICT) industry uses enormous and rapidly increasing amounts of electricity--and generates enormous amounts of greenhouse gases. And yet, neither I nor the experts I contacted could find a study about 5G’s energy use or greenhouse gas emissions.

I have to admit that I am part of the ICT industry. I helped create the problems. Remaining silent about my realizations would make me an even larger part of the problem. Because I am now aware that 5G could put a halt to the environmental progress you and others have made, I feel an urge to inform citizens around the world what I have learned, and to help find legal ways to limit the use of 5G to where it is truly required.

Greta, every bit of data that travels the Internet consumes energy. The more data used, the more energy consumed. While 5G will use less energy than 4G to transmit the same data (and so we can call 5G more energy efficient), 5G will consume about three times more electricity than 4G. 5G will use much shorter waves to transmit data faster. These waves do not travel far. So, they require millions of new radiation-emitting small antennas, located much closer to homes, schools and offices. Constructing millions of new antennas and billions of 5G compatible devices will require a long series of energy intensive processes, ranging from ore extraction to manufacturing of devices and infrastructure. Building a new, international network that operates in every city and rural area will create unimaginable amounts of greenhouse gases, toxic emissions, radiation and electronic waste.

In spite of the industry’s claims, 5G will not help to reduce climate change. It will speed it up. I will elaborate on this in future letters.

I’m an engineer, yes. Still, I want technology to respect wildlife, public health and the realities of climate change. I hope that as users of technology, we will learn the impacts of our digital purchases and usage so that we can take responsibility and reduce our digital footprint. I hope that governments and regulatory bodies will create ambitious policies that protect our environment and our health. This would be true progress for our society and next generations.

Miguel Coma is an engineer in telecommunications and an Information Technology architect. After a decade in telecommunications (with two mobile operators and an equipment manufacturer), he now works as an enterprise architect in the bank-insurance sector. He believes in technology’s potential to create sustainable progress.

Katie Singer writes about technology and nature. "An Electronic Silent Spring" is her most recent book. In 2018, she spoke about the Internet’s footprint at the United Nations. She dreams that every smartphone user knows the supply chain of one substance (of 1000+) in every smartphone.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Wall Street International Magazine, Katie Singer & Miguel Coma, 23 Oct 2020

Landmark ruling made on rooftop phone masts in London
United Kingdom Created: 22 Oct 2020
A Tribunal ruling has set an annual payment of £5000 for a rooftop phone mast in London.

The case of CTIL v L&Q, where landowners L&Q were represented by law firm Clarke Willmott LLP will have major implications for future telecoms agreements for rooftop sites.

The Tribunal made it clear that operators should pay for temporarily shifting its equipment to allow landlords to carry out essential repairs. This, in turn, would put the onus squarely on the telecoms operator.

Clark Willmott Partner Kary Withers commented: “This is the first time that market evidence of new code deals has been considered by a Tribunal and that is why a figure of £5,000 p.a as opposed to £1,000 at a previous Tribunal case involving a property in Islington, has been arrived at.

“The Tribunal also concluded that unrestricted sharing is incompatible with ensuring the least possible loss to landowners.”

Martin Rodger QC commented during the trial that “the notion that landowners should pay for lift and shifts is ludicrous, [the parties] are out of their minds if they thought the landowner should pay”.

The Tribunal considered the use of a rooftop through common parts is likely to involve the landowner. They reviewed market evidence and decided that deals that were negotiated before the commencement of the new code and therefore could not be seen as reliable.

The consideration ordered included an allowance for building maintenance and insurance of £1500, an allowance of £1,000 for managing access, and an allowance for the anticipated costs for upgrading and sharing with two other operators.

The Tribunal considered that willing parties negotiating a 10-year arrangement would be more likely to agree to an annual payment rather than a one-off fee.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Mobile News, Saf Malik, 20 Oct 2020

New planning rules could allow for increased height of mobile phone masts
Scotland Created: 17 Oct 2020
An updated planning regime could see new ground-based mobile phone masts in Scotland being extended in height by five metres under draft proposals to change ‘permitted development rights’ legislation.

Existing laws governing the siting of digital communications infrastructure are set to be updated and could see ground based masts being extended to 30m in height, from the current 25m, “outside designated areas”, which include conservations areas, sites of special scientific interest, national parks and world heritage sites.

Updates to planning legislation around ‘priority development types’ were outlined in a new consultation document which has recently gone live on the Scottish Government website.

The consultation, which closes on November 12, makes clear that any increase in size of either new or pre-existing digital telecommunications infrastructure or equipment, which could bring about economic and climate change benefits, would have to be balanced against any environmental impacts, “particularly on sensitive areas”.

The consultation explains: “The Scottish Government is committed to reviewing permitted development rights (PDR) for digital communications infrastructure to assist in enhancing and rolling out vital and improved digital communications (e.g. the rollout of 5G) for all regions of Scotland. This has become even more important given our reliance on digital communications during the Covid-19 pandemic. The benefits of enhanced digital connectivity also result in less travel which contributes significantly towards climate change measures by reducing our carbon footprint.”

Among the aims of the proposals include the ability to:

- Increase existing size limits for PDR for digital infrastructure, i.e. new masts, extensions to existing masts, antennae and other equipment on buildings, equipment cabinets on the ground and on buildings, other apparatus, and underground equipment; and

- extend PDR for some types of digital infrastructure into sensitive areas, subject to lower size/height limits than elsewhere

In addition to new ground-based masts, the proposed updates to permitted development rights (PDR) would allow network operators to increase the size of existing masts beyond the current limits to improve mobile coverage or for maintenance purposes. Under the planned changes, which would apply to designated areas, the masts could be increased in height up to 30 metres (i.e. the same maximum height as for new masts..’) and also that ‘the increase should be limited to no more than 50% of the height of the original mast (whichever is the lower)’. The consultation outlines plans to allow existing masts which are above 30 metres in height to be increased to up to 50 metres in height.

Follow-up questions include whether mast size width should also be increased and whether replacement masts can be sited slightly further from existing locations; it also proposes extending dish antenna and other antenna systems on buildings and to ‘extend PDR beyond small antennas to cover small cell systems (small antennas and ancillary apparatus) on dwellinghouses and on all buildings in conservation areas’.

The full consultation is available here:
Click here to view the source article.
Source: FutureScot, Kevin OSullivan, 15 Oct 2020

Experts warn of 'mass violation of rights' as contact-tracing data collected in pubs sold on
United Kingdom Created: 15 Oct 2020
Experts have warned of a “mass violation of rights” after customer data collected by pubs and restaurants has reportedly been sold on to third parties.

Contact-tracing data required by the NHS Test and Trace scheme has been harvested by tech companies on behalf of hospitality venues since they reopened in June, according to The Times.

Although the government states that the information can only be kept for 21 days and must not be used “for any purposes other than for NHS Test and Trace”, some firms are reportedly selling it on.

A number of the data collection firms have reportedly created privacy policies which allow them to store users’ data for up to 25 years and share it with third parties.

The practise was described as a “real scandal” by experts shortly after it was revealed as they called on the government to crack down on the companies.

University of Oxford professor Carissa Veliz tweeted: “In case public trust regarding #privacy wasn't low enough...
Read more: Missing 16,000 coronavirus tests glitch 'caused by large Excel spreadsheet file'

“Scandals like these are the product of decades of allowing an unethical business model that depends on the mass violation of rights to thrive unfettered. Haven't we had enough? #PrivacyIsPower”

Lawyer and TedX speaker Dana Denis-Smith tweeted: “Why isn’t this a surprise how many people read T&Cs on apps esp as they rush to eat out?”

Blogger Jennifer Howze said: “This is a real scandal and we should not be forced into sharing our personal data by govt!”

Harriet Sergeant, a researcher at the Centre For Policy Studies, tweeted: “Pubs and restaurants sell on our contact-tracing data under so called ‘privacy policies’. And that’s just what we know about.”

While Gaurav Malhotra, director of software development company Level 5, told The Times: “If you’re suddenly getting loads of texts, your data has probably been sold on from track-and-trace systems.”

So-called “quick response” QR barcodes have reportedly allowed companies to gain access to names, addresses, telephone numbers and email details.

QR codes have been widely adopted by the hospitality, leisure and beauty industries as an alternative to pen-and-paper visitor logs.

Currently the government requires these venues to collect the names and contact details of customers to help with the NHS Test and Trace programme.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Yahoo! News UK, George Martin, 11 Oct 2020

5G International Legal Action Network
USA Created: 8 Oct 2020
We are a professional network of lawyers and relevant experts, dedicated to redirecting the 5G Juggernaut toward balance and wisdom. Our species is rushing toward a future that feeds our addiction to speed, instant gratification, energy consumption, and disconnection from Earth. By creatively working together, we have a chance to cause a shift.

We are accomplishing our goal through concerted and effective legal action and education. We offer an opportunity for Human-Centered Lawyering on an international scale, based on the principle of Paying Forward, or passing the fruits of our discoveries on to others, thereby accelerating the process of new learning and practical application.

We invite you to join us:
Click here to view the source article.
Source: 5G International Legal Action Network

Objections against 20m phone mast outside school
United Kingdom Created: 7 Oct 2020
Hutchinson 3G UK has applied to Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council asking form permission to install the mast on a piece of land at the corner of Vyne Road and Queen Mary Avenue, in South View, outside The Vyne School.

The installation would include six antennas and two transmission dishes, along with four equipment cabinets.

The application states: “This location has been identified as being integral to the needs of H3G’s network in this area”.

However, residents have objected to the plans, saying the location is not suitable. The height of the mast would be at least double that of an average two storey house.

Pauline Hughes, from Darlington Road, said: “It would stand well in excess of the surrounding streetlights and residential properties which are substantially less than 20m in height. Something of this height should be located in an industrial/employment area.”

She also pointed out that the mast might obscure the view for drivers using the junction.

Alison Jones, from Burgess Road, raised concerns about the safety of the mast, saying: “I already suffer from severe tinnitus and there is circumstantial evidence that transmission poles such as these make tinnitus worse.”

Mr Lampard, from Darlington Road, said in his objection: “I would rather live without 5G than with this proposal.”

He added: “Could the proposal be in a more obtrusive location? Placed on the exposed corner of Queen Mary Avenue it will instantly become the most striking landmark within the ‘conservation’ area.”
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Basingstoke Gazette, Emily Roberts, 06 Oct 2020

«First  ‹Previous   Page 3 of 758   Next›  Last»