Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

1.1K

Mobile network providers are gradually shutting down 3G for economical reasons, because 4G/LTE's establishment made 3G mostly obsolete, and because most devices support 4G already.

Many places are also widely equipped with LTE-A (or 4G+).

2G will remain for a while for compatibility reasons and long range, but is also said to shut down.

But it would be good if remote places will still keep 2G and 3G due to their superior range (4G speeds are useless without signal, and 5G's range is crap anyway).

In lesser crowded and more remote places, one 3G antenna might provide for the entire valley.

It might not be fast, but enough for exchanging text contents (e.g. tweets, browsing wikis) and maybe downloading multiple videos at 480p overnight.

Of course, there's also satellite Internet, but that requires a big stationary satellite receiver for the home, so no portability.

Another reason for keeping 2G and 3G in remote places is providing access to emergency information in very remote places.

Mobile network providers are gradually shutting down 3G for economical reasons, because 4G/LTE's establishment made 3G mostly obsolete, and because most devices support 4G already. Many places are also widely equipped with LTE-A (or *4G+*). 2G will remain for a while for compatibility reasons and long range, but is also said to shut down. But it would be good if **remote places** will still keep 2G and 3G due to their superior range (4G speeds are useless without signal, and 5G's range is crap anyway). In lesser crowded and more remote places, one 3G antenna might provide for the entire valley. It might not be fast, but enough for exchanging text contents (e.g. tweets, browsing wikis) and maybe downloading multiple videos at 480p overnight. Of course, there's also satellite Internet, but that requires a big stationary satellite receiver for the home, so no portability. Another reason for keeping 2G and 3G in remote places is providing access to emergency information in very remote places.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (8).
[–] • 1 pt

Any electromagnetic spectrum radiation can be dangerous, if it's of high enough power. The power put out by a cellular tower could be dangerous, assuming you were a bird and made your nest on the emitter.

Otherwise, it's non-ionizing, meaning it's not powerful enough to knock electrons out of orbits and cause damage like ionizing radiation, such as that emitted by radioactive materials.

[–] • 1 pt

Any electromagnetic spectrum radiation can be dangerous, if it's of high enough power.

Indeed.

But one usually can not go close enough to a 2G/3G/4G tower for it to be hazardous.

But 5G is much higher power and has a much wider frequency range. However, 5G's range is much, much shorter than 4G.

[–] • 1 pt

Yeah, 5G is going to be a new beast. I don't know enough about it yet to comb the fearmongering from the facts.

[–] • 0 pt

And because it's non-ionizing, it's promoted as totally safe. However, non-ionizing radiation can interact with living cells and tissues, especially at 24/7 exposure and at specific frequency ranges.

[–] • 0 pt

It's not totally safe. Any electromagnetic radiation can cause problems. People that have their device glued to their heads 16 hours a day probably aren't doing themselves any favors.