1) Industry has co-opted the term “smart” and equated it with wireless, encouraging the expansion of the wireless grid. There are many communities across Canada, including BC, that have received – and more that have applied for – financial incentives (bribes) to become a “smart” city. Nanaimo was the first one on the Island that I knew about.
The details are at the link. Who decides to apply to the government? Is it the Council — do the residents know and agree? Do the residents realize that many communities, especially coastal ones, have or will have fibre to the door, providing faster, safer internet access? Bowen Island is an example. Why has it applied to become a “smart” city?
“Smart” city design, justification from Telus’s point of view:
The Smart City is the New Normal
Even the telecoms realize that fiber optic cable is more efficient and, in the long run, will provide better service all-round. But in the meantime they are taking advantage of people not knowing this, of being unaware/ignorant about the availability of FOC.
What Makes a Town or City “Smart”?
“Smart” communities use computing and communication technology to provide innovative solutions to complex issues.The goal is to stimulate community-based social and economic improvement and enhance our quality of life. The backbone of a wired smart city is optical fiber to every home and building — an electronic highway promoting collaboration, connection, commerce, and culture.
2) Cities are being rated as being prepared to become “smart” as if that is a defining feature for success in the future. No mention of radiation, health, or environmental effects.
(click on photo to enlarge)
Report Names U.S. Cities Ready to Become Cybersecurity Vulnerable and Privacy Invasive “Smart Cities” — Is Yours One of Them?
“ProptechOS considered 11 indicators to evaluate each location’s smart city technology readiness, including the availability of free WiFi hotspots, broadband download speeds and airports. It also considered the number — total and per 100,000 people — of IoT companies and public-access electric vehicle charging points, as well as the total number of 5G network towers and green-certified buildings. In addition to infrastructure, the report looked at the number of tech jobs available in each area.
“The cities that will thrive in the future will be the ones best adapted to our new and greener ways of living.”
3) A correction from Dr. Moskowitz regarding the article in Jan. 30 update [1) – https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/2023-01-30-censorship-to-accommodate-industry/] about Dr. Lin’s article being censored by a scientific journal. He was not. The 3 “considerations” are in the link. My “correction” re. Dr. Lin’s statement re cell phone SARs is still relevant.
“According to Louis Slesin, Editor of Microwave News, Dr. Lin made the deletions that appeared as strike-outs in the pre-proof version of his new paper, not the journal’s editors. The following tweet provides the rationale why Dr. Lin made these changes.
Dr. Lin’s third “consideration” below seems questionable. Many cellphones and other wireless devices have SARs which are close to ICNIRP’s 2.0 W/kg SAR limit. Moreover, according to Om Gandhi’s research, ICNIRP’s 2.0 W/kg SAR limit which is averaged over 10 grams allows about 2-3 times greater absorption of radiation than the FCC’s SAR 1.6 W/kg SAR limit which is averaged over only 1 gram (i.e. cubic centimeter). Besides, the SAR limit is based on a threshold of harm (i.e., full body exposure of 4.0 W/kg) that is contradicted by more than 100 studies and has been debunked multiple times, most recently in ICBE-EMF‘s open access paper, “Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G.””
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters/Citizens for Safer Tech
“Sometimes the questions are complicated, and the answers are simple.” Dr. Seuss
Sent from my wired laptop with no wireless components. Practice Safe Tech.