The Biden administration has charged the Federal Communications Commission with prohibiting digital discrimination -- but without a third Democratic commissioner to break the agency's partisan deadlock, those plans are in trouble. From a report: One of President Biden's key domestic priorities, improving internet access and affordability, can't advance unless the Senate confirms his FCC nominee. The Federal Communications Commission has been deadlocked at 2 Democrats and 2 Republicans since Biden took office, and his nominee for the third seat, Gigi Sohn, has been awaiting a Senate vote for months amid Republican opposition. The agency is required by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to craft rules preventing digital discrimination on broadband access.

The rules would prohibit internet service providers such as Comcast or Verizon from deployment discrimination based on the income level or predominant race or ethnicity of the people living in an area. A 2020 study of internet access in Oakland, Calif., found that areas that were redlined by banks in the past -- denied loans or investment -- now have less ISP competition and fiber-based services than their wealthier counterparts. FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel launched an inquiry in March, with support from the agency's Republicans, on how to create rules preventing digital discrimination and facilitating equal access to high-speed internet. A major question is how the agency will interpret a part of the law that says the rules should take into account issues of "technical and economic feasibility."

"CIQ has landed $26 million in funding to support its plans to expand the use of Rocky Linux in the enterprise space," reports ZDNet. Last year, Red Hat decided to stop supporting CentOS 8 and shifted focus to CentOS Stream. CentOS had some huge enterprise users, among them Disney, GoDaddy, RackSpace, Toyota, and Verizon. In response, Greg Kurtzer, one of CentOS's founders, kicked off Rocky Linux in December 2020.... Kurtzer says Rocky Linux adoption has been "massive", with monthly downloads of OS images typically 250,000, reaching 750,000 in a bumper month. "Within two months we had 10,000 developer and contributors trying to be part of this project...."

The project has gained the support of Greg Kroah-Hartman, the maintainer of the main-line stable Linux kernel, to meet community demands for Rocky Linux to run on a more modern, optimized kernel, Kurtzer said. Kroah-Hartman is leading Rocky Linux special interest group (SIG) for the kernel to create an optional enhanced kernel for Rocky Linux. "He's working closely with us to make sure the kernel we use is blessed by him. He's in the loop as bugs come up and help us manage that kernel in Rocky Linux," says Kurtzer.
"Moreover, today's news follows shortly after CIQ inked a major deal with Google to help support companies looking to deploy Rocky Linux on Google's cloud infrastructure," reports VentureBeat.

Kurtzer tells the site that Rocky Linux "has been a rocket ship in terms of uptake across the enterprise and cloud."

echo123 writes: Twenty Internet providers, including AT&T, Comcast and Verizon, have agreed to provide high-speed service at a steep discount to low-income consumers, the White House announced Monday, significantly expanding broadband access for millions of Americans. The plan, a feature of the $1 trillion infrastructure package passed by Congress last year, would cost qualifying households no more than $30 per month. The discounts plus existing federal Internet subsidies mean the government will cover the full cost of connectivity if consumers sign on with one of the 20 participating companies. The White House estimates the program will cover 48 million households, or 40 percent of the country.

The 100-megabit-per-second service is fast enough for a family to work from home, complete schoolwork, browse the Internet and stream high-definition movies and TV shows, the White House said. Households can qualify for the subsidies, called the Affordable Connectivity Program, if their income is at or below 200 percent of federal poverty guidelines, a member of the household participates in certain federal anti-poverty initiatives -- including Medicaid, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, federal housing assistance, Pell Grant tuition assistance, or free or reduced-price school meals -- or if the household already qualifies for an Internet provider's low-income service program. Consumers can check whether they qualify for discounted service at getinternet.gov.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A federal judge has ordered all Internet service providers in the United States to block three pirate streaming services operated by Doe defendants who never showed up to court and hid behind false identities. The blocking orders affect Israel.tv, Israeli-tv.com, and Sdarot.tv, as well as related domains listed in the rulings and any other domains where the copyright-infringing websites may resurface in the future. The orders came in three essentially identical rulings (see here, here, and here) issued on April 26 in US District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Each ruling provides a list of 96 ISPs that are expected to block the websites, including Comcast, Charter, AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile. But the rulings say that all ISPs must comply even if they aren't on the list: "It is further ordered that all ISPs (including without limitation those set forth in Exhibit B hereto) and any other ISPs providing services in the United States shall block access to the Website at any domain address known today (including but not limited to those set forth in Exhibit A hereto) or to be used in the future by the Defendants ('Newly Detected Websites') by any technological means available on the ISPs' systems. The domain addresses and any Newly Detected Websites shall be channeled in such a way that users will be unable to connect and/or use the Website, and will be diverted by the ISPs' DNS servers to a landing page operated and controlled by Plaintiffs (the 'Landing Page')." That landing page is available here and cites US District Judge Katherine Polk Failla's "order to block all access to this website/service due to copyright infringement." "If you were harmed in any way by the Court's decision you may file a motion to the Federal Court in the Southern District of New York in the above case," the landing page also says.

The three lawsuits were filed by Israeli TV and movie producers and providers against Doe defendants who operate the websites. Each of the three rulings awarded damages of $7.65 million. TorrentFreak pointed out the rulings in an article Monday. The orders also contain permanent injunctions against the defendants themselves and other types of companies that provided services to the defendants or could do so in the future. That includes companies like Cloudflare, GoDaddy, Google, and Namecheap. In all three cases, none of the defendants responded to the complaints and did not appear in court, the judge's rulings said. "Defendants have gone to great lengths to conceal themselves and their ill-gotten proceeds from Plaintiffs' and this Court's detection, including by using multiple false identities and addresses associated with their operations and purposely deceptive contact information for the infringing Website," the rulings say. The defendants are liable for copyright infringement and violated the anti-circumvention provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the judge wrote [...].

CNBC explores the dream of "a future where nobody has to constantly update and change online passwords to stay ahead of hackers and keep data secure." Here's the good news: Some of the biggest names in tech are already saying that the dream of a password-less internet is close to becoming a reality. Apple, Google and Microsoft are among those trying to pave the way... In theory, removing passwords from your cybersecurity equation nixes what former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff has called "by far the weakest link in cybersecurity." More than 80% of data breaches are a result of weak or compromised passwords, according to Verizon....

Doing away with passwords altogether is not without risks. First, verification codes sent via email or text message can be intercepted by hackers. Even scarier: Hackers have shown the ability to trick fingerprint and facial recognition systems, sometimes by stealing your biometric data. As annoying as changing your password might be, it's much harder to change your face or fingerprints. Second, some of today's password-less options still ask you to create a PIN or security questions to back up your account. That's not much different from having a password.... Plus, tech companies still need to make online accounts accessible across multiple platforms, not just on smartphones — and also to the people who don't own smartphones at all, roughly 15% of the U.S.
Some data points from the article:

• "Microsoft says 'nearly 100%' of the company's employees use password-less options to log into their corporate accounts."

• "In September, Microsoft announced that its users could go fully password-less to access services like Windows, Xbox, and Microsoft 365."

• "Similarly, Google sells physical security keys, and its Smart Lock app allows you to tap a button on your Android or iOS device to log into your Google account on the web."

• Apple's devices have used Touch ID and Face ID features for several years."

A federal appeals court has denied a request for a rehearing on its January decision that upholds California's net neutrality law. From a report: The 2018 law, widely considered the strongest in the US, was signed into law a year after the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) repealed the Open Internet Order. That order had established stringent net neutrality rules that prohibited internet service providers from throttling or blocking legal websites and apps, and banned ISPs from prioritizing paid content. California's law, which finally took effect last year, also prohibits throttling and speed lanes. Wireless trade associations including the NCTA, the CTIA, and ISPs including Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T sued to block California's law from taking effect, saying the FCC decision should preempt the state law. But that challenge was rejected by a district court judge.

The Ninth Circuit voted 3-0 in January to uphold the lower court ruling, saying the FCC "no longer has the authority" to regulate broadband internet services because the agency reclassified them as "information services, instead of telecommunications services. The FCC therefore cannot preempt the state action." FCC chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel praised the decision on Twitter, reiterating her position that she wants to see net neutrality become "the law on the land" again. The FCC can't currently reinstate net neutrality at the federal level however since the panel lacks a majority and the two Democrats and two Republicans remain deadlocked on the issue. President Biden's FCC nominee Gigi Sohn is still awaiting a confirmation vote in the Senate.

Employees at an Apple store in Atlanta filed a petition on Wednesday to hold a union election. If successful, the workers could form the first union at an Apple retail store in the United States. From a report: The move continues a recent trend of service-sector unionization in which unions have won elections at Starbucks, Amazon and REI locations. The workers are hoping to join the Communications Workers of America, which represents workers at companies like AT&T Mobility and Verizon, and has made a concerted push into the tech sector in recent years. The union says that about 100 workers at the store -- at Cumberland Mall, in northwest Atlanta -- are eligible to vote, including salespeople and repair technicians, and that over 70 percent of them have signed authorization cards indicating their support. In a statement, the union said Apple, like other tech employers, had effectively created a tiered work force that denied retail workers the pay, benefits and respect that workers earned at its corporate offices.

The nonprofit online news site Virginia Mercury investigated their state police departments' "real-time location warrants," which are "addressed to telephone companies, ordering them to regularly ping a customers' phone for its GPS location and share the results with police." Public records requests submitted to a sampling of 18 police departments around the state found officers used the technique to conduct more than 7,000 days worth of surveillance in 2020. Court records show the tracking efforts spanned cases ranging from high-profile murders to minor larcenies.... Seven departments responded that they did not have any relevant billing records, indicating they don't use the technique. Only one of the departments surveyed, Alexandria, indicated it had an internal policy governing how their officers use cellphone tracking, but a copy of the document provided by the city was entirely redacted....

Drug investigations accounted for more than 60 percent of the search warrants taken out in the two jurisdictions. Larcenies were the second most frequent category. Major crimes like murders, rapes and abductions made up a fraction of the tracking requests, accounting for just under 25 of the nearly 400 warrants filed in the jurisdictions that year.
America's Supreme Court "ruled that warrantless cellphone tracking is unconstitutional back in 2012," the article points out — but in practice those warrants aren't hard to get. "Officers simply have to attest in an affidavit that they have probable cause that the tracking data is 'relevant to a crime that is being committed or has been committed'.... There's been limited public discussion or awareness of the kinds of tracking warrants the judiciary is approving." "I don't think people know that their cell phones can be converted to tracking devices by police with no notice," said Steve Benjamin, a criminal defense lawyer in Richmond who said he's recently noticed an uptick in cases in which officers employed the technique. "And the reality of modern life is everyone has their phone on them during the day and on their nightstand at night. ... It's as if the police tagged them with a chip under their skin, and people have no idea how easily this is accomplished."
The case for these phone-tracking warrants?

• The executive director of the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police tells the site that physical surveillance ofen requires too many resources — and that cellphone tracking is safer. "It may be considered an intrusive way of gathering data on someone, but it's certainly less dangerous than physical tracking."
• A spokesperson for the Chesterfield County police department [responsible for 64% of the state's tracking] argued that "We exist to preserve human life and protect the vulnerable, and we will use all lawful tools at our disposal to do so." And they added that such "continued robust enforcement efforts" were a part of the reason that the county's still-rising number of fatal drug overdoses had not risen more.

The site also obtained bills from four major US cellphone carriers, and reported how much they were charging police for providing their cellphone-tracking services:

• "T-Mobile charged $30 per day, which comes to $900 per month of tracking."
• "AT&T charged a monthly service fee of $100 and an additional $25 per day the service is utilized, which comes to $850 per 30 days of tracking..."
• "Verizon calls the service 'periodic location updates,' charging $5 per day on top of a monthly service fee of $100, which comes to $200 per 30 days of tracking."
• "Sprint offered the cheapest prices to report locations back to law enforcement, charging a flat fee of $100 per month."

Thanks to Slashdot reader Beerismydad for sharing the article!

The Seattle Times surveys the landscape after a historic unionization vote at an Amazon warehouse in New York — and finds the same sentiments are spurring activism by workers three timezones away: As the world watched thousands of Amazon warehouse workers in New York form on Friday the company's first U.S. union, a handful of employees of a Seattle thrift store celebrated their own victory. Sixteen workers at Crossroads Trading Co. in search of higher wages, more hours and better benefits voted unanimously Wednesday to form a union at the chain's store in Seattle's Capitol Hill neighborhood. Organizers at Crossroads said they built off the momentum and union support in the neighborhood from another successful union drive at a Starbucks store just a few blocks away.

Now, a group of security workers who have contracts with Amazon, Microsoft and Sound Transit are taking a similar tack, hoping to use the swell of enthusiasm created by Amazon workers in Staten Island to bring more workers in Seattle into the union fold....

Since Amazon Labor Union started organizing — unofficially with a walkout in 2020 in protest of the company's treatment of workers amid the COVID-19 pandemic — the union wave appears to have swelled in the Seattle area. A group of workers at an Amazon Fresh store in Seattle's Central District organized to form Amazon Workers United, and now three more stores in the area are starting their own drives, according to organizer Joseph Fink. Workers at Verizon retail stores in Everett and Lynnwood are currently casting votes in a union election. Ballots were sent to workers in March and votes will be counted this month. In Seattle, a Starbucks retail store on Capitol Hill became the first unionized store in the region....

Watching workers at companies including Starbucks and Amazon face anti-union tactics did stoke fears of retaliation for union efforts at Crossroads, said Emma Mudd, a sales associate and one of the lead union organizers. But it exposed the playbook that companies might follow — and showed what workers could do to push back, engage one another and put public pressure on the company.

"It was helpful to have tangible examples, because we did have conversations to prepare for union busting," Mudd said. "It was really helpful to see how those workers were able to push through it."

Walgreens and other retailers replaced some fridge and freezer doors with iPad-like screens, reports CNN. "And some shoppers absolutely hate it." The screens, which were developed by the startup Cooler Screens, use a system of motion sensors and cameras to display what's inside the doors — as well as product information, prices, deals and, most appealing to brands, paid advertisements. The tech provides stores with an additional revenue stream and a way to modernize the shopping experience. But for customers who just want to peek into the freezer and grab their ice cream, Walgreens risks angering them by solving a problem that shoppers didn't know existed. The company wants to engage more people with advertising, but the reaction, so far, is annoyance and confusion.

"Why would Walgreens do this?" one befuddled shopper who encountered the screens posted on TikTok. "Who on God's green earth thought this was a good idea?"

"The digital cooler screens at Walgreens made me watch an ad before it allowed me to know which door held the frozen pizzas," said someone on Twitter....

Walgreens began testing the screens in 2018 and has since expanded the pilot to a couple thousand locations nationwide. Several other major retailers are launching their own tests with Cooler Screens, including Kroger, CVS, GetGo convenience stores and Chevron gas stations. "I hope that we will one day be able to expand across all parts of the store," said Cooler Screens co-founder and CEO Arsen Avakian in an interview with CNN Business. Currently the startup has about 10,000 screens in stores, which are viewed by approximately 90 million consumers monthly, according to the company....

Politifact last month debunked a viral Facebook video that claimed "Walgreens refrigerators are scanning shoppers' hands and foreheads for 'the mark of the beast.'"

Avakian insists the tech is "identity-blind" and protects consumers' privacy. The freezers have front-facing sensors used to anonymously track shoppers interacting with the platform, while internally facing cameras track product inventory...

The items on display don't always match up with what's inside because products are out of stock.....

"This is the future of retail and shopping," Avakian said.
CNN notes that major corporations are backing the company Cooler Screens, which "has raised more than $100 million from backers including Microsoft and Verizon." But long-time Slashdot reader davidwr points out it's been done before. "Some gas stations have had video ads at the pump for years now. I boycott those stations on principle."

And Slashdot reader quonset wonders if we're one step closer to Futurama's vision of a world where advertisers enter our dreams.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Consumer Reports wants the Federal Communications Commission to take a closer look at whether Internet service providers are complying with a US law that prohibits them from charging hardware rental fees when customers use their own equipment. In a filing submitted to the FCC this week, Consumer Reports said it asked members about their Internet bills and got over 350 responses, with some suggesting violations of either the letter or spirit of the law. "Some contain allegations that the law is being violated, whereas others state the new statute is being respected. Many more stories suggest that ISPs dissuade consumers from using their own equipment, typically by refusing to troubleshoot any service disruptions if consumers opt not to rent the ISP's devices. Such practices result in de facto situations where consumers feel pressured or forced to rent equipment that they would prefer to own instead," Consumer Reports told the FCC.

Consumer Reports' filing came in response to the FCC asking for public comment on the implementation of the Television Viewer Protection Act (TVPA), which took effect in December 2020. In addition to price-transparency rules for TV service, the law prohibited TV and broadband providers from charging rental or lease fees when "the provider has not provided the equipment to the consumer; or the consumer has returned the equipment to the provider." All the comments collected by Consumer Reports are available here. The FCC filing includes examples of complaints about AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, Charter Spectrum, Frontier, Windstream, and Cox, though the complaints weren't all about rental fees.

In its call for public input, the FCC asked for comment on "the extent to which (if at all) subject entities continue to assess charges for equipment that are expressly prohibited by the statute." [...] Consumer Reports said its questions for members were "designed to measure whether or not ISPs were in compliance... and also to solicit consumer opinion on whether or not it was difficult to use consumer-owned equipment versus renting those devices from the provider. Notably, neither of the two cable industry trade associations mentioned this issue in any detail in their comments filed last month at the Commission." Consumer Reports said that some of the responses "suggest the statute is not being complied with as vigorously as Congress intended... These allegations merit further investigation by the Commission." Consumer Reports offered to share contact information for the customers with the FCC so it can investigate further.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from ZDNet: Frontier, a national Internet Service Provider (ISP), is now bringing 2 Gbps broadband to all its fiber customers. While Frontier is best known for its rural DSL internet service, the company has been expanding its fiber network. Frontier's 2 Gbps service will be available to approximately 4 million customers in 19 states as part of its launch. This 2 Gbps service is symmetrical; this means you'll get 2 Gbps speeds both up and down. Frontier's not the only one that offers multi-Gbps speeds. AT&T, Google Fiber, Verizon Fios, Xfinity, and Ziply Fiber also offer this level of performance, but none of them offer it over their entire network like Frontier.

AT&T's planned shutdown of its 3G network Tuesday has sparked fears that home security systems, medical alert monitors and a range of other devices will stop working. From a report: Carriers have previously retired networks, but this transition is proving more complicated because the pandemic hindered companies that rely on 3G services from making upgrades. Plus, there are just more devices to manage. AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon are all planning to shut down their 3G networks this year to support new 5G services. AT&T, which first announced plans to sunset its 3G network in 2019, says less than 1% of its mobile data traffic runs on that network. The company has offered customers free and discounted 4G LTE phones to help them upgrade, totaling about 2 million replacements. What to watch: AT&T says phone coverage will not be affected, but it's not just phones that use the company's 3G network.

Attackers have commandeered thousands of TracFone customers' phone numbers in recent weeks, forcing new owner Verizon Communications to improve safeguards less than two months after it took over the prepaid wireless provider. From a report: TracFone offers prepaid wireless service under several brands, including Straight Talk, Total Wireless and its namesake brand. Some customers of Straight Talk said they found their phone lines suddenly disconnected around the December holidays. "We were recently made aware of bad actors gaining access to a limited number of customer accounts and, in some cases, fraudulently transferring, or porting out, mobile telephone numbers to other carriers," TracFone said in a notice posted on its website this month. In some cases, customers said they discovered their lines had been moved without their permission to Metro, a unit of T-Mobile US. A T-Mobile spokeswoman said the company investigated and found "no fraud or data breach of any sort" on its side. The company added that such unauthorized transfers "are unfortunately an industrywide issue."

Verizon, which acquired TracFone in late November in a $6.25 billion deal, said it had added security protections to the recently acquired services to prevent such fraudulent transfers. For instance, the prepaid operators will now send customers a text message notification when a transfer request is made. A Verizon spokeswoman said the attack appeared to affect about 6,000 TracFone customers, a fraction of Verizon's roughly 24 million prepaid lines. "We have no reason to think that this was caused by anybody on the inside," the spokeswoman said. "You've got the bad actors out there constantly trying to find points of weakness," Matt Ellis, Verizon's finance chief, said Tuesday in an interview. "We've addressed that weakness."

The FAA has announced that an "estimated 78 percent of the U.S. commercial fleet" have been cleared to land at airports with 5G C-band, even under low-visibility conditions. The Verge reports: The agency's statement comes after a week of controversy surrounding the rollout of AT&T and Verizon's upgraded cellular tech, which saw US airlines warning of "catastrophic disruption" to travel and shipping and some international airlines announcing they'd halt flights to some US airports. At issue are concerns that some radio altimeters won't properly ignore signals from the new 5G transmitters. While there are precautions that should keep this from happening, including creating buffer zones around airports, an incorrect altimeter reading could cause real problems during a low-visibility landing.

Given the high stakes, the FAA has said that only planes with altimeters that it has tested and cleared will be allowed to land in sub-optimal conditions at airports where the new 5G tech has rolled out. [...] On January 16th, the agency announced that it had cleared two altimeters, which it bumped up to five on Wednesday. It said the cleared altimeters were installed in "some" versions of planes like the Boeing 737, 747, and 777. The FAA changed that language on Thursday, saying that the 13 cleared altimeters should cover "all" Boeing 717, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, 787, MD-10/-11, and Airbus A300, A310, A319, A320, A330, A340, A350, and A380 models. It also notes that "some" Embraer 170 and 190 regional jets are covered.

The FAA is still predicting that some altimeters won't pass the test and will be "too susceptible to 5G interference." Planes equipped with those models won't be allowed to land at airports with the new 5G tech in low-visibility conditions -- which could prevent airlines from scheduling any flights using those planes to airports of concern, given the unpredictability of weather and the disruption such a diversion would cause.

gollum123 shares a report from CNN: Major international airlines are canceling flights to the United States over aviation industry fears that 5G technology could interfere with crucial onboard instruments. But it's business as usual in Europe, where the latest generation of high speed mobile networks is being rolled out without a hitch. Why is there a potential problem in the United States, but not Europe? It comes down to technical details.

Mobile phone companies in the United States are rolling out 5G service in a spectrum of radio waves with frequencies between 3.7 and 3.98 GHz. The companies paid the US government $81 billion in 2021 for the right to use those frequencies, known as the C-Band. But in Europe, 5G services use the slower 3.4 to 3.8 GHz range of spectrum. The aviation industry is worried that US 5G service is too close to the spectrum used by radar altimeters, which is between 4.2 and 4.4 GHz. Europe does not face the same risk, according to the industry, because there is a much larger buffer between the spectrum used by radar altimeters and 5G.

There are other differences in how 5G is being rolled out, according to the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Other countries are using lower power levels, restricting the placement of 5G antennas near airfields and requiring them to be tilted downward to limit potential interference with aircraft. In France -- cited by telecom carriers such as AT&T and Verizon as an example of 5G and aviation working seamlessly together -- the height of a 5G antenna and the power of its signal determine how close it is allowed to a runway and the flight path of an aircraft, according to a technical note from France's National Frequency Agency (ANFR). Antennas around 17 major French airports are also required to be tilted away from flight paths to minimize the risk of interference, the agency's director of spectrum planning and international affairs, Eric Fournier, told CNN.

America's Federal Aviation Administration "has published the list of 50 airports around which it wants Verizon and AT&T to create '5G buffer' zones..." reports PC Magazine: The Department of Transportation previously asked Verizon and AT&T to delay the deployment of their C-Band networks from Dec. 5, 2021 to Jan. 5 due to concerns about interference affecting the altimeters used by commercial aircraft. Then on Jan. 2 the FAA asked the carriers to push back the debut of their C-Band networks again so it could investigate those safety risks.

The FAA said at the time that it would "identify priority airports where a buffer zone would permit aviation operations to continue safely while the FAA completes its assessments of the interference potential around those airports." Verizon and AT&T agreed to delay the launch of their C-Band networks for two weeks and respect the buffer zones designated by the FAA.

The administration says in its announcement that "the wireless companies agreed to turn off transmitters and make other adjustments near these airports for six months to minimize potential 5G interference with sensitive aircraft instruments used in low-visibility landings...." Reuters reports that the FAA's list was informed by Verizon and AT&T's coverage maps — in some cases "5G towers are far enough away that a natural buffer exists," the FAA says, according to the report — as well as a given airport's existing capabilities.
"Traffic volume, the number of low-visibility days and geographic location factored into the selection," acknowledges the FAA's statement.

Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader xetdog for sharing the story!

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The Federal Aviation Administration tentatively agreed not to seek any more 5G delays from AT&T and Verizon, potentially ending a battle over the aviation industry's unproven claim that 5G transmissions on C-Band frequencies will interfere with airplane altimeters. The commitment came Monday night, when AT&T and Verizon agreed to one more delay of two weeks, pushing their deployment off until January 19. They had previously agreed to a delay from December 5 until January 5. Terms of Monday's deal were described in an attachment to a letter (PDF) that Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg sent to the carriers. "In light of the foregoing, and subject to any unforeseen aviation safety issues, DOT and FAA will not seek or demand any further delays of C-Band deployment," the deal terms say.

Buttigieg thanked the AT&T and Verizon CEOs, writing, "Your voluntary agreement both to delay initial deployment by two weeks, and to subsequently adopt some additional mitigations, will give us additional time and space to reduce the impacts to commercial flights... We are confident that your voluntary steps will support the safe coexistence of 5G C-Band deployment and aviation activities." The deal incorporates voluntary commitments that AT&T and Verizon previously made, including "C-Band radio exclusion zones" around airports for six months. The aviation industry will give carriers "a list of no more than 50 priority airports" where the exclusion zones will apply.

AT&T and Verizon will provide data on base stations, operating characteristics, and planned deployment locations. They will also "continue to work in good faith with aviation stakeholders to support the technical assessment of individual altimeters and airport environments," the deal says. The FAA previously said it "will safely expedite the approvals of Alternate Means of Compliance (AMOCs) for operators with high-performing radio altimeters to operate at those airports," signaling that airlines may already be using altimeters that can co-exist with C-Band transmissions. AT&T and Verizon's C-Band spectrum licenses are for the frequencies from 3.7 GHz to 3.98 GHz, but the companies don't plan to deploy between 3.8 GHZ and 3.98 GHz until 2023. The radio altimeters used to determine airplane altitudes rely on spectrum from 4.2 GHz to 4.4 GHz. "Assuming there are no further problems, AT&T and Verizon would be able to use their spectrum licenses without extra restrictions after July 5," the report says.

"At the end of the commitment period specified in the Voluntary Commitments (i.e. through July 5, 2022), Licensees intend to deploy 5G base stations in any manner consistent with their C-Band Licenses, all customary rules and regulations, and any additional airport-specific mitigation measures Licensees have committed to take based on their continued engagement with the FAA and the aviation industry," the agreement said.

"AT&T and Verizon on Sunday rejected the U.S. Department of Transportation's request that they delay this week's scheduled launch of a new round of 5G wireless service," reports Politico, adding that the carriers "instead pledged to take enhanced measures to avoid warned disruptions of air travel..." U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and FAA Administrator Steve Dickson had asked the companies on New Year's Eve to put off Wednesday's launch of the new wireless service for two additional weeks while their agencies address concerns that the new signals could interfere with some types of aircraft equipment. Unless those issues are resolved, air travelers will face "widespread and unacceptable disruption as airplanes divert to other cities or flights are canceled, causing ripple effects throughout the U.S. air transportation," Buttigieg and Dickson wrote in their letter, reported last week by POLITICO.

The wireless carriers' rebuff is the latest step in weeks of an escalating standoff between the aviation and telecommunication sectors — a year after the mobile phone companies spent more than $80 billion to buy licenses for the 5G-friendly C-band airwaves at a Federal Communications Commission auction. The fight over the Trump-era initiative has drawn in multiple agencies and the White House, with airlines pushing for an emergency stay even after the FCC insisted that the wireless companies can safely use the airwaves...

The FAA on Sunday said it's reviewing the carriers' letter but added, "U.S. aviation safety standards will guide our next actions." Verizon and AT&T told DOT on Sunday that they will embrace even more extensive mitigation measures through July 5. But they outright rejected the idea of postponing the launch of the new 5G service. "Agreeing to your proposal would not only be an unprecedented and unwarranted circumvention of the due process and checks and balances carefully crafted in the structure of our democracy, but an irresponsible abdication of the operating control required to deploy world-class and globally competitive communications networks that are every bit as essential to our country's economic vitality, public safety and national interests as the airline industry," the two companies' CEOs wrote.

They said they want to keep working with the federal government to avoid "escalating" grievances from the airline industry "in other venues."

Reuters reports: U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and the head of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on Friday asked AT&T and Verizon Communications to delay the planned January 5 introduction of new 5G wireless service over aviation safety concerns. In a letter Friday seen by Reuters, Buttigieg and FAA Administrator Steve Dickson asked AT&T Chief Executive John Stankey and Verizon Chief Executive Hans Vestberg for a delay of no more than two weeks as part of a "proposal as a near-term solution for advancing the co-existence of 5G deployment in the C-Band and safe flight operations."

The aviation industry and FAA have raised concerns about potential interference of 5G with sensitive aircraft electronics like radio altimeters that could disrupt flights.... Earlier Friday the two companies accused the aerospace industry of seeking to hold C-Band spectrum deployment "hostage until the wireless industry agrees to cover the costs of upgrading any obsolete altimeters." Buttigieg and Dickson said under the framework "commercial C-band service would begin as planned in January with certain exceptions around priority airports...." The carriers, which won the spectrum in an $80 billion government auction, previously agreed to precautionary measures for six months to limit interference...

Wireless industry group CTIA said 5G is safe and spectrum is being used in about 40 other countries.