- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Starlink loses out on $886 million in rural broadband subsidies::The FCC reaffirmed a decision not to award Starlink a nearly $900 million subsidy for offering 100Mbps/20Mbps low-latency internet service in 35 states.
In this thread. A bunch of people who’ve never had to use the prior remote internet solutions that existed prior to Starlink. For a good chunk of the world, Starlink is actually game changing.
I spent the better part of the last decade working in remote locations, including the high arctic and and rural indigenous communities. Starlink is both fast and affordable compared to the prior solutions. Hell, I even personally worked on hundred million dollar fibre optic line projects, that were hundreds of millions over budget, trying to get these communities connected. Starlink is hands down the better choice, unless you really wanted to put your data centre in Fort Good Hope for some unknown reason.
If Elon wasn’t attached to this project, I’d bet the ratio of negative comments would be lower.
deleted by creator
There’s also a bunch who have never left the city, and have no comprehension of just how remote some communities are.
deleted by creator
Wow! Been there, done that, in BOTH scenarios. Starlink came along well after my ISP days, no idea what it’s like, but it’s gotta beat hell out of 56K and old-school satellite.
deleted by creator
4G Internet implies that there’s a fiber connection to that tower, and that tower can’t be far away. This is more like an intentional decision by the providers.
deleted by creator
Weird seeing this as a country-fried liberal. City people seem to have no comprehension of the issues facing us. And when confronting them about it, “Fuck all you conservative rednecks! You get what you deserve!”
And yet they have no idea why the countryside hates them and votes Trump. Self-defeating to say the least. Which is what they say of us! Rinse and repeat.
In the rural areas near where I am, gigabit fiber in underfunded areas is being installed, but sadly a vocal minority of residents keep burning up and sawing down the new fiber internet poles.
Of course we don’t hear about the good news from areas where it’s installed drama free, but the bad news where something goes terribly wrong is the one that sticks, and affects the general public’s impressions of a particular area or stereotype 😒
Admittedly the pole installation method for this is quite odd though, maybe a cost saving measure as usually it’s done underground
deleted by creator
This only really happens when fuckcars posts show up on /all IMO, where some of the more extreme opinion holders are more vocal.
Fuck cars means fuck car dependency, i.e. places designed specifically for cars: no sidewalks, no bus, no train, no safe bicycle or light motorized assistive vehicle infrastructure available - you need a car for everything, or stay trapped at home.
It doesn’t mean fuck cars literally.
It’s pretty well known that rural areas, by design, require cars and motorbikes to travel out of them - a train is ideal, but good luck convincing anyone to finance that kind of project. A bicycle could work well for moving around town though depending on how safe it is, saving some wear and tear from your vehicle
I mean, fuckcars aren’t representative of the average liberal by any means, so I don’t think that’s entirely fair.
About 87% of the population in my country live in an urban environment, many of them will just have no idea how it is even just a few miles out of a city. There’s just no alternative to personal transportation, and bikes don’t cut it.
I’m still pretty much on board with the fuck cars crowd though - it’s bizarre to me that despite so many people living in our cities that our transit seems even worse than what the US has. It’s just so much nicer being in places with fewer cars around.
You have no God-given obligation to live in bumfuck nowhere. Don’t be surprised if you’re inconvenienced by your choice of location.
deleted by creator
Hillary was a classic example of that effect actually, no attempt to empathise, understand, or try to gain the support of half the country.
Nope, better to just insult them.
I own property in a very rural place and I don’t want it messing up our night sky view.
Guess what, we also have great internet in this very rural place already, too, because they ran cable and put cell towers out there. That’s all it takes.
Sure, but there are many places where this is the only option, and that’s not likely to change any time soon.
deleted by creator
That’s not “very rural”, in that case.
deleted by creator
You are the very definition of privileged, compared to most remote users. And your comment is as close to textbook NIMBY as I’ve ever seen. Plus a healthy dose of “fuck em, I got mine”.
What I’m saying is the most cost effective way to get internet to rural folks is to run cables, it works. You don’t have to put thousands of satellites up, it isn’t easier or better.
You sound like you’ve never been anywhere truly remote. For a lot of people in the world, it would be cheaper for the governmet to buy their rural property, bulldoze it, and then buy them a house in a town with internet service – than it is to run a line to their property.
of course that would be cheaper if the government is paying for it…That would also be cheaper than just buying comcast for someone even in suburbs of the US…
You’re coming off as something of an out of touch asshole, to be honest. I know people for who getting mains power out to their house would cost them more than the property was worth. And there was mains available at the boundary. THAT’S what remote means, not what you’re describing.
well when your backyard is the night sky for the entire globe you can call me a NIMBY when it comes to starlink’s glowing sattelite trains