4 ms·

Frankly, what this article tells me is that the ISP conglomerates haven't yet bribed the state officials of Kentucky or Ohio to ban or minefield local governmen

• r00fus 9y ago
  For more read here: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/isp-lobby-has-already-won-limits-on-public-broadband-in-20-states/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/isp-lobby-has-al...
• microcolonel 9y ago
  Well, in actual rural places, as in not dense enough for any particular road's worth of internet connection to matter, there are point to point radio ISPs (built off stuff like what Ubiquiti networks makes), and sometimes just a verbal agreement to beam a network over a distance.
• bsder 9y ago
  What this article tells me is that these areas are so unprofitable that the telcos don't actually care. I can tell you that they know exactly which areas can be profitable, and if one of those areas suddenly decides to try to do something on their own, all of a sudden lots of obstacles magically appear.
  • PaulHoule 9y ago
    Actually, Frontier charges $90 a month for 1 Mbps DSL. The problem is not that they could not afford to offer me a gigabit at $120 a month, but that they can't afford to give up $90 a month that they get without investing in their networks. In the case of Frontier, it pays a dividend greater than earnings. It even pays a dividend in quarters where earnings are negative! It is not a "profitable" phone company, it is a company that is bleeding a copper network dry.