3 ms·

“The US has a large NIH attitude and is unwilling to adopt overseas experience or standards.” This indeed seems to be a problem. The US always wants to lead an

“The US has a large NIH attitude and is unwilling to adopt overseas experience or standards.” This indeed seems to be a problem. The US always wants to lead and if something works better somewhere else there is always the excuse “we are too big/spread out/not socialists” or something else. Or it just gets ignored. See healthcare or internet availability.

bin0 7y ago
> internet availability Remind me again, which nation has produced companies with a realistic chance of delivering satellite internet to every one?
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  There are plenty of countries that have cheaper and better internet right now.
  - bin0 7y ago
    Most of them are much smaller, meaning there is significantly less distance to cover. Of course you can get fiber to the home every where when you have a small nation. Let's look at larger nations: Canada has worse broadband but better mobile [0][1]. I'd attribute this to population density: most of their population is fairly close to our border because the rest is a frozen wasteland. Russia has worse speeds by far, and the certain things simply are not accessible due to being blocked. No, we're not South Korea, but S. Korea is small with most people living in a very concentrated area. Again, no other nation has companies with excellent chances of setting up satellite network infrastructure, which is a good solution for a nation as big and spread-out as America. [0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmurnane/2016/09/15/comparing-internet-access-speeds-in-canada-mexico-and-the-united-states/#31a949661039 https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmurnane/2016/09/15/compari... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Internet_connection_speeds#Average_connection_speeds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Internet_...
    - Ididntdothis 7y ago
      I live in LA which as far as I can tell is pretty densely populated. I have one provider to choose from (Spectrum) at $70 for 100mbps. That's it. Why is there no competition in this area?
      - bin0 7y ago
        The feds make ISPs spend money on rural areas which aren't really profitable; that's likely a part of it. But there's no competition because there are a limited number of lines available; they can't tear up the street for every one that wants to.
rayiner 7y ago
The US has about the same number of broadband subscriptions per household as Sweden. US wired broadband speeds are also in the top 10 in Akamai’s ranking.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  And the cost in Sweden is around half of the US.
  - rayiner 7y ago
    It looks like Bahnhhof is $43/month for gigabit, compared to $70-80 in the US for Verizon or AT&T. But income is 50% higher in the US, so in terms of affordability the difference isn’t as big. (Remember, fiber service isn’t a product mass-manufactured in China. Everyone from the guy laying fiber to the guy doing tech support is getting paid much higher US salaries, not lower Swedish salaries.)
    - Ididntdothis 7y ago
      Sweden median income is 37000 per person ca 45000 in the US. But let’s close this. I am sure you will find a justification for US health care costs too.

bin0 7y ago

> internet availability Remind me again, which nation has produced companies with a realistic chance of delivering satellite internet to every one?

Ididntdothis 7y ago
There are plenty of countries that have cheaper and better internet right now.
- bin0 7y ago
  Most of them are much smaller, meaning there is significantly less distance to cover. Of course you can get fiber to the home every where when you have a small nation. Let's look at larger nations: Canada has worse broadband but better mobile [0][1]. I'd attribute this to population density: most of their population is fairly close to our border because the rest is a frozen wasteland. Russia has worse speeds by far, and the certain things simply are not accessible due to being blocked. No, we're not South Korea, but S. Korea is small with most people living in a very concentrated area. Again, no other nation has companies with excellent chances of setting up satellite network infrastructure, which is a good solution for a nation as big and spread-out as America. [0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmurnane/2016/09/15/comparing-internet-access-speeds-in-canada-mexico-and-the-united-states/#31a949661039 https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmurnane/2016/09/15/compari... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Internet_connection_speeds#Average_connection_speeds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Internet_...
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    I live in LA which as far as I can tell is pretty densely populated. I have one provider to choose from (Spectrum) at $70 for 100mbps. That's it. Why is there no competition in this area?
    - bin0 7y ago
      The feds make ISPs spend money on rural areas which aren't really profitable; that's likely a part of it. But there's no competition because there are a limited number of lines available; they can't tear up the street for every one that wants to.

rayiner 7y ago

The US has about the same number of broadband subscriptions per household as Sweden. US wired broadband speeds are also in the top 10 in Akamai’s ranking.

Ididntdothis 7y ago
And the cost in Sweden is around half of the US.
- rayiner 7y ago
  It looks like Bahnhhof is $43/month for gigabit, compared to $70-80 in the US for Verizon or AT&T. But income is 50% higher in the US, so in terms of affordability the difference isn’t as big. (Remember, fiber service isn’t a product mass-manufactured in China. Everyone from the guy laying fiber to the guy doing tech support is getting paid much higher US salaries, not lower Swedish salaries.)
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    Sweden median income is 37000 per person ca 45000 in the US. But let’s close this. I am sure you will find a justification for US health care costs too.