3 ms·

So thoughts on rural areas- my experience is that they generally have more workers that will be considered essential than in urbanized areas- agricultural worke

So thoughts on rural areas- my experience is that they generally have more workers that will be considered essential than in urbanized areas- agricultural workers, truck drivers, people in the supply chain, etc. That might provide some moderating forces on the lower bandwidth options they are often stuck with. That being said, schools doing distance learning over low bandwidth dsl or fixed wireless is going to be interesting...

dredmorbius 7y ago
Time for the rural broadband administration to shine: https://www.ntca.org/ruraliscool/who-we-are https://www.ntca.org/ruraliscool/who-we-are See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Utilities_Service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Utilities_Service
- Accujack 7y ago
  If by "shine" you mean "be as ineffective and underfunded as they have been for decades", then yes.
  - dredmorbius 7y ago
    Rural phone and electric service exist largely by government based efforts. Market solutions don't work for disadvantaged communities, we've learnt that lesson repeatedly. Answering your presumption: no, that's not what I mean at all.
HarryHirsch 7y ago
Try office hours (i.e. video calls) over satellite internet! It's the only thing that's on offer in the boonies.
stickfigure 7y ago
I'm on rural wireless broadband about an hour outside of SF. While the service has never been amazing (3Mbit on a good day, 10Mbit at best), it's been sub-1Mbit (and sometimes sub-0.1Mbit) for quite some number of days now. The rural wireless ISPs are swamped.
sudosteph 7y ago
I had to do a temporary move, and ended up in the only rural county in NC with county-wide municipal fiber. It's working great, FWIW. I'm hopeful this situation will finally prove to the rest of the state that rural fiber is a worthwhile thing to do at scale. I've seen people argue it's not worth it b/c it doesn't attract enough jobs to pay for itself, but the additional network resiliency and quality of living improvements alone are worth it. Especially in times like this. If Wilkes County can do it, so can others.
Accujack 7y ago
FYI, "lower bandwidth" can effectively mean dial up connections only, depending on how far someone lives from a major population center. My uncle lives about 50 miles west of Minneapolis/St. Paul, and unless he wants to pay more than his entire (fixed) monthly income, his only option is dial-up. Cell data isn't even very good out there. Lots of people in the US in rural areas are going to be entirely shut out of schools and businesses for the duration.
- topkai22 7y ago
  Agreed, I don't want to minimize the impact on them. I was responding to the article's DSL population. For your uncle- I know that both suburban and rural providers in my area are providing various "COVID19 lifeline" deals, including fixed wireless operators serving some super rural locations. Might be worth looking into.

dredmorbius 7y ago

Time for the rural broadband administration to shine: https://www.ntca.org/ruraliscool/who-we-are https://www.ntca.org/ruraliscool/who-we-are See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Utilities_Service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Utilities_Service

Accujack 7y ago
If by "shine" you mean "be as ineffective and underfunded as they have been for decades", then yes.
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  Rural phone and electric service exist largely by government based efforts. Market solutions don't work for disadvantaged communities, we've learnt that lesson repeatedly. Answering your presumption: no, that's not what I mean at all.

HarryHirsch 7y ago

Try office hours (i.e. video calls) over satellite internet! It's the only thing that's on offer in the boonies.

stickfigure 7y ago

I'm on rural wireless broadband about an hour outside of SF. While the service has never been amazing (3Mbit on a good day, 10Mbit at best), it's been sub-1Mbit (and sometimes sub-0.1Mbit) for quite some number of days now. The rural wireless ISPs are swamped.

sudosteph 7y ago

I had to do a temporary move, and ended up in the only rural county in NC with county-wide municipal fiber. It's working great, FWIW. I'm hopeful this situation will finally prove to the rest of the state that rural fiber is a worthwhile thing to do at scale. I've seen people argue it's not worth it b/c it doesn't attract enough jobs to pay for itself, but the additional network resiliency and quality of living improvements alone are worth it. Especially in times like this. If Wilkes County can do it, so can others.

Accujack 7y ago

FYI, "lower bandwidth" can effectively mean dial up connections only, depending on how far someone lives from a major population center. My uncle lives about 50 miles west of Minneapolis/St. Paul, and unless he wants to pay more than his entire (fixed) monthly income, his only option is dial-up. Cell data isn't even very good out there. Lots of people in the US in rural areas are going to be entirely shut out of schools and businesses for the duration.

topkai22 7y ago
Agreed, I don't want to minimize the impact on them. I was responding to the article's DSL population. For your uncle- I know that both suburban and rural providers in my area are providing various "COVID19 lifeline" deals, including fixed wireless operators serving some super rural locations. Might be worth looking into.