2 ms·

London average fibre availability is 21%, sure that's better than nothing but I'm not sure I could say 1 in 5 is "plenty", especially compared to cities with >9

London average fibre availability is 21%, sure that's better than nothing but I'm not sure I could say 1 in 5 is "plenty", especially compared to cities with >99% coverage. There's no reason for London's poor coverage rates except deliberate telecoms underfunding. London should also have >99% coverage by now, but instead we play catch up in the post-covid world while available bandwidth for many residents can not adequately sustain a family working from home and distance learning.

carmen_sandiego 6y ago
There are other reasons. For example I think Kensington and Chelsea balked at the idea of having the on-street infra for some schemes. Same reason they don't have nice cycling infra. I'm surprised line-of-sight across the rooftops hasn't taken off yet. Seems like the density would make it worthwhile, but maybe there's some unseen factor at play.