3 ms·

An issue that appears to be overlooked is that the US is much less densely populated and has a much higher overall population and land area to cover. I favor th

by naner 15y ago

An issue that appears to be overlooked is that the US is much less densely populated and has a much higher overall population and land area to cover. I favor the way many European countries are able to handle things like this (and healthcare, and transportation, etc) but the US is hardly similar to any of those countries. We're operating at a completely different scale here. Not to mention political and cultural differences and issues of states' rights versus the federal government's rights.

masklinn 15y ago
> An issue that appears to be overlooked It wasn't overlooked in the article, you overlooked it in your reading: > Meanwhile, the size of the U.S. may be a red herring. Most of the region between Boston and Washington is as densely populated as most of Europe and the UK. So is the California coast between San Francisco and San Diego. And so is the region of the Midwest centered on Chicago. Those areas are home to about a quarter of all Americans. In other words, we live in a big country, but a lot of it is relatively empty space. > The argument that the U.S. is too spread out is nonsense, according to Herman Wagter, one of the Netherlands' most prominent evangelists for next-generation broadband. He thinks there's something else going on in Verizon's and AT&T's opposition to competition at home: They're afraid of it.
nitrogen 15y ago
The potency of the population density argument is seriously diminished by the fact that rural municipal broadband initiatives frequently provide much higher performance than available commercial offerings. Blaming the government is reasonable. Before the FCC shut it down, I had a 6mbit up/160kbit down wireless cable modem from Sprint Broadband Direct in a rural area in 2000, connecting to a tower 30 miles away.
anghyflawn 15y ago
What do you think is the population density of Sweden, Norway, or Finland? There is still very decent broadband to be had up here at 70 degrees northern latitude.

by naner 15y ago

masklinn 15y ago

> An issue that appears to be overlooked It wasn't overlooked in the article, you overlooked it in your reading: > Meanwhile, the size of the U.S. may be a red herring. Most of the region between Boston and Washington is as densely populated as most of Europe and the UK. So is the California coast between San Francisco and San Diego. And so is the region of the Midwest centered on Chicago. Those areas are home to about a quarter of all Americans. In other words, we live in a big country, but a lot of it is relatively empty space. > The argument that the U.S. is too spread out is nonsense, according to Herman Wagter, one of the Netherlands' most prominent evangelists for next-generation broadband. He thinks there's something else going on in Verizon's and AT&T's opposition to competition at home: They're afraid of it.

nitrogen 15y ago

The potency of the population density argument is seriously diminished by the fact that rural municipal broadband initiatives frequently provide much higher performance than available commercial offerings. Blaming the government is reasonable. Before the FCC shut it down, I had a 6mbit up/160kbit down wireless cable modem from Sprint Broadband Direct in a rural area in 2000, connecting to a tower 30 miles away.

anghyflawn 15y ago

What do you think is the population density of Sweden, Norway, or Finland? There is still very decent broadband to be had up here at 70 degrees northern latitude.