3 ms·

The only complaints I've seen involve two hours of obstruction, which seem like they'd be hard to resolve without major effort the author admitted he didn't wan

The only complaints I've seen involve two hours of obstruction, which seem like they'd be hard to resolve without major effort the author admitted he didn't want to go through for a trial product he would not be keeping. Cutting down trees or running cable long distances or building tall towers all seem like pretty drastic choices. In the end, politicians with enough will to stand up to the terrible telco conglomerates currently holding back rural broadband would be a better answer here in the US, no need to pollute the sky. Launch a federal program like those that ensured electricity and telephone to every rural customer, with a generous minimum speed, and customers for Starlink in the US drop to near-zero.

mlindner 5y ago
> The only complaints I've seen involve two hours of obstruction, which seem like they'd be hard to resolve without major effort the author admitted he didn't want to go through for a trial product he would not be keeping. Cutting down trees or running cable long distances or building tall towers all seem like pretty drastic choices. Yeah many Starlink customers do exactly that or hire someone to do that for them. They've had to do similar drastic measures in many cases to even get service at all via microwave antennas on tall towers or LTE antennas on tall towers or other such things. The guy wasn't desperate for good internet, which is why he didn't feel it was worth it.
- pwinnski 5y ago
  Hence my description of this solution as mediocre at best. Everything you say was described in the Verge article by the author, so I don't see how the article is inaccurate or should be avoided.
  - mlindner 5y ago
    But practically every solution is "horrible at best" for these users who want Starlink where nothing else is available. Also I find it hard to say "100+ mbps with 95%+ uptime (improving with time) for $100/month" as "mediocre service". That's quite good service and revolutionary service for the people unmet by other services. Even if you need to do a bit of handiwork (much more common in rural areas) to get it installed.

mlindner 5y ago

> The only complaints I've seen involve two hours of obstruction, which seem like they'd be hard to resolve without major effort the author admitted he didn't want to go through for a trial product he would not be keeping. Cutting down trees or running cable long distances or building tall towers all seem like pretty drastic choices. Yeah many Starlink customers do exactly that or hire someone to do that for them. They've had to do similar drastic measures in many cases to even get service at all via microwave antennas on tall towers or LTE antennas on tall towers or other such things. The guy wasn't desperate for good internet, which is why he didn't feel it was worth it.

pwinnski 5y ago
Hence my description of this solution as mediocre at best. Everything you say was described in the Verge article by the author, so I don't see how the article is inaccurate or should be avoided.
- mlindner 5y ago
  But practically every solution is "horrible at best" for these users who want Starlink where nothing else is available. Also I find it hard to say "100+ mbps with 95%+ uptime (improving with time) for $100/month" as "mediocre service". That's quite good service and revolutionary service for the people unmet by other services. Even if you need to do a bit of handiwork (much more common in rural areas) to get it installed.