2 ms·

You say we can't wire up America, but what's your source? I'm not personally seeing a problem with a TVA-level engagement to bring high-speed Internet to as man

You say we can't wire up America, but what's your source? I'm not personally seeing a problem with a TVA-level engagement to bring high-speed Internet to as many people as possible. Starlink looks like it will be half the price, but Musk has gone on record saying this is for rural areas. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/03/musk-says-starlink-isnt-for-big-cities-wont-be-huge-threat-to-telcos/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/03/musk-... Further, I was getting 150 Mb a few months back, but now I'm down to 30 Mb. This isn't a polished product yet and it's in danger of losing federal funding. https://broadbandbreakfast.com/2021/12/starlink-download-speeds-fell-below-new-federal-broadband-standard-in-q3-ookla-data-show/ https://broadbandbreakfast.com/2021/12/starlink-download-spe...

Jtsummers 5y ago
> You say we can't wire up America, but what's your source? I did not say that, reread what I wrote and quote where you think I said that. > I'm not personally seeing a problem with a TVA-level engagement to bring high-speed Internet to as many people as possible. That's basically what I was getting at with this: >> short of conscripting every possible technician in the US to accomplish the effort. But, sadly, it is politically not viable in the US. If it were, I suspect we would have seen such an effort (though probably not telecom focused) post 2007/2008 financial crisis. Instead, a crap ton of money was dumped into the hands of contractors to spend on infrastructure that barely went anywhere. Just like a crap ton of money has been dumped into ISPs that still can't be bothered to cover the last 1.5 miles to your home. What I did write: >> [Starlink] also covers a larger geographic area (and therefore a larger number of people) in a shorter time than any cell tower + cable solution would The first part is pretty obviously true, but the parenthetical does remain to be seen. It depends on how effective the fleet actually scales with connecting additional users, and they're only at ~145k right now.

Jtsummers 5y ago

> You say we can't wire up America, but what's your source? I did not say that, reread what I wrote and quote where you think I said that. > I'm not personally seeing a problem with a TVA-level engagement to bring high-speed Internet to as many people as possible. That's basically what I was getting at with this: >> short of conscripting every possible technician in the US to accomplish the effort. But, sadly, it is politically not viable in the US. If it were, I suspect we would have seen such an effort (though probably not telecom focused) post 2007/2008 financial crisis. Instead, a crap ton of money was dumped into the hands of contractors to spend on infrastructure that barely went anywhere. Just like a crap ton of money has been dumped into ISPs that still can't be bothered to cover the last 1.5 miles to your home. What I did write: >> [Starlink] also covers a larger geographic area (and therefore a larger number of people) in a shorter time than any cell tower + cable solution would The first part is pretty obviously true, but the parenthetical does remain to be seen. It depends on how effective the fleet actually scales with connecting additional users, and they're only at ~145k right now.