3 ms·

"After careful legal, technical, and policy review, we are rejecting these applications. Consumers deserve reliable and affordable high-speed broadband," So ma

• refulgentis 4y ago
  That's exactly what the grants in question are for And no, there isn't more to it, the only reason we're even here is because they had to play along with Starlink's initial application that had too optimistic numbers because it's not their job to question pie in the sky numbers, but instead, to tentatively approve it until it's proven false.
• dogman144 4y ago
  Ya What’s tough is the only ya provider I trust for rural use is starlink.
• prvc 4y ago
  It's nakedly political.
• thewebcount 4y ago
  > So make ATT and other ISPs serve the rural market, FTC! You don’t want that. They (and others like Verizon) have repeatedly taken government grants to extend their networks into unserved areas (both rural and urban) and then just not done the work. Ars Technica follows this stuff pretty closely and they’ve done some good reporting on it.
  • ncmncm 4y ago
    AT&T took $500M back when to extend fiber to rural areas, back when that seemed like a lot of money. They ran fiber to 1/10 mi from my house. Then, never lit it, because the grant they took didn't require that. FCC staying on top of telecomm companies' follow-through is a welcome change.