3 ms·

That's clearly what the author of that article want to say, but the truth is that Greenland has a centralized access (people go through the national provider to

by nolok 1y ago

That's clearly what the author of that article want to say, but the truth is that Greenland has a centralized access (people go through the national provider to get access, and said provider uses others' solutions in the backend), while Starlink offer was for a direct to consumer system; they were simply not answering to the criterias requested.

simondotau 1y ago
This is pretty much exactly correct. This comment should be pinned to the top of this whole thread, because it does nobody any good when "alternative facts" are valued more highly than a boring truth.
- mlrtime 1y ago
  But then this article would be buried and the gears of the internet wouldn't continue to spin. We all know at this point that rage == clicks == ad revenue.
  - lukan 1y ago
    Except this is one of the few sites not operating by this principle. (The only ads here are YC startup job offers)
    - mlrtime 1y ago
      It still operates, just stops at the ads=money part.
      - 1oooqooq 1y ago
        not really. this still push ads. they are just limited to "native ads format" (i.e. look like content to evade ad blockers) and only advertise yc companies and jobs.
310260 1y ago
The "uses others solutions" bit is for satellite alone when it comes to Tusass. They own and run all other types of telecom service in Greenland whether fiber, cellular, microwave, or marine radio.
motorest 1y ago
> (...) while Starlink (...) were simply not answering to the criterias requested. If you read the article, that's not exactly the arguments pointed out by neither Tusass nor Greenland's politicians. Cited from the article: > Binzer said it was not about which company was better, but about trust and long-term cooperation. Tusass already works with Eutelsat and knows their systems well. > Some Greenlandic politicians have warned that the country must keep control of its telecom infrastructure. > They fear that opening the market to foreign providers could threaten national security. For now, Tusass remains the sole provider of telecommunications in Greenland. The citations from the article are clear on how national security concerns were a key argument to not go with Starlink.

by nolok 1y ago

simondotau 1y ago

This is pretty much exactly correct. This comment should be pinned to the top of this whole thread, because it does nobody any good when "alternative facts" are valued more highly than a boring truth.

mlrtime 1y ago
But then this article would be buried and the gears of the internet wouldn't continue to spin. We all know at this point that rage == clicks == ad revenue.
- lukan 1y ago
  Except this is one of the few sites not operating by this principle. (The only ads here are YC startup job offers)
  - mlrtime 1y ago
    It still operates, just stops at the ads=money part.
    - 1oooqooq 1y ago
      not really. this still push ads. they are just limited to "native ads format" (i.e. look like content to evade ad blockers) and only advertise yc companies and jobs.

310260 1y ago

The "uses others solutions" bit is for satellite alone when it comes to Tusass. They own and run all other types of telecom service in Greenland whether fiber, cellular, microwave, or marine radio.

motorest 1y ago

> (...) while Starlink (...) were simply not answering to the criterias requested. If you read the article, that's not exactly the arguments pointed out by neither Tusass nor Greenland's politicians. Cited from the article: > Binzer said it was not about which company was better, but about trust and long-term cooperation. Tusass already works with Eutelsat and knows their systems well. > Some Greenlandic politicians have warned that the country must keep control of its telecom infrastructure. > They fear that opening the market to foreign providers could threaten national security. For now, Tusass remains the sole provider of telecommunications in Greenland. The citations from the article are clear on how national security concerns were a key argument to not go with Starlink.