I mean, you don’t have to guess. He’s interfered in a war and turned a social network into his personal bullhorn.
If they have electricity, than fiber is practical. For the tiny few that don’t, fine. But even then, for the billions invested in launching these satellite clusters, it just might be cheaper to build a handful of crazy long terrestrial microwave links.
The trouble with starlink is that the actual amazingly practical use-cases for it are not a sufficiently profitable market for it given the insane investment. So they have to convince people it’s a better idea as a rural ISP than demanding fiber.
Fourth option: Municipal fiber, but open access to those lines for private ISPs of all types.
You lack individual choice by design. You should choose whatever is best for you, obviously, but you can be pissed there’s no fiber running alongside your electricity service.
lol. I thought those commas were decimals for a second. Wow.
Technically correct. The best kind of correct ;). He should have said not sharing that last mile connection, like one would share with a satellite downlink.
That, and if they could pull heavy copper wiring to the furthest rural reaches of the country in the 1930s, they can pull fiber along side it today. The poles and right of way is already there. Satellite is a fine stop-gap while it gets done, but there’s no excuse for it to be the permanent solution.
Cory Doctorow described it as anti-futuristic tech. Where fiber networks get better, faster, and cheaper the denser they get, wireless satellite will get slower and less reliable the more people share that spectrum.
Don’t tell them you can buy a vps and run your own vpn in another country.
When a car is stolen, they typically get to sell another one, courtesy of the drivers insurance policy. They are incentivized to bad security.