You’re coming off as something of an out of touch asshole, to be honest. I know people for who getting mains power out to their house would cost them more than the property was worth. And there was mains available at the boundary. THAT’S what remote means, not what you’re describing.
Comment on Starlink loses out on $886 million in rural broadband subsidies
crazyCat@sh.itjust.works 9 months agoWhat I’m saying is the most cost effective way to get internet to rural folks is to run cables, it works. You don’t have to put thousands of satellites up, it isn’t easier or better.
Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 9 months ago
troyunrau@lemmy.ca 9 months ago
You sound like you’ve never been anywhere truly remote. For a lot of people in the world, it would be cheaper for the governmet to buy their rural property, bulldoze it, and then buy them a house in a town with internet service – than it is to run a line to their property.
freeman@lemmy.pub 9 months ago
of course that would be cheaper if the government is paying for it…That would also be cheaper than just buying comcast for someone even in suburbs of the US…