I live in a rural area far from the nearest available fiber connection, so I connect through a satellite dish. At the moment that means 209Mbps down, 16Mbps up and a 21ms latency for $120/month. It would be nice to have a much faster fiber connection but it's not clear why it is important enough to justify a taxpayer subsidy. What essential services am I missing because of the slower connection? Given the exploding federal deficit this looks like a good place to make a cut.
rsynnott•2h ago
... Well, I mean, also the _120 dollars a month_ seems like a bit of an issue; that'd simply be unaffordable for a lot of people.
Also, there's an element of future-proofing; what will you need in 2050? Will a satellite be able to provide it?
Also there's a question of long-term viability. As fixed line and very high-speed terrestrial cellular spread, satellite internet will become less and less a viable business, as its market shrinks to basically just the truly rural.
delichon•4h ago
rsynnott•2h ago
Also, there's an element of future-proofing; what will you need in 2050? Will a satellite be able to provide it?
Also there's a question of long-term viability. As fixed line and very high-speed terrestrial cellular spread, satellite internet will become less and less a viable business, as its market shrinks to basically just the truly rural.