|
Top-level
 @th0r5t3n @Gerego @brianstorms @rodhilton Germany’s population density even in rural areas isn’t that low. Surely it would be far more efficient to force cellular operators to fill coverage holes. But satellite sounds fancier, so it’s easier to get investors that way. (See also, especially egregiously, The Boring Company and Hyperloop, vs. a goddamn metro. The latter isn’t sexy but makes much more sense.) 4 comments
 @th0r5t3n and ironically governments also paid for Starlink, but don't even own the profits. @chucker @Gerego @brianstorms @rodhilton @reneestephen @chucker @Gerego @brianstorms @rodhilton "My" government (I'm German) didn't pay for it, they did afaik funnel money into German telcos for no return though... @th0r5t3n Mine either (Canada), but IMO failure to hold telcos responsible for their commitments and then not realizing the problem needed a different solution (nationalized community networks) is a very boomer failure everywhere...due I think to not really believing the internet was a real thing that was gonna truly matter to the future of industry let alone society as a utility. Just... "more interactive TV." |
Gregory's Server
@chucker @Gerego @brianstorms @rodhilton Our Government had decades to force telecommunication providers to provide DSL, optic fibre or decent mobile networks. They simply didn't.
In rural areas of Brandenburg, I'd go for Starlink, in spite of the price, since all other options suck hard.