Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jacob22c t1_j8l0je9 wrote

Love the idea of spacex finally allowing people living in the country access to high-speed internet, but i do hate that it came to this. Where we have to rely on the petty whims of a megalomaniac billionaire for infrastructure improvements when the government should be doing it.

36

GreenPL8 t1_j8l594u wrote

For real. Fiber has been around for how long? And we still aren't connected?

16

SmoothSlavperator t1_j8mny26 wrote

"The Golden Mile" problem. There's a certain "Break even" point with efficiency vs population density involving cost per user to maintain. Pulling numbers out of the air to explain, it comes down to something like the provider having to spend $10k/yr(probably more than that) to run a switches and repeaters and string a line to get Bob, who lives 5 miles away from anyone else, his internet that's only paying in $75 a month. Whereas if you had 100 subscribers all on top of eachother, your marginal cost per subscriber all gets absorbed.

4

GreenPL8 t1_j8mv1s7 wrote

Yes. So why complain about SpaceX when we've failed to deliver for our own residents?

2

SmoothSlavperator t1_j8n4mgf wrote

Because laying hard line into rural areas isn't viable and we don't have the means to launch our own satellites.

3

yerkah t1_j8lmc0o wrote

Because it's tough to make government efficient by nature when it comes to new telecom infrastructure, even if well-funded. It's an example of the many huge technological leaps throughout American history that were typically made by inventors, engineers, etc. on behalf of a given industry, rather than by state projects. (Of course, there are exceptions.) Telecommunications is no different, going all the way back to the first phone and telegraph lines. VT (and reddit's demographic generally) just often lean left, so the idea of private actors being inherently more effective at making these improvements doesn't ideologically sit well with many.

7

SmoothSlavperator t1_j8mo7mx wrote

The world would be a better place if micro and macro economics along with accounting and ops management were core curriculum for all majors.

2

TastySnozzberry t1_j8nv50q wrote

The wheels of the government turn slowly. Private industry is and always will be quicker and more efficient due to lower levels of bureaucracy. The government, given all the lobbying and corruption, would go for the lowest bidder to set up the program which would significantly lower the quality of the product/service. Musk may be a megalomaniac billionaire, but is the government really any better with all the corruption and lobbying? Look at all the insider trading they do to get rich. Given all that I would rather rely on private industry and a megalomaniac billionaire.

2

SemperFuu t1_j8ot1j3 wrote

lol who do you think the gubment pays?

2

Aperron t1_j8ttena wrote

I actually only recently realized that most people actually think that NASA itself built and operated the hardware that put man on the moon or built the space shuttle, satellites etc.

NASA had only ever operated as sort of a loosely hands on project manager. The actual engineering, production and operation has always been essentially handled by the corporate military industrial complex.

IBM, ITT, Western Electric, Remington Rand, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin and all the rest put things into space and landed on the moon. NASA comes up with some napkin bid specs, and coordinates delivery and writes the checks.

2

SemperFuu t1_j8tvhap wrote

Winner winner chicken dinner. Also the military doesn’t build its technology, very few government agencies do. Check out a book called, IBM and the Holocaust, wild af 🤯

1

SmoothSlavperator t1_j8mni2p wrote

Musk maybe kind of a shitbag but you really don't want the government involved with providing the internet than it has to.

0