The FCC decided it wouldn’t be the “best” use of limited funds.

Starlink loses out on $886 million in rural broadband subsidies::The FCC reaffirmed a decision not to award Starlink a nearly $900 million subsidy for offering 100Mbps/20Mbps low-latency internet service in 35 states.

  • GBU_28@lemm.eeEnglish
    8·
    11 months ago

    This makes zero sense. If that was profitable it would have been done already.

    • echo64@lemmy.worldEnglish
      8·
      11 months ago

      It’s not, neither is starlink. That’s the whole point. You have two things, you can either launch infinite rockets forever or lay some infrastructure that we can benefit from forever.

      Why America chooses not to lay infrastructure is beyond me. More so why Americans justify it so often. This shit is why America doesn’t have trains.

      • Ilovethebomb@lemm.eeEnglish
        5·
        11 months ago

        The fact that you’re talk about laying copper for Internet access shows just how little you know.

        • echo64@lemmy.worldEnglish
          6·
          11 months ago

          I use it because it makes people mad and I think that’s funny, obviously fibre is better. Good for digestion

          Also yes copper is still more cost efficient than infinite rockets with infinite cell towers forever

      • crazyCat@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        3·
        11 months ago

        Preach the truth brother. The single most effective way to spread more internet is more cable and towers.

      • LilB0kChoy@midwest.socialEnglish
        2·
        11 months ago

        Bundle it all together! We have tons of electrical that should be moved underground. Throw internet lines into that pool too and put it all under the ground and run the network cables everywhere the power goes.