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.

  • crazyCat@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    62·
    10 months ago

    I own property in a very rural place and I don’t want it messing up our night sky view.

    Guess what, we also have great internet in this very rural place already, too, because they ran cable and put cell towers out there. That’s all it takes.

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.mlEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      Sure, but there are many places where this is the only option, and that’s not likely to change any time soon.

      • Candybar121@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        “where this is the only option”

        literally tell me one place on the planet that this is the only option. Ignoring the FACT that you can run cables to anywhere on the entire planet ig.

    • Troy@lemmy.caEnglish
      44·
      10 months ago

      You are the very definition of privileged, compared to most remote users. And your comment is as close to textbook NIMBY as I’ve ever seen. Plus a healthy dose of “fuck em, I got mine”.

      • Ben Hur Horse Race@lemm.eeEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        well when your backyard is the night sky for the entire globe you can call me a NIMBY when it comes to starlink’s glowing sattelite trains

      • crazyCat@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        What 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.