And upgrading is piss cheap. Just change transceivers.

Same fiber cable that does 1gbps can do 100tbps.

Alternative Headline: Billionaire Signals States Should Speed Fiber Rollout

Except that US ISPs have already been provided upwards of $80b to roll out a fiber optic backbone for rural connections, and have instead largely pocketed the funds and sat on their hands.

It has largely fallen to smaller communities to incorporate their own local ISPs and manage their own roll-outs, as such projects aren’t viewed as worthwhile for private companies.

Honestly, if Australia could roll out a national fiber backbone (almost a decade ago!) across the same approximate landmass as the contiguous 48 states at less than 10% of the overall population; there is no valid reason that the wealthiest nation to have ever existed can’t also do so.

Even if a Federal program (not under this administration, obviously) was to just run fibre parallel to the existing interstate highways, and leave the last (20) miles to local utilities - it would be cheaper, faster and more reliable than LEO - and without all the additional negatives that come with that!

I’m sure we could afford it from muskrat’s government contracts ( our tax money )

That's a dumb ass idea, and I'm literally on Starlink right now

We can definitely afford it, especially with LUDs plus federal subsidies. That's literally what they're for.

Honestly, I think starlink is a fantastic idea in general, but this is clearly bullshit. Starlink works well in tandem with fiber, not as a replacement.

It's just never going to be as cost effective as installed fiber. Fiber is obviously the right technology to use in heavily populated areas i.e. for the vast majority of Internet users. And where the population is sparse and laying fiber for individual customers is cost prohibitive, that is where satellite connectivity shines. If SpaceX or anyone else is pretending otherwise, they're being blatantly deceitful and malicious. That's not in Internet users' best interest.

Online and not LAN? I have doubts.

I would burn the money before giving it to the nazi

Fiber should be deployed to rural addresses like yours

I don't disagree, it should be deployed to rural areas. It's never going to happen though, it's just not profitable.

Sure, electrical infrastructure was deployed to the whole country, but it doesn't need to be replaced and upgraded as frequently as Internet infrastructure does. Even if some rural areas do get fiber at some point, don't expect the infrastructure to be upgraded regularly enough to stay comparable to denser areas.

You're never going to find a company willing to do that job. We could do it at the national level, but I have my doubts that the country is headed in that direction.

Uh, how often are you using the Internet to connect to a computer in your home town? Maybe 5% of the time?

I've never used Starlink, but with a basic understanding of geography and optics, I'm going to bet that in most scenarios the latency difference between Starlink and fiber is negligible, sometimes even being faster on Starlink, depending on the situation.

That said, I'm not suggesting Starlink is a realistic replacement for fiber, just that latency isn't the big issue. (It has other serious issues)

What's wrong with 4g? I live in a rural region and have been using it for years

Much more frequently than you think with CDN endpoints.

Don't worry, the way things are going the star link satellites are going to shoot themselves. Unfortunately together with everything else in the low orbit.

Unreliable, high latency, slow bandwidth and data caps?

The side effects include filling orbit with space junk, crashing satellites to Earth, and blinding our ability to see meteors with a collision course for Earth. The side effects may not be predictable, but they're definitely measurable.

That's not true... There are different types of fiber with different throughputs depending on the class of the cable and the length of the installation.

Hmmm ditch lightning fast and stable fiber for the mediocre speed and unstable micro satellite internet connection controlled by a petty asshole...

What to do, what to do?

Ok, so actual question, How useful are CDN endpoints these days with https everywhere? Because you can't cache encrypted content. Also you can't cache live content like video calls or online games. I'd imagine the percentage of cacheable content is actually fairly low these days. But like I said, I don't actually know the answer to this, i'd be curious to hear your take.

For me? 40/5 was about the best I could get. Mountains between me and the towers.