[runarberg]

I don’t understand, why is it not feasible to bring faster internet connectivity to suburban America with traditional infrastructure? Why do we need an entrepreneur to launch a constellation of satellites into low earth orbit—ruining the night sky for astronomers globally?

Countries like Finland and Iceland can bring decent speed internet to rural populations where it rains as much (or even more) then in the pacific north west. So I don’t know what makes America so exceptional that they can’t bring good internet to their population.

[inetknght]

> why is it not feasible to bring faster internet connectivity to suburban America with traditional infrastructure?

Politics and corruption. Existing entrenched ISPs are massively profitable. Competition kills profits.

[runarberg]

It sounds like a change in policy would be more sane then entrusting private entrepreneur in fixing this very solvable problem.

[inetknght]

Oh yeah. That's definitely all it is. Why didn't we figure that out?

What policy do you want to change?

[runarberg]

Since the problem is lack of internet infrastructure, as the market has failed in providing decent internet to a significant portion of the population, I suggest that the government subsides (or even funds) the infrastructure projects required for bringing the portion of the population a decent internet connection that the marked has failed.

That seems like a pretty obvious policy change that a mere layperson can come up with in their couch. I’m sure a civil engineer can do better though.

[antepodius]

I don't know how much you can say it's a market problem as such, a role is clearly played by regulatory capture combined with/leading to/reinforcing monopolies. Local american governments granting big ISPs de jure or de facto sole rights to law down cable in a town means it's very hard to break in to the market as a hypothetical newer, smaller ISP.

I don't know that monopolies and rent-seeking wouldn't show up anyway with laxer regulation, but it's something to be taken into account.

[runarberg]

Like I indicated, I’m not a civil engineer and am in no position to be coming up with a policy my self. I can say though—and I might be wrong—that America has some policy that might be hindering traditional infrastructure being build to provide decent internet connectivity to some parts of the population. I’m sure there are civil engineers though that can provide examples of better policy that may help solve this issue.

[nickik]

Claiming that the market has failed in a industry that has been utterly dominated by government and that was never actually a real market is pretty rich. This started out as basically a state monopoly that was then partially privatized but local monopoly laws were held in place.

Just throwing more money at utterly gridlocked system is not the solution.

[throwawayhhakdl]

So all you need to do is change the policy determining billions of dollars of infrastructure and profits with powerful entrenched interests? Where do I sign up?

[nickik]

This system is not primary for suburban America, but for places that are further out. But if suburban America is so shit, then why not solve this problem as well.

Nothing stops the US except incompetence.