[CaptainOfCoit]

> Europe's size may not lead you to comprehending the US' size.

Why not?

Europe seems to be about 10 million km2 in land size, and the USA 9 million km2. Are you trying to say that because Europe has bigger land size, it's hard for Europeans to imagine individual states' sizes?

[godelski]

Size can mean multiple things.

Here's some quick facts comparing population and area

  - There are 17 European countries >100km2 but 37 US states are
  - 13 states (only one of those is <100km2) has a population density <= Norway. 
  - The most population dense state is Jersey, at 488 people/km2. 5 European countries are more dense than that.
  - 10 US states have >100 people/km2 but 25 European countries do (I'm rounding Albania up)
  - California, the most populous state, is smaller than Sweeden, but larger than Germany in area. It has half the population of Germany. 90% of CA's population lives in 5% of the area (near SF and LA)
  - Driving North-South through California takes a bit over 13hrs but if you add 30 minutes you'll only hit one of those areas. 
  - Driving East-West across Texas takes 12 hrs and you'll only go through 2 major cities. You are likely to see more tornadoes than cities and definitely more cows than people (I know from experience)

Most of the US population is in the East and West coasts. With far more in the east. Most of the US is just empty, but also the land is not nearly as nice as in Europe.

I don't think it is hard for Europeans to imagine individual state sizes, but likely won't imagine how empty it is. Hell, even Americans aren't good at that

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_and_population_of_Europea...

[shakna]

By everyone thinking you can get 100% coverage across the Great Basin Desert? Yes. Yes I do think that the population density of Europe leads them to think everything is closer and easier than it is.

That one desert, of many, is about 190,000 miles in size. That's half the size of the whole of France.

Are you really saying covering that, with 100% coverage, with no dead spots at all, is a reasonable task to undertake?

[defrost]

That's a population distribution issue, not an area size issue (you yourself raised the size of Texas as a "problem").

FWiW the state I grew up in is 3x the area of Texas with cattle stations larger than those tiny Texas ranches.

~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ur5EQ1NZN6A

If you want to challenge the myth of coverage in Europe forget about size comparisons and look to some of the hard walking trails in remote areas; Via Dinarica Kosovo is known for it's beauty and harsh terrain, not for it's cell reception.

Elsewhere in the Balkans, Romania, et al you'll find blind spots.

[shakna]

The signal in the Kimberley's is shithouse, mate. Last time I was there, I went three days with zero signal, because I was in some more remote communities. That's not really an argument against what I was suggesting, is it?

[defrost]

> That's not really an argument against what I was suggesting, is it?

No, that's pretty much just a tangential straw interpretation of your own design as the signal quality in Kimberley, or lack thereof, has got three tenths of f'all to do with the issue being population distribution rather than size.

Both Europe and the US have low population regions with poor signal.

Upthread I suspect the anecdata about good quality signal in Europe came from somebody who had more exposure to the well trod higher population density parts of Europe and hadn't encounter less covered corners.

[shakna]

> I'm running LTE-only with zero problems for 2 years now without a single coverage gap. Even in the rural parts.

The anecdote, was suggesting that our vast and empty lands are trivial to cover. But as you know, that has nothing to do with reality. I'm so sorry I tried to convey it with a tinch of kindness to them. Next time I'll tell them to pull their fucking head in.

[CaptainOfCoit]

> Are you really saying covering that, with 100% coverage, with no dead spots at all, is a reasonable task to undertake?

Well, do people live in this desert? If not, then I wouldn't say that's reasonable.

But then I don't feel like your replies here are reasonable either and pretty disingenuous overall, so maybe lets just leave it at that, and you can continue believe your country is much bigger than it is.

[godelski]

  > Well, do people live in this desert? If not, then I wouldn't say that's reasonable.

It stretches from Reno Nevada to Salt Lake City Utah. It also includes Las Vegas, Ogden Utah, and Provo Utah. But there are plenty of small cities in between. If you drove on the I-80 from Reno to SLC you'd pass through Fernley (23k people), Lovelock (2k), Imlay (200), Winnemucca (8.5k), Carlin (2.4k), Elko (21k), Wells (1.3k), Oasis (34), West Wendover (4.5k), and a few dozen more cities comparable to Imlay or Oasis as well as just as many ghost towns. That drive would take over 7hrs and is over 800km long.

This is not an uncommon setting in the US either. I'm sure there's a few unique paths like this in Europe, but honestly, are there that many? I once drove the majority of the US (I started in The South, so think 24 -> 70 -> 29 -> 80 -> 29 -> 90) and despite driving across almost all of America the biggest city I drove through was St Louis, which doesn't even have 300k people. I think if you counted all the people that were <5km distance from me over the subsequent several days and several thousand kilometers I doubt the number would add up to my stop in St Louis and would only have happened because I went through Sioux Falls (~200k at the time).

[ben_w]

I think the comparison here would probably be the Greek archipelago. Or indeed Greece, or even more broadly the Balkans, given how the settlements are mostly in valleys and there's a lot of mountains, but I wrote the next paragraph before thinking of that:

You can go into the absolute wilderness of the states/the waters of the Mediterranean with suitable gear, and there's some dotted isolated communities within the uninhabited territory/EEZ of the greater region.

I don't know if either has good cell coverage. I presume not, given I managed to lose cell coverage even just crossing the English Channel by ferry a few years back.

[shakna]

Yes, people do.

But no, I don't live in America. I live in the much, much, much less dense country of Australia. Where tourists frequently die, because they believe that they'll have cell signal everywhere.