I would post this to the WISPA list but they don't seem to like policy discussions there, I guess I could find an address for someone on their policy committee.
But am I the only one that looks at the continual stated need to throw tons of federal money at broadband deployment, and then looks at services like Starlink and T-Mobile Home, and wonders if the govt funding is really needed? And if the issue isn't really coverage or speed, but price? Seems like soon any claim that a school kid can't do online classes because they have no Internet in their area will be bogus, once Starlink launches enough satellites. But maybe every family can't afford $100 per month. That's why I ask if the issue is price not availability or speed. And I saw that Starlink wants to be eligible for the govt broadband gravy train. Same as Hughesnet and Viasat, I wonder what exactly would the public dollars be funding? Launching satellites? Seems like they are doing that anyway. Subsidies on CPE or monthly service? I know I'm something of an outlier because I don't believe the govt should subsidize anything but fiber. Seems like anything paid for with public money should last 20 years and be infinitely upgradeable. And maybe be neutral transport that lets the customer pick from various ISPs, although that is probably pie-in-the-sky. Yes, if they are throwing money around, why shouldn't we get our fair share, but putting selfish interests aside, I don't get it.
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
