I don't understand how consumers in North America are so fucked in terms of telecom and internet. How the companies can buttrape you so much over there?
I don't understand how consumers in North America are so fucked in terms of telecom and internet...
Other urls found in this thread:
arstechnica.com
twitter.com
Literally run by jews.
Go and study some history. In particular the era of the telegraph (google books has lots of great, free books to offer, all scanned for you). Then compare the superior european system with it's service public to the clusterfuck that burgers came up with.
>(((free books)))
because while Europe has limited land and resources and must cleverly planify evey bit of hole they dig americans could make just new infrastructure for every new ccomunication technology that gets released, if It wasnt for their unregulated ancap meme they have for economy It would be that way at least
Because they have the government backing them up. My only options for internet are AT&T and Xfinity
and the insane amount of money they steal from taxpayers
talk about buttrape
Because they allow corporations to buy elections and thus control politicians.
I swear. Jow Forums is filled with a bunch of commies
In order to make the investment to bring internet to a bunch of redneck parts of the country, you need tons of infrastructure. Not even just cable lines, but servers to route traffic. And typically those backward towns don't have the people to make that infrastructure. So you gotta pay for travel expenses as well as man power
>gigabit speeds for < $100 with fios
>europoors are lucky enough to have money after getting fucked in the asshole by their government
Cable companies does this also. Where I was born comcast was the only option.
We don’t have health care either. It’s literally a corporatoracy and dystopian third world shithole.
This is the REAL reason Americans have shit internet:
Instead of demanding they get better internet, they actually defend the shit they have just to "stick it to yurop".
>thank you government, for raping me in my ass I will forever fight against anyone who criticizes you.
Why not just use 4g/5g? It's much cheaper than cables. Even we have our whole country covered even with much less people an low population density.
And the left map is only 1 company.
>muuh geography
you dumbfucks thought this was a good excuse to fuck people over already 100 years earlier. It never was, and never will be.
Remember, have literally zero competitors in an area is basically endorsed.
You still need to cover the entire land mass of the united states with towers. You just saved the expense of laying down cable to individual homes but you still have the expense of manpower, laying down cable from tower to tower, and of course, servers
May I remind you, our country is 2-3 times the size of Europe, with less population
Your """countries""" are the size of one of our states
It's also bad argument because it is a huge market with 330million people where companies could make huge investments.
For example USA has 2x bigger population density than Finland so it should be easy to make these investments.
Because it's not really just rural areas that have shit internet.
It's cities and suburbs too.
Americans use the same argument why they can't have passenger trains.
Can't have a train between New York and Washington or between LA and San Francisco because "America sooooooooo big it will cost quadrillions".
The U.S has faster internet than the majority of Europe, and pays a lower price when adjusting for income. Europe is the place that gets fucked over.
Yeah but your companies should be able to do it because they have more customers and even more reasons to do so. In Finland population density is 17/km^2 and in USA it's 35/km^2. So In USA you would have much more customers even in the most rural areas.
Yeah this big country argument is pretty bad because they also have the population mass to cover it.
hey, we have AmCrap from NYC to DC
so there
>our country is 2-3 times the size of Europe
No it isn't.
And yes, rural Russia has better internet than "silicon valley" San Francisco.
No you see the reason why your perfectly logical reasoning doesn't work is because american exceptionalism. For whatever reasons burgers get confused, angry and violent when it is pointed out their country isn't magically different to any other particular developed country on earth.
>the united states has uniform population density
That's why I said cities don't have the issue. It"s rural areas
This is only one company btw
Well look at Finland: Most of the country is unpopulated and there is still internet.
What's that spec of shit under Louisiana?
Russia is bigger than America yet you can have MUCH better internet in middle of nowhere Siberia than you can in any major American city.
Puerto Spico
Yes and you have 65 times more people, so those investments should be even better for you.
fuck off retard.
ive got gigabit internet 15 miles from a "city" in montana.
however its a spotty piece of shit and ping times are horsecock because they oversell the network for MUH SHEKELS
Poorto Rico.
I think they still don't have electricity because no ship can reach it.
*rides on a train from lisbon to vladivostok*
43 out of 56 US' states and territories are above 20 pop/km^2
America's real problem is their backbone.
Which is basically non-existent.
You can run a fast line to the homes, but IX to IX is dogshit.
This, i've got 100mbs internet but the ping times are 3rd world tier 3g.
>NYC gigabit fios
>near all of the major servers
>near zero ping
>get kicked for "spoofing ping"
Such is life
This guy gets it.
Correct!
Coverage is not an issue for places where people actually live. And yes, the big country argument is just fine when we have areas of land, particularly out west, bigger than some of your countries where there's hardly a single person.
I have doubts. Internet in St. Petersburg was crappy.