From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt1-x82c.google.com (mail-qt1-x82c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B9DD3B29D; Sat, 16 Dec 2023 16:45:16 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qt1-x82c.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-425922f5b89so16881391cf.0; Sat, 16 Dec 2023 13:45:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1702763115; x=1703367915; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=WexjXBZRRFZ4jCboMs2RM6FXgCpFlm7NoU+WjhZwIwo=; b=hUhJOWgGGkMTKdxVpcDLXT8lvDohK8sJMITqED8qoWGgRaI40yBBl28OUsiE/iey46 vhmhIhvedJeIUvGbDoMYjk0FS4gZUEEHUCVSHbhX/4SvjL12w5iAlt75G+DRa5vABYYc oyOe9ShamZsV9gh6AlK2o9Q2cqkp61/5TjNuRlzsxc0RWO+r9noehPQDmXiFIVr6Ylt8 XBb7id3Z5bYgDlMVtYmVGKJx7qTF5Q8Mt+3UxNNsTyrH7rSmGynSgLrHGNZK/0qpaqZp Zr0kdStXKLpJrj9gLpk1rSxHhmw85wCsPDVTK9LfVVkbRjx1iesayO9cA/gZS1xm5XVm bFcg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1702763115; x=1703367915; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=WexjXBZRRFZ4jCboMs2RM6FXgCpFlm7NoU+WjhZwIwo=; b=UYi7uZKKOAmTanzH6b0cBspXF3fn9Oa4z54IxoJ6FJNlGEiVZfb0IGDv3ODZr3fZjJ uMxVdMNDnQKd/Aqbrg5QVUqgzPtrbxVZEnufMNpsF86btsh/C0vZ/nygrDXM7VrwBuK+ pBGCSFRZVRSyczbTAJeFvKmsHj7nP4Aocmtamm2O5AWmm2hCOjCRMGJgzfBRgwVJqhv1 HziGbebcwj/3aJN9AK92zBxNOrSC+qZLbenapnop4UaDonRfMD/T4Dzbp2JeZi88Pu8v Ybr0U/tEigDi1S3BnLfT69h///8mQ/WWGr2d7rv1SeGpKv3Xhs2dXct/F/AWV6gL1k6D eriQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxMCMxKhDhhMSnLDqRw7K74pzwpyC4rpGvuEL5P44PH+F77ESTa BqVtH2JZO/UNxRK2VYEKqIN3hSqNnF2fZ8OPXkJqb+xD4y4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF9fgKoWF4orqbPr+CPGJb/DzoMGUx5/+f1hvytQYDLvZhdjg8tn/UeQloCZES134RR26ScRrOw94Z/3RhhEos= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7f0c:0:b0:425:9ddf:2bca with SMTP id f12-20020ac87f0c000000b004259ddf2bcamr19606211qtk.111.1702763115424; Sat, 16 Dec 2023 13:45:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <02cc2879-ef99-4388-bc1e-335a4aaff6aa@gmail.com> <18A40E71-F636-41A9-A8A7-0F4F69E3C99F@gmx.de> <650s1558-6310-063q-s5q2-o782rnnoss29@ynat.uz> <471154o6-no08-67or-p1o2-np919ro26osp@ynat.uz> <05ef1cd50d0e0a681b2cd38b1bdeb0a9@rjmcmahon.com> <4p61qp8r-p1p1-r83r-n283-315548o163po@ynat.uz> <3b1dac448b6590029679a7c22516c40c@rjmcmahon.com> In-Reply-To: From: Frantisek Borsik Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2023 22:44:38 +0100 Message-ID: To: Dave Taht via Starlink Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back=21_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_asp?= =?UTF-8?Q?ects_heard_this_time=21?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a1af49060ca76e89" Subject: Re: [NNagain] [Starlink] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink's RDOF Application X-BeenThere: nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2023 21:45:16 -0000 --000000000000a1af49060ca76e89 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When someone is speaking with a C-suit of the 25Gbps ISP that still believes "in over-provisioning. QoS/QoE is for those ISPs which have less bandwidth than they need" (paraphrasing) - that particular someone knows that there is still SO much work in front of us. *trying to bring this thread back on track :-) So this thread started with FCC denial to Starlink. Those 640k locations will not be served in the coming years (1-5 years, for that particular amount of $). Their only hope was to get served by Starlink. If FCC will decide to give those money to someone else, it's total farce. Starlink, in this particular case, was their only hope. Do you really think that you will see WISPs popping up at those locations? Do you see FISPs doing it? Or anyone with DOCSIS? No way. This decision was pure political BS - a revenge against Musk. And those people living at these locations in question are the ones that will loose the most in the crossfire. It's sad. No matter how much mental gymnastics you want to apply here in order to legitimise this post-facto. No internet? Starlink would bring at least some internet connectivity to them - I, those people or anyone without a pure political bias in this case, should not give a flying F that "THiS iS nOt A rEaL 1gbps/500mbps bRoADband" or whatever. They want and need at least some internet connectivity. The only way to deliver it to them in a reasonable timeframe is Starlink. All the best, Frank Frantisek (Frank) Borsik https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714 iMessage, mobile: +420775230885 Skype: casioa5302ca frantisek.borsik@gmail.com On Sat, Dec 16, 2023 at 7:48=E2=80=AFPM Robert McMahon via Nnagain < nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > > And the excuse for not hiring women in the Criminal Division was they hav= e > to deal with all these tough types, and women aren't up to that. And I wa= s > amazed. I said, have you seen the lawyers at legal aid who are representi= ng > these tough types? They're all women. > > People ask me sometimes, when =E2=80=94 when do you think it will it be e= nough? > When will there be enough women on the court? And my answer is when there > are nine. RBG > > Bob > On Dec 16, 2023, at 9:30 AM, rjmcmahon via Nnagain < > nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: >> >> The president who ran Harvey Mudd College had to fix their computer >> science problem of a 90% to 10% male to female ratio. She was asked, >> "What's the goal?" She responded, "It should reflect to population so >> 50/50." The others said, "Be realistic." >> >> She was and she got it to 50/50 where it should be in every technology >> group.Though we have more improvements to be done. >> >> https://hechingerreport.org/an-unnoticed-result-of-the-decline-of-men-in= -college-its-harder-for-women-to-get-in/ >> >> There is now way to fix a problem without getting passed the denial >> phase. This list population, and the LEO worshiping of Musk displayed >> here by its constituents, are very much white male things. Not noticing >> this & staying silent on this shows a lack of integrity by the group. My >> judgment. >> >> Bob >> >>> to be very clear, I am in no way saying that anyone's (let alone >>> saying women's) views are not desired. I think a diversity of views if >>> extremely valuable. >>> >>> I just get my back up when people say things like 'there need to more >>> X in charge' (for any value of X that refers to a characteristic that >>> someone is born with) >>> >>> David Lang >>> >>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, Dave Taht wrote: >>> >>> This is principally a male dominated list, and I in general assume >>>> that the public debate over fiber, bandwidth, etc, etc skews heavily >>>> male also. >>>> >>>> It is a very good set of questions to ask about how the internet >>>> should be structured to best meet the needs of both sexes, and how >>>> that has changed over time, and may change in the future! I hesitate >>>> to even make one overbroad conclusion! Permanent connectivity and >>>> messaging seems more important to women than men, and a phone more >>>> important than fiber. Security (tracking and/or protecting kids), >>>> also. It is something I would rather research than draw premature >>>> conclusions from. >>>> >>>> https://www.google.com/search?q=3Dhow+do+men+and+women+use+the+intern= et+differently >>>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 1:42=E2=80=AFPM David Lang via Starlink >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> why do you think telehealth won't work over LEO services? >>>>> >>>>> I've used it personally. >>>>> >>>>> Even if women use telehealth more than men, that doesn't say that >>>>> women have any >>>>> particular advantage in moving the bits around that make telehealth >>>>> possible. >>>>> >>>>> David Lang >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, rjmcmahon wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Women are the primary users and providers of telehealth services. >>>>>> They are >>>>>> using broadband to care for our population. They also run most of >>>>>> the >>>>>> addiction services across our country, whatever the addiction may >>>>>> be. So >>>>>> gender actually matters. Ask them as providers. Telehealth doesn't >>>>>> work over >>>>>> LEO (nor does it matter much for men on boats.) Same for distance >>>>>> learning. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/women-more-likely-telehealth-pa= tients-providers-covid-19-pandemic/608153/ >>>>>> >>>>>> As Washington considers which virtual care flexibilities should >>>>>> remain in >>>>>> place post-COVID-19, experts are flagging that paring back >>>>>> telehealth access >>>>>> and affordability will disproportionately affect women, even as a >>>>>> growing >>>>>> share of startups emerge to address women=E2=80=99s unique health n= eeds. >>>>>> >>>>>> While women are more likely than men to visit doctors and consume >>>>>> healthcare >>>>>> services in general, telehealth seems to be uniquely attractive to >>>>>> women. >>>>>> >>>>>> Bob >>>>>> >>>>>>> who exactly do you think is calling for there to be no Internet >>>>>>> access? and what in the world does the sex of individuals have to >>>>>>> do >>>>>>> with shipping bits around? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Starlink (and hopefully it's future competitors) provides a way to >>>>>>> get >>>>>>> Internet service to everyone without having to run fiber to every >>>>>>> house. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As for the parallels with rural electrification, if that problem >>>>>>> were >>>>>>> to be faced today, would the right answer be massive public >>>>>>> agencies >>>>>>> to build and run miles of wire from massive central power plants? >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> would the right answer be solar + batteries in individual houses >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> the most rural folks, with small modular reactors to power the >>>>>>> larger >>>>>>> population areas? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just because there was only one way to achieve a goal in the past >>>>>>> doesn't mean that approach is the best thing to do today. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> David Lang >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, rjmcmahon wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We're trying to modernize America. LBJ helped do it for >>>>>>>> electricity >>>>>>>> decades ago. It's our turn to step up to the plate. Tele-health >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> distance learning requires us to do so. There is so much to >>>>>>>> follow. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A reminder what many women went through before LBJ showed up. I'm >>>>>>>> skeptical a patriarchy under Musk is even close to capable. We >>>>>>>> probably >>>>>>>> need a woman to lead us, or at least motivate us to do our best >>>>>>>> work for >>>>>>>> our country and to be an example to the world. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A Hill Country farm wife had to do her chores even if she was ill >>>>>>>> =E2=80=93 no >>>>>>>> matter how ill. Because Hill Country women were too poor to affor= d >>>>>>>> proper >>>>>>>> medical care they often suffered perineal tears in childbirth. >>>>>>>> During the >>>>>>>> 1930s, the federal government sent physicians to examine a >>>>>>>> sampling of >>>>>>>> Hill Country women. The doctors found that, out of 275 women, 158 >>>>>>>> had >>>>>>>> perineal tears. Many of them, the team of gynecologists reported, >>>>>>>> were >>>>>>>> third-degree tears, =E2=80=9Ctears so bad that it is difficult to= see how >>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>> stand on their feet.=E2=80=9D But they were standing on their fee= t, and >>>>>>>> doing all >>>>>>>> the chores that Hill Country wives had always done =E2=80=93 haul= ing the >>>>>>>> water, >>>>>>>> hauling the wood, canning, washing, ironing, helping with the >>>>>>>> shearing, >>>>>>>> the plowing and the picking. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Because there was no electricity. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Bob >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, Sebastian Moeller via Starlink wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Frantisek, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Dec 15, 2023, at 13:46, Frantisek Borsik via Nnagain >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thus, technically speaking, one would like the advantages of >>>>>>>>>>> satcom >>>>>>>>>>> such as starlink, to be at least 5gbit/s in 10 years time, to >>>>>>>>>>> overcome >>>>>>>>>>> the 'tangled fiber' problem. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> No, not really. Starlink was about to address the issue of >>>>>>>>>>> digital >>>>>>>>>>> divide - >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I beg to differ. Starlink is a commercial enterprise with the >>>>>>>>>> goal to >>>>>>>>>> make a profit by offering (usable) internet access essentially >>>>>>>>>> everywhere; it is not as far as I can tell an attempt at >>>>>>>>>> specifically >>>>>>>>>> reducing the digital divide (were often an important factor is >>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>>> necessarily location but financial means). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Every Inernet company " commercial enterprise with the goal to >>>>>>>>> make a >>>>>>>>> profit by offering (usable) internet" don't dismiss a company >>>>>>>>> because >>>>>>>>> of that. Starlink (and the other Satellite ISPs) all exist to >>>>>>>>> service >>>>>>>>> people who can't use traditional wired infrastructure >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> delivering internet to those 640k locations, where there is >>>>>>>>>>> literally >>>>>>>>>>> none today. Fiber will NEVER get there. And it will get there, >>>>>>>>>>> it will >>>>>>>>>>> be like 10 years down the road. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is IHO the wrong approach to take. The goal needs to be = a >>>>>>>>>> universal FTTH access network (with the exception of extreme >>>>>>>>>> locations, >>>>>>>>>> no need to pull fiber up to the highest Bivouac shelter on Mt. >>>>>>>>>> Whitney). >>>>>>>>>> And f that takes a decade or two, so be it, this is >>>>>>>>>> infrastructure that >>>>>>>>>> will keep on helping for many decades once rolled-out. However >>>>>>>>>> given >>>>>>>>>> that time frame one should consider work-arounds for the interi= m >>>>>>>>>> period. >>>>>>>>>> I would have naively thought starlink would qualify for that >>>>>>>>>> from a >>>>>>>>>> technical perspective, but then the FCC documents actually >>>>>>>>>> discussion >>>>>>>>>> requirements and how they were or were not met/promised by >>>>>>>>>> starlink was >>>>>>>>>> mostly redacted. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> what do you consider 'extreme locations'? how long a run between >>>>>>>>> houses is 'too far'? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> we've seen the failure of commercial fiber monopolies in cities >>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>> housing density of several houses per acre (and even where there >>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>> apartment complexes there as well) because it's not profitable >>>>>>>>> enough. >>>>>>>>> When you get into areas where it's 'how many acres per house' th= e >>>>>>>>> cost >>>>>>>>> of running FTTH gets very high. I don't think this is the >>>>>>>>> majority of >>>>>>>>> the population of the US any longer (but I don't know for sure), >>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>> it's very clearly the majority of the area of the US. And once >>>>>>>>> you get >>>>>>>>> out of the major metro areas, even getting fiber to every town o= r >>>>>>>>> village becomes a major undertaking. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Is running fiber 30 miles to support a village of 700 people an >>>>>>>>> 'extreme location'? let me introduce you to Vermontville MI >>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermontville,_Michigan which is >>>>>>>>> less >>>>>>>>> than an hours drive from the state capitol. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> David Lang >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nnagain mailing list >>>>>>>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> Starlink mailing list >>>>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >> >> Nnagain mailing list >> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain >> >> _______________________________________________ > Nnagain mailing list > Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > --000000000000a1af49060ca76e89 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
When someone is speaking with a C-suit of the 25Gbps = ISP that still believes "in over-provisioning. QoS/QoE is for those IS= Ps which have less bandwidth than they need" (paraphrasing) - that par= ticular someone knows that there is still SO much work in front of us.

*trying to bring this thread back on track :-)

So this thread started with FCC denial to Starlink. Those= 640k locations will not be served in the coming years (1-5 years, for that= particular amount of $). Their only hope was to get served by Starlink. If= FCC will decide to give those money to someone else, it's total farce.= Starlink, in this particular case, was their only hope. Do you really thin= k that you will see WISPs popping up at those locations? Do you see FISPs d= oing it? Or anyone with DOCSIS? No way.

This decis= ion was pure political BS - a revenge against Musk. And those people living= at these locations in question are the ones that will loose the most in th= e crossfire. It's sad. No matter how much mental gymnastics you want to= apply here in order to legitimise this post-facto. No internet? Starlink w= ould bring at least some internet connectivity to them - I, those people or= anyone without a pure political bias in this case, should not give a flyin= g F that "THiS iS nOt A rEaL 1gbps/500mbps bRoADband" or whatever= . They want and need at least some internet connectivity. The only way to d= eliver it to them in a reasonable timeframe is Starlink.=C2=A0
All the best,

Frank

Frantisek (Frank) Borsik

=C2=A0

=

https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik

Signal, Telegram, WhatsA= pp: +421919416714=C2=A0

iMessage, mobile: +420775230885

Skype: casioa5302ca=

frantisek.borsik@gmail.com



On Sat, Dec 16, 2023 at 7:48= =E2=80=AFPM Robert McMahon via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

And the excuse for not hiring women in the Criminal Divis= ion was they have to deal with all these tough types, and women aren't = up to that. And I was amazed. I said, have you seen the lawyers at legal ai= d who are representing these tough types? They're all women.

People ask me sometimes, when =E2=80=94 when do you think= it will it be enough? When will there be enough women on the court? And my= answer is when there are nine. RBG

Bob
On Dec 16, 2023, at 9:30 AM, rjmcmahon via Nnaga= in <n= nagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
The president who ran Harvey Mudd College had to fix their computer science problem of a 90% to 10% male to female ratio. She was asked, 
=
"What's the goal?" She responded, "It should reflect to =
population so 
50/50." The others said, "Be realistic."
She was and she got it to 50/50 where it should be in every technolog=
y 
group.Though we have more improvements to be done.

https://hechingerre=
port.org/an-unnoticed-result-of-the-decline-of-men-in-college-its-harder-fo=
r-women-to-get-in/

There is now way to fix a problem without get=
ting passed the denial 
phase. This list population, and the LEO worship=
ing of Musk displayed 
here by its constituents, are very much white mal=
e things. Not noticing 
this & staying silent on this shows a lack o=
f integrity by the group. My 
judgment.

Bob
=
 to be very clear, I am in no way saying that anyone's (let alone
 s=
aying women's) views are not desired. I think a diversity of views if extremely valuable.
 
 I just get my back up when people say thing=
s like 'there need to more
 X in charge' (for any value of X tha=
t refers to a characteristic that
 someone is born with)
 
 David =
Lang
 
 On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, Dave Taht wrote:
 
 This is principally a male dominated list, and I in general assume
 t=
hat the public debate over fiber, bandwidth, etc, etc skews heavily
 mal=
e also.
 
 It is a very good set of questions to ask about how the in=
ternet
 should be structured to best meet the needs of both sexes, and h=
ow
 that has changed over time, and may change in the future! I hesitate=

 to even make one overbroad conclusion! Permanent connectivity and
 =
messaging seems more important to women than men, and a phone more
 impo=
rtant than fiber. Security (tracking and/or protecting kids),
 also. It =
is something I would rather research than draw premature
 conclusions fr=
om.
 
 https://www.google.com/=
search?q=3Dhow+do+men+and+women+use+the+internet+differently
 
 O=
n Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 1:42=E2=80=AFPM David Lang via Starlink
 <starlink@li=
sts.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
 
 why do you thin=
k telehealth won't work over LEO services?
 
 I've used it pe=
rsonally.
 
 Even if women use telehealth more than men, that doesn&#=
39;t say that 
 women have any
 particular advantage in moving the bi=
ts around that make telehealth 
 possible.
 
 David Lang
 
 =
On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
 
 Women are th=
e primary users and providers of telehealth services. 
 They are
 usi=
ng broadband to care for our population. They also run most of 
 the
=
 addiction services across our country, whatever the addiction may 
 be.=
 So
 gender actually matters. Ask them as providers. Telehealth doesn=
9;t 
 work over
 LEO (nor does it matter much for men on boats.) Same=
 for distance 
 learning.
 
 https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/women-more-l=
ikely-telehealth-patients-providers-covid-19-pandemic/608153/
 
 =
As Washington considers which virtual care flexibilities should 
 remain=
 in
 place post-COVID-19, experts are flagging that paring back 
 tel=
ehealth access
 and affordability will disproportionately affect women, =
even as a 
 growing
 share of startups emerge to address women=E2=80=
=99s unique health needs.
 
 While women are more likely than men to =
visit doctors and consume 
 healthcare
 services in general, teleheal=
th seems to be uniquely attractive to 
 women.
 
 Bob
 who exactly do you think is calling for there to be no Internet access? and what in the world does the sex of individuals have to 
 do=

 with shipping bits around?
 
 Starlink (and hopefully it's f=
uture competitors) provides a way to 
 get
 Internet service to every=
one without having to run fiber to every
 house.
 
 As for the par=
allels with rural electrification, if that problem 
 were
 to be face=
d today, would the right answer be massive public 
 agencies
 to buil=
d and run miles of wire from massive central power plants? 
 or
 woul=
d the right answer be solar + batteries in individual houses 
 for
 t=
he most rural folks, with small modular reactors to power the 
 larger population areas?
 
 Just because there was only one way to achiev=
e a goal in the past
 doesn't mean that approach is the best thing t=
o do today.
 
 David Lang
 
 On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, rjmcmahon wro=
te:
 
 Hi All,
 
 We're trying to moderniz=
e America. LBJ helped do it for 
 electricity
 decades ago. It's =
our turn to step up to the plate. Tele-health 
 and
 distance learnin=
g requires us to do so. There is so much to 
 follow.
 
 A reminde=
r what many women went through before LBJ showed up. I'm
 skeptical =
a patriarchy under Musk is even close to capable. We 
 probably
 need=
 a woman to lead us, or at least motivate us to do our best 
 work for our country and to be an example to the world.
 
 A Hill Country f=
arm wife had to do her chores even if she was ill 
 =E2=80=93 no
 mat=
ter how ill. Because Hill Country women were too poor to afford 
 proper=

 medical care they often suffered perineal tears in childbirth. 
 Du=
ring the
 1930s, the federal government sent physicians to examine a  sampling of
 Hill Country women. The doctors found that, out of 275 wo=
men, 158 
 had
 perineal tears. Many of them, the team of gynecologis=
ts reported, 
 were
 third-degree tears, =E2=80=9Ctears so bad that i=
t is difficult to see how 
 they
 stand on their feet.=E2=80=9D But t=
hey were standing on their feet, and 
 doing all
 the chores that Hil=
l Country wives had always done =E2=80=93 hauling the 
 water,
 hauli=
ng the wood, canning, washing, ironing, helping with the 
 shearing,
=
 the plowing and the picking.
 
 Because there was no electricity. 
 Bob
 On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, Sebastian Moeller via =
Starlink wrote:
 
 Hi Frantisek,
 
 
 On Dec 15, 2023, at 13:46, Frantisek Borsik via Nnagain
 <=
;nnagain=
@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
 
 Thus, technically speaking, =
one would like the advantages of 
 satcom
 such as starlink, to be at=
 least 5gbit/s in 10 years time, to 
 overcome
 the 'tangled fibe=
r' problem.
 
 No, not really. Starlink was about to address the =
issue of 
 digital
 divide -
 
   I beg to differ.=
 Starlink is a commercial enterprise with the 
 goal to
 make a profi=
t by offering (usable) internet access essentially
 everywhere; it is no=
t as far as I can tell an attempt at 
 specifically
 reducing the dig=
ital divide (were often an important factor is 
 not
 necessarily loc=
ation but financial means).
 
 Every Inernet company &qu=
ot; commercial enterprise with the goal to 
 make a
 profit by offeri=
ng (usable) internet" don't dismiss a company 
 because
 of =
that. Starlink (and the other Satellite ISPs) all exist to 
 service
=
 people who can't use traditional wired infrastructure
 
 
 delivering internet to those 640k locations=
, where there is 
 literally
 none today. Fiber will NEVER get there.=
 And it will get there, 
 it will
 be like 10 years down the road.
 
   This is IHO the wrong approach to take. The goal need=
s to be a
 universal FTTH access network (with the exception of extreme =

 locations,
 no need to pull fiber up to the highest Bivouac shelter=
 on Mt. 
 Whitney).
 And f that takes a decade or two, so be it, this=
 is 
 infrastructure that
 will keep on helping for many decades once=
 rolled-out. However 
 given
 that time frame one should consider wor=
k-arounds for the interim 
 period.
 I would have naively thought sta=
rlink would qualify for that 
 from a
 technical perspective, but the=
n the FCC documents actually 
 discussion
 requirements and how they =
were or were not met/promised by 
 starlink was
 mostly redacted.
=

 
 what do you consider 'extreme locations'? how lo=
ng a run between
 houses is 'too far'?
 
 we've seen t=
he failure of commercial fiber monopolies in cities 
 with
 housing d=
ensity of several houses per acre (and even where there 
 are
 apartm=
ent complexes there as well) because it's not profitable 
 enough. When you get into areas where it's 'how many acres per house'=
; the 
 cost
 of running FTTH gets very high. I don't think this =
is the 
 majority of
 the population of the US any longer (but I don&=
#39;t know for sure), 
 but
 it's very clearly the majority of th=
e area of the US. And once 
 you get
 out of the major metro areas, e=
ven getting fiber to every town or
 village becomes a major undertaking.=

 
 Is running fiber 30 miles to support a village of 700 people an 'extreme location'? let me introduce you to Vermontville MI
 =
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermontville,_Michigan which is <=
br> less
 than an hours drive from the state capitol.
 
 David Lan=
g

 Nnagain mailing list
 Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
 http=
s://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
 

 Starlink mailing list
 Starlink@lists=
.bufferbloat.net
 https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink=

= Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.buffer= bloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
__________= _____________________________________
Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@= lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
--000000000000a1af49060ca76e89--