what does this have to do with starlink vs FTTH?
I don't know or care the sex of the other people in this discussion, I could
make guesses based on the listed names for some, but by no means all, but why
would I?
This discussion is open to anyone.
David Lang
On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
I surveyed some female telehealth providers. There are a lot of subtleties
required to make telehealth work well for the providers. Their knowledge
level is quite fascinating.
I don't see their voices here on these boards either. In education, the
absence of something being taught is called the null curriculum. This group
has a huge null curriculum w/respect to female voices - though that's my
perspective.
https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/reimagining-the-null-curriculum
Bob
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-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 telehealth
access and affordability will disproportionately affect women, even as a
growing share of startups emerge to address women’s unique health needs.
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 – no
matter how ill. Because Hill Country women were too poor to afford
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, “tears so bad that it is difficult to
see how they stand on their feet.” But they were standing on their feet,
and doing all the chores that Hill Country wives had always done –
hauling 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
<nnag...@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 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 interim 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' 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'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 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 less
than an hours drive from the state capitol.
David Lang
_______________________________________________
Nnagain mailing list
nnag...@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
