this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
835 points (95.8% liked)

> Greentext

7551 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml
835
Anon notices the "grass is always greener" trope in movies (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 1 year ago by Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works to c/greentext@lemmy.ml
150 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

rural life can not be sustainable.

Cities need farms to feed the inhabitants of the cites, farms can't exist without farmers (yet) and there's plenty of types of businesses farmers need to visit fairly frequently in order to live. This creates and sustains the small farm communities the dot the rural landscape between large cities

move out of city for cheap house etc - than complain about no wifi, no doctors etc - force government to have fiber internet - yadda yadda

Farmers need services too. Are you just saying everyone unlucky enough to be born outside of a major metropolis must go without medical care or access to modern services?

Also fiber is literally cheaper in the long term. It has effectively infinite bandwidth, requires no maintenance except repairing damage by excavation/natural disasters/wildlife (which any kind of utility line requires) and can run literally hundreds of kilometers without any repeaters or anything else to maintain the signal inbetween.

ISPs were (and still are in many places) utilizing worn out, sometimes over a century old telephone and cable television infrastructure to deliver internet to places that hadn't yet gotten fiber, and it perpetuates a digital divide that prevents kids growing up on farms from accessing services that might help them be the most productive members of society that they can be

people who advocate rural areas are just big egoists and ignorant

I think you're the ignorant one in this case

[–] yournamehere@lemm.ee -5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

assumptions assumptions.

look at the facts.

co2 -> rural homes cause way more emissions

...so does their commute.

they cost, we pay

internet...extremely expensive to get fibre everywhere. ...so is public transport.

the cost, we pay

i do not see how a planet with growing numbers of ppl could allow rural areas really

[–] uis@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

internet...extremely expensive to get fibre everywhere.

Fibre cost per kilometer is much cheaper than copper. Fibre is cheapest way to get internet everywhere.

[–] yournamehere@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

starlink not cheaper?

the point is that it costs money to get infrastructure anywhere. and those ppl that just want to live out their fantasy to build their own ugly home somewhere in the woods just care about themselves.

[–] michaelrose@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Starlink is actually extremely expensive and slow. About $600 for the dish and about $100 for speed slower than my cable plan in 2003 as slow as 25Mbps. Worse even though rural areas are spread out a good chunk of people tend towards smaller clumps close enough to be sharing the same bandwidth. The entire constellation doesn't scale to supporting a reasonable experience to even a fraction of rural America let alone planet earth.

You still basically need to run fiber into every town however small.

[–] yournamehere@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

thanks. i hoped it was faster really.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

assumptions assumptions. look at the facts.

I literally provided facts and linked on the ones that are not common knowledge

i do not see how a planet with growing numbers of ppl could allow rural areas really

WHERE WILL THE FOOD BE GROWN THEN?! WHERE WILL THE RESOURCES TO BUILD AND MAINTAIN THE CITIES COME FROM?!