USA has always been corrupt. What's chocking is the brazenness of this administration. Former administrations at least had the decency to do it in the shadows.
this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
678 points (99.6% liked)
politics
22053 readers
3607 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Wouldn't 4G make more sense for most rural locations, its not like its a single house with nothing for 1000 miles in all directions
It's so rural in my area that you will not get cell signals out here. 4g isn't an option. The best we can get is either satellite or 1mb dsl.
I'm in a rural town (less than 2k population), and we still have fucking DSL offerings available. It's wild. 4G expanded out here right before covid, but it's still really spotty and there's too many users for the tower's broadband, so it's actually kinda slow.
To the users yes, or coax(DOCSIS), how they get to the Internet doesn't really matter, the challenge for rural communities is how they connect to the urban networks(backhaul).
A lot of rural towns are actually serviced by wireless point to point radios. They have some impressive throughput capabilities but nowhere near what fiber can provide. Also, they are affected by environmental factors like weather or wildlife (https://youtu.be/cZkAP-CQlhA)
ISPs don't really want to spend millions of dollars to run fiber through mountains to service a town of 4 or 5 thousand people, it would be a poor investment, this is where government programs like above can be useful in then allowing that town or region to have better Internet.
They can probably make the argument that starlink is cheaper but it's not a long term solution.
Wow I’m shocked. This is my shocked face.
Satellite internet is simply never going to best the throughput and stability of fiber. Just another corrupt action so this administration can line their pockets.
And it totally won't be monitored or censored ... promise! /s
probably the point of putting it in the white house, so russia can monitor it.
ATTENTION ~~CITIZEN~~ ILLEGAL ALIEN:
Connection to [lemmy.dbzer0.com] has been [BLOCKED] due to [RADICAL ANARCHIST TERRORIST ACTIVITY]. US-SchutzStaffel Agents have been dispatched to your location.
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE. HAIL TESLA!
There is absolutely no reason the US government shouldn't be launching their own public satellite internet.
Look at North Korea. People get killed for smuggling in flash drives with western media into the country. We could be streaming it from uninterruptible satellites. We could be fighting the global information war on a level most other countries could only dream of.
On the domestic end, if we get Internet access to every corner of the country, it opens up remote work to every American. That could bring an incredible economic boost to impoverished rural areas.
We are losing the information war at home. Why would we wish our terrible misinformation on anyone else? They’d turn this into a news max global broadcast system.
Trump shut down Radio Free Asia. And Radio Free Europe, and Voice of America. I don't think he cares about getting the message out there.
And as far as a public Internet? Have you met the US? We can't deliver electricity or water without someone making a profit on each unit of energy or water delivered. It's unamerican. Why would satellite Internet be any different?
I would much rather see Europe doing it.
Yeah amigo, I get that'd be amazing but you think the government would want highly educated populace here and everywhere? and with free access to all kinds of information?
Yeah right...
Sadly, I think it's been established that access to the internet doesn't make people more educated.
view more: next ›