Facebook, Google Battle To Bring Internet To Remote Locations
jfruh (300774) writes "Facebook and Google only make money from people when they can access the Internet, so it stands to reason that they're working to make sure everyone has access. While Google's Project Loon seeks to use balloon-borne equipment, Mark Zuckerberg envisions a system of drones and laser beams."
No really, they are stupid ideas.
I'd be a months pay that no one at Google has any intention of using this anywhere in the real world and that this is more just something to get news hits than anything anyone actually would be stupid enough to try.
Drones and blimps are clearly much more cost effective and reliable than say ... a simple steel tower.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
What I envision is a sci-fi battle where Google laser beams are attempting to shoot down Facebook drones.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Sounds a lot like Google TiSP (albeit, a few days early).
They're just trolling. People living in these areas would not have the money to pay for such an access model. You can't finance something like this with banner- ads.
I think universal access to information is great, socially it is empowering and amazing... but FB and Google are not charities. As tfs says "Facebook and Google only make money from people when they can access the Internet"
The internet is only available to the the richest 30% of the world.
Advertisers currently access to the eyeballs of the top 30%
Accessing the eyeballs of the very poor or extremely remote populations does not make sense from an advertising standpoint.
Maybe first Facebook and Google can convince AT&T to actually install the equipment needed for me to get DSL, or convince the cable company to run the 0.4 miles of line down into my subdivision so that I can get real high speed Internet at my house.
Because what are laser beams without them?
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Mark Zuckerberg envisions a system of drones and laser beams.
I think the USAF envisions the same thing.
But it does make sense from an arms race standpoint: facebook and google probably have the same eyeballs right now. If facebook were to have more eyeballs than google, facebook's revenue would go up and googles down.
It also makes sense for advertising for advertising. People are talking about it and not in a "Can you BELIEVE what facebook changed now? Fuck facebook! I'm going to quit it for the rest of the day!"
I live in Northern Mozambique in Africa. Our NGO pays $1000 (USD) per month for a 1Mb/s symmetrical dedicated line. It's delivered via fiber, even out here. The incumbent state-owned provider is over $2000/month for a 1Mb/s copper line. The only other option is VSAT but that's 10:1 contention or higher unless you want to pay $8k/month or more. VSAT with contention is unusable during the day.
We don't need balloons, we just need fiber terminations with reasonable fees. If we could get 10Mb/s for $500 that would transform the country.
They both have a common goal, to get a network to the masses. Just make nice, join forces, and get the job done. Enough with the story headlines and get on with it.
How about our connecting our rural areas? We got those areas electricity back under FDR, we can get them broadband now.
SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
Is facebook bringing the internet, or just facebook to remote locations?
Provided you can afford the land on which to install a steel tower. It might be logistically easier to gain rights to airspace for a tethered balloon than to land space.
These two stories were reported over a year ago.
I'd pay to see that.
The world is a stage, but the play is badly cast.