content: Then again there are have been multiple PUDS build their own service only to have cable lobbyists cause the state level to back out.  I would agree that for rural areas mobile is the most cost conceivable option. However I could also see mobile companies gerrymander their networks. Right "currently data is retardedly expensive," more expensive cost will lower demand, coupled with a lower population density in rural areas; companies won't make the money to pay for the infrastructure.  In the mean time the mobile companies setup in the cities, provide the majority of the population with in a county a product and be stamped as OK. From a business standpoint, it makes perfect sense. From a citizen viewpoint, where location matters,  given areas will continue to have issues. Thus, nothing is solved, in my opinion. And granted, no answers, but I'd like to see a mechanism of reducing infrastructure costs, between customers and business-pool of providers. Doesn't matter if Ars is liberal circle jerk voat is conservative circle jerk. News is news, filter the relevant and irrelevant data.