Re: @Wellyboot
>The only way such a rich country law as "Universal Service Obligation" can exist is if money can be pissed away with little notice.
Yep, don't see an issue here - wrt "pissing away money": HS2, Track&Trace, Ferries, Brexit "preparation", or are you implying with a USO the monies don't go into the pockets of Conservative party sponsors...
>Why are the parents compromising their kids education? Or are their values and perception of education different to yours?
Probably have different values, I took the choice and 'compromised' my kids education by moving out of town - took them away from all the endemic inner-city school problems that curtail aspirations and limit achievement: drugs, gangs...
>Why? Covering almost everyone is enough but there will always be some awkward sod in the middle of nowhere.
I fully get this point, however, it is the government/Ofcom who are pushing the 100% geo coverage. However, there is a balance between catering for the individual and catering for people - hence why mobile coverage is of some use, as then the service can be used by both (fixed address) residents and mobile/field workers. (Yes, I've designed and delivered Internet access at some remote reservoirs just so that the engineers can call home and update SAP in real-time...).
>The internet is not an absolute necessity
Yet... in a wealth country such as the UK, it is becoming harder to stuff without "the Internet" and by "the Internet" I include the infrastructure necessary for cashless payments etc.
>So you insist they must have better because reasons. At no point have you suggested it is worth it. And this is why it is so difficult to do because it is not an investment but a cost.
Looking at it from a commercial perspective, I suspect many inner-city areas aren't worth providing coverage too either...
Biting the hand that feeds IT
