• 0 Posts
  • 21 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 16th, 2024

help-circle
  • Only to be CEO of a massive capitalist company.

    I’ve heard a few tales of some CEO’s (of very small companies) here in the Nordics actually being generous to their employees. Like it’s most definitely a rarity, but I believe it is possible.

    Like a CEO who values profits but values employees and paying their fair share more and isn’t blinded by greed and addicted to money. A socialist, literally. A market socialist, but a socialist nonetheless.

    Everyone could have their basic needs met, and we could still have rich people. Just not filthy rich, not “rich-to-the-point-no-one-else-has-anything” rich.


  • Afaik, high internet speed requires higher frequencies and high frequencies reach less far + have less penetration through/around obstacles. That’s what makes providing “4g” virtually everywhere easy (good enough for phone calls at least), but if they want to provide actual high speeds everywhere, then it suddenly becomes not so easy (nor cheap).

    Why are you putting “4g” in quotes? It is 4g. Basic cellular networks cover the entire country, and using 4g speeds has been common for a long time. Hell, back when I was in the army, I had a laptop with a mobile connection. It was 3g back then, but it worked, even from the deepest of woods we were in.

    The terrain of Finland probably makes this easier for us, as this is a rather flat country. We have literally no mountains. A few fells (=large hill, essentially) , but no mountains.


  • I wish I had a good answer, but I don’t, really.

    Probably a combination of just providing a service and having good technology to do so and companies which want to sell said technology, I guess?

    Everyone enjoys the internet. I might be assuming, but the sort of “if you want services, move to a city” sort of rhetoric that might exist somewhere in the US doesn’t really exist for us Finns. We understand wanting to live in the middle of the woods while still having access to basic services.

    The Northern part is very sparsely populated, yeah (well not compared to some other places in the middle of huge states in the US but) something like two people per square kilometer, but rural living is pretty common throughout the country, so the whole country understands the need for them, perhaps?

    Also, I think a lot of the towers are older towers for just 2g, going back from GSM to NMT, those towers always just being updated with newer technology, again perhaps? (I’m too lazy to research this now.) And the need to have just cellular networks to be able to call emergency services if you’re lost deep in the woods has always been a pretty high priority, I think?

    The only places you maybe can’t get cell reception in Finland are some places in the middle of a few national parks in Lapland.






  • I remind you that it’s the remaining 3% of the country, physically. It’s not 3% of the population. It’s just some places in Lapland which don’t have the greatest coverage. And the 97% figure is 4g, 3g has better coverage.

    The Northern part of Finland is very sparsely populated and people like internet and cables are very labour-intensive compared to setting up mobile network towers.

    But yeah, compared to the US, we’re not really that sizable. We’re like the size of Montana or so, and they’ve around a fifth of our population.

    tldr Yeah, it is about the size, but also, with Nokia and so on, we’ve sort of quite a lot of good know-how on building wireless networks. We’re the most sparsely populated country in the EU, but I think there’s quite a lot of Spain where there’s much worse coverage.