Hacker News Reader

That's because it's not. The cost isn't $240 by necessity. They're knowingly overpaying for Internet access (they have multiple connections, they're not even using Starlink for example).

I'm paying $34 / month in a small city in the middle of nowhere for 200mbps in the US.

View on HN

$140/month to get the most upload bandwidth possible at my house (35 Mbps through Spectrum).

Then $99/month for Starlink (for now, at least).

Meanwhile a few blocks away a friend has 500 Mbps symmetric access for $50/month.

Time to build a wireless link to your friend :)

Seriously though this is achievable with consumer hardware[0], as long as you have line-of-sight or close enough to it.

[0]: https://www.amazon.com/TP-Link-300Mbps-dual-polarized-direct...

And check out Ubiquiti and Mikrotik for more hardware that does this sort of thing.

Yeah most of my experience is from Ubiquiti and Mikrotik about 10 years ago. I was going to recommend Ubiquiti but it looks like the bar (and price) is even lower now.

@geerlingguy that would be a great video idea if possible

How is 5G or LTE service in your area?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com