R
Rod Speed
Guest
"Damian" <damianandrews@y7mail.com> wrote in message
news:kt2q11$8hr$1@dont-email.me...
there isn't decent broadband already available to anyone who wants it.
Thats not going to cost anything like $50B.
news:kt2q11$8hr$1@dont-email.me...
Wrong. I keep saying we should only be providing broadband where"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5jqkjFnb89U1@mid.individual.net...
"Damian" <damianandrews@y7mail.com> wrote in message
news:kt27i1$r6$1@dont-email.me...
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5hkjsF9c5kU1@mid.individual.net...
"Damian" <damianandrews@y7mail.com> wrote in message
news:ksvvi1$apj$1@dont-email.me...
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5gg02F2aasU1@mid.individual.net...
"Damian" <damianandrews@y7mail.com> wrote in message
news:ksu9cp$etv$1@dont-email.me...
"Bob Milutinovic" <cognicom@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ksqk3t$s7n$1@dont-email.me...
"Damian" <damian_andrews75@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:ksol43$vj1$1@dont-email.me...
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b59h1mFh9ksU1@mid.individual.net...
Damian <damian_andrews75@yahoo.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Don McKenzie <5V@2.5A> wrote
http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/
Watch the 20 minute video on that page.
Trouble with that line is that Turdbull has decided to go for
FTTN instead.
For obvious reasons.
Yeah, someone eventually got it thru his thick skull that
wireless
was never gunna be able to do anything like what FTTP can do.
Are you telling me Turnball previously believed in wireless'ing
the whole country without fibre??!!
I find it hard to believe!!!
Turnball's not in the business of dragging projects forever on
top of budget blow outs.
But his approach will cost even more than FTTP will.
Not correct in terms of what he promises in terms of speed and
rollout completion.
It may or may not cost more to switch the remainder of the
PSTN/POTS that he leaves as it is from the local node onwards,
into full fibre network, eventually.
But, that's still debatable.
I'd have to agree with Rod in this instance (yes, strange things do
happen!).
But, you are not. Rod's against both governments and opposition's
version of NBN.
Where he stands is unclear.
Only to those as stupid as you.
I have said repeatedly now that we should be providing
a decent broadband service for those who can't currently
have one if they want one, and that how that is best done
varys with where they are.
That's pretty vague, isn't it?!!
Nope.
Seriously lacks any technical details.
Nope, those are there right now.
How can the outback towns get at least 20Mbps?!!
They dont need at least 20Mbps.
ADSL2+ will do them fine and most of them have that right now.
The problem isnt the towns, its those well out of the towns.
Is is possible the current satellite interenet technology to provide a
minimum satisfactory speed?!
Yes.
What about the towns(either regional outback ones or not so regional)
that need 50Mbps speed(at least)?!
None of them need anything like that.
You need to give some tech details,
Nope.
otherwise they are just sweet words that may turn bitter.
Nope.
According to him, we already have decent broadband all around the
country.
I have never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything
like that.
Yes, you said something remotely resemble that.
Nope.
I quote you here,
"I just dont see any reason to be spending anything like $50B NOW
when most of us have
a very viable broadband service if we want it."
Even someone as stupid as you should be able to
grasp that MOST OF US is nothing even remotely
resembling anything like ALL OF US.
"It makes a lot more sense to be delivering a decent broadband service
to those who can't currently have one
Even someone as stupid as you should be able to
grasp that THOSE WHO CAN'T CURRENTLY HAVE
ONE is nothing even remotely resembling anything
like ALL AROUND THE COUNTRY.
using whatever makes the most sense with those who can't currently
have a decent broadband service."
And you provide us very little detail how you gonna do that!
Because anyone with even half a clue who has been following
the debate about the NBN knows that that is by using whatever
of ADSL2+. wireless the way the NBN is doing it right now, and
satellite and FTTP are the way to do that.
If that's the case why are you saying FTTP NBN is a waste?!!!
Because it costs a lot more than $50B.
So, you obviously have a plan to do FTTP NBN for less than $50B, right?
there isn't decent broadband already available to anyone who wants it.
Thats not going to cost anything like $50B.
I'm dying here to hear more details of your broadband plan for the
nation.
Then just die quietly.
'Whatever' isn't good enough.
You get no say what so ever on what is or is not good enough.
Pollies like to hear details regardless of whether they can understand
it or not.
No one with even half a clue actually gives a flying red fuck
what those stupid clowns might or might not like to hear.
Compare the coalition's rejigged-one-more-time-'cause-we've-got-NFI
policy to that of roadworks. Let's take the example of majority of
the M5 from Liverpool to Lakemba.
They had the ability to implement three lanes in each direction
when it was being built, for nominally 15% more than the cost of
building two lanes in each direction - but they chose not to. Now
the widening of the road to three lanes each way is costing them
150% of the original building cost.
Let's pluck an exemplaery figure out of my arse - if the original
cost of building the M5 from Liverpool to Lakemba was $1B, it
would've cost them $1.15B to make it a six-lane road - but it's now
costing them a total (including original woks) of $2.5B.
As financially painful as it might be in the short term, a complete
investment in infrastructure will yield massive rewards going into
the future without constantly "sticky-taping" costly improvements
as the need arises for each.
That doesn't mean to say I fully agree with the way in which it was
implemented; engaging contractors with NFI to do the job just
because they said they can was an utterly idiotic decision to make,
not at all different to the way in which the "free roof insulation"
scheme was implemented.
Ultimately, we _do_ need this type of infrastructure if we're to
even survive through the remainder of the century - we no longer
have a viable manufacturing industry, most of our intellectual
resources are being shipped out, and anybody who thinks we're
getting a fair price for the ore that's being dug out of our land
is an idiot.
Without providing technological infrastrucutre, it won't be long
before we end up being another Greece. Why do you think India's
booming? It's not because of their natural resources and definitely
not because of their capable citizens - it's because their
government was astute enough to realise that providing appropriate
tools would allow even incompetents to flourish in the new world
economy.
