Singapore - Infrastructure -1Gbps fibre NBN

[Arm's Length]

On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 13:51:27 +1000
B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

Arm's Length wrote:
On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 06:38:00 +1000
B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

In that context, it's stupid to build *another* fixed line
solution.

The premise of your argument is fundamentally flawed. I, as a
consequence of this glaring flaw, unreservedly dispute your
argument as it stands in its contextual devaluing of progress as an
essential constituent of a thriving national life.

Spare me the garbage. I already have a cable connection. Why would I
want to pay for your silly NBN?

You either just don't get it or you're being argumentative and
insulting merely for the sake of it. The latter is a greater indictment
against you than the former alongside of being suggestive of a distinct
psychological condition inherent in your personality.

There is a vast amount of pseudo-intellectualism in the modern world.
It is a pity, because it detracts from that which could be achieved
with this planetary evolution. Those of whom indulge most frequently in
it, delude themselves that they are being smart and answering
intelligently. Nothing could be further from the truth. Such as these
have contributed to the ongoing deterioration of Usenet.

I have been paying for the cable for 15 years. You must be a Labor
supporter.

Good for you. Having said that, it's all about you, isn't it? Which is,
interestingly but unfortunately, a character trait of so many amongst
the humanity of this period. Others have pointed this out about people
who hold similar and extreme ideas as you.

I wouldn't so quickly boast about your cable connection either, as the
bandwidth and speed associated with the cable of the present are
nothing compared to the bandwidth and speed possible in technologies
the human species is quite ignorant of. While we are at it, what I
do say is nothing compared to what I could reveal. But cannot
possibly reveal much to a world of which is bound to childishness and is
unappreciative of alternative presentations refuting the generally
accepted paradigmatic presentation.

Anyway, in response to your obvious ranting and inability to answer
with a co-measurement of civility as well as to the exactness of the
revealed points of conjecture, I am neither a supporter of Labor nor
any other political party. I am not even a supporter of any particular
independent. Although I am enormously interested in politics, the
politics I envisage is entirely different to the sad state of politics
on this planet and in this era. Democracy, as any other political
ideology, is not understood by the human species in its purity and
essence.

Besides, I haven't voted since I was 18 and I am now 53. I am a
conscientious objector to dictatorially inclined compulsory voting in a
nation of which purports to be democratic and free. Sue me, if you dare.

 

[Rod Speed]

B J Foster wrote

annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results, that
a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had *no* *fixed*
*line* phone service - they had gone completely mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend.

Pigs arse they do when the 'trend' has some very real downsides like deliverable bandwidth.

In spades when something like the NBN is foisted on the absolute vast bulk of consumers by some clown like the Dud.

Early adopters are going fully wireless.

Another pig ignorant lie with BROADBAND.

In that context, it's stupid to build *another* fixed line solution.

Yes, but that is a separate matter entirely to your pig ignorant drivel.

It is pointless and wasteful to build FTTP where ADSL exists.

Why? It fulfils a need for higher speeds than will ever be possible over copper (and probably wireless too).

 

[Rod Speed]

B J Foster wrote

Rod Speed wrote
Rob wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results,
that a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had *no*
*fixed* *line* phone service - they had gone completely mobile.

Yep Ill agree with that - several of my friends (the y and older
generations thats 80yrs old.) are mobile and wireless BB only.

Its still a much smaller minority than those who have a fixed line.

When the Model-T Ford first rolled off a production line, the majority of people were still using public transport.

Pigs arse they were. The absolute vast bulk of them had no access to public transport.

And wireless is nothing like what the Model-T Ford was to transport anyway.

If a Labor government had been in charge they would have built high-speed train lines which would have stood idle only
a few years later.

How odd that the high speed train lines that did get built arent idle even now.

Not only will the silly NBN not meet our needs,

Nothing ever meets all needs, fool.

but it is also the most expensive solution.

Another pig ignorant lie.

Why not do the "last mile" with wireless?

Because it cant deliver anything like the same thruput as with fibre.

$43 billion will stimulate a lot of economic activity in the sector,

Pigs arse it will, because most have access to decent broadband if they want it.

but it will be wasted.

Yes, but so is broadband in any form.

As a voter, I'd prefer if they'd expand coal-handling facilities.

More fool you.

It's a no-brainer.

Easy to claim. Pity you cant actually substantiate that claim.

The simple fact of the matter is that Labor and Conroy have no ideas other than to spend, spend and spend

Thats another lie. They were planning to cut cut cut until the GFC showed up.

- and then 3 years later, they start looking for ways to tax.

Corse the coalition never ever did anything like that at all, eh ?

"Oh, we're running out of money. Oh, what can we tax?".

Another lie.

Bloody morons.

Your sig is supposed to have a line with just -- on it in front of it.

Conclusion: The NBN is a white-elephant

Agree

 

[Rod Speed]

B J Foster wrote

Rod Speed wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results, that
a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had *no* *fixed*
*line* phone service - they had gone completely mobile.

Just because some fool claims something, doesnt make it gospel.

There are certainly some who have gone completely mobile,

Go look up "early adopter" in te dictionary

Dont need to, its obvious what it means.

You aint established that its early adopters that have gone completely mobile.

Mobile was around and almost universally adopted LONG before
many went completely mobile as a result of the massive hike in
line rents that Telstra was allowed to charge, and capped mobile
plans. Nothing whatever to do with early adopters at all.

and then come and discuss it.

I'll tell you to go and fuck yourself, again, instead.

most obviously those with capped mobile plans that are now
very common, who effectively dont pay any marginal cost for
an extra call, and those who share accomodation or move quite
a bit etc, but thats got nothing to do with 'early adopters' since
fuck all dont have a mobile anymore.

Labor is building a white elephant.

Doesnt meant that everyone who uses mobiles for voice use it for net
access, stupid. The NBN aint a white elephant, just a very expensive way to improve
fixed line broadband.
Considering that data transmission rates like now would have been
at the highest levels of science fiction when copper phone lines
were first put into use, they have turned out to be an incredibly resilient system, when you look at the data
speeds via ADSL
that these "ancient" lines can provide even now, on top of their
traditional use as a telephone line.

For that matter electricity, and literally thousands of inventions
we use everyday and rely on are "last century technology"

It is pointless and wasteful to build FTTP where ADSL exists.

Nope, the speeds are much faster than anything ADSL can do.

If broadband was such a point of difference then it would be an
important factor in buying a home. It isn't.

Because almost all houses have decent broadband available now.

Labor are just wasting our grandchildren's taxes

You dont know that and they wouldnt be doing that if they spent
part of what was obtained by flogging off Telstra on the NBN.

and spending our retirement savings on a white elephant.

Another pig ignorant lie.

Conclusion: The NBN is a white-elephant

Agree

 

[Rod Speed]

B J Foster wrote

dechucka wrote
B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Rob wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results,
that a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had *no*
*fixed* *line* phone service - they had gone completely mobile.

Yep Ill agree with that - several of my friends (the y and older
generations thats 80yrs old.) are mobile and wireless BB only.

Its still a much smaller minority than those who have a fixed line.

When the Model-T Ford first rolled off a production line, the majority of people were still using public transport.

If a Labor government had been in charge they would have built
high-speed train lines which would have stood idle only a few years later.

like all those high speed rail links around the world are?

Those are inter-city links.

Irrelevant to your pig ignorant lie.

Fibre is *absolutely* the right technology for inter-city links.

Irrelevant to your pig ignorant lie.

Do try to think next time before you post.

Do try to bullshit your way out of your predicament
better the next time you get done like a dinner, as always.

The NBN will not meet our needs for mobility

It was never intended to REPLACE wireless, fuckwit.

and fibre is the most expensive conceivable solution for the "last mile".

Yes, but it does deliver much better thruput than wireless can ever do for the last mile.

Wireless is just to obvious for egotistical emotional Labor idiots to contemplate.

Only fools like you that dont have a fucking clue about what the technology
is actually capable of would actually be stupid enough to claim that wireless
can ever deliver anything like the same simultaneous thruput that fibre can.

$43 billion spent on a fibre last mile will be wasted.

Yes.

Why are they not expanding coal-handling facilities?

Thats happening too.

It's a no-brainer.

Then its well suited to you, you dont have a brain.

Labor has no ideas other than to spend, spend and spend.

Another pig ignorant lie.

Vote out the stuck-up arrogant fools before we go bankrupt.

There isnt even the remotest possibility of the country going bankrupt, fool.

Conroy last on the Vic senate paper.

Most of us dont even get to vote in Vic, cretin.

 

[Rod Speed]

B J Foster wrote

dechucka wrote
B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote
dechucka wrote
B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Rob wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial
results, that a large percentage of Australians (early
adopters) had *no* *fixed* *line* phone service - they had
gone completely mobile.

Yep Ill agree with that - several of my friends (the y and older generations thats 80yrs old.) are mobile and
wireless BB only.

Its still a much smaller minority than those who have a fixed line.

When the Model-T Ford first rolled off a production line, the majority of people were still using public
transport.

If a Labor government had been in charge they would have built
high-speed train lines which would have stood idle only a few years later.

like all those high speed rail links around the world are?

Those are inter-city links. Fibre is *absolutely* the right technology for inter-city links. Do try to think next
time before you post.

You used an analogy which was just plain stupid

Rubbish.

Fact.

Fibre is perfect for inter-city and undersea links,

Its UNIVERSALLY used for inter exchange and for the connection to RIMs, CMUXes and wireless nodes as well.

it is stupid for the "last mile". Get that? Stupid.

Irrelevant to your stupid footshot on high speed rail.

Did I mention that using fibre to build faster fixed-line solution is stupid? Using fibre to build a faster fixed-line
solution is stupid. Just like running a high-speed train to your door. Got it? Stupid!

You never said a word about to your door, fuckwit.

Fibre is the most expensive conceivable solution for the "last mile".

It also deliver FAR more thruput than anything else does.

Only Labor idiots would overlook the obvious: Wireless is cheap

And you dont get anything like the same simultaneous thruput.

and you get none of this:
http://annsgarden.com/poles/JP0-Hooper3.jpg

Easily fixed by not running the fibre on the poles, fool.

Instead of spending $43 billion on a white-elephant,

It aint a white elephant.

why not spend a mere $800 million on expanding port facilities?

Thats being done as well, fool.

It's a no-brainer.

You're a no brainer.

Labor idiots.

You're a terminal fuckwit.

Vote Conroy last on the Vic senate paper.

Most of us dont get to vote in Vic, fuckwit.

 

[annily]

On 21-08-10 13:22, B J Foster wrote:

annily wrote:
On 21-08-10 06:08, B J Foster wrote:
annily wrote:
B J Foster wrote:
kreed wrote:
On Aug 18, 11:17 pm, B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote:
Don McKenzie wrote:
...

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this
last-century
technology.


Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of anyone I
know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results, that
a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had *no* *fixed*
*line* phone service - they had gone completely mobile.


And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.


Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless.


There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless,
regardless of trends.


ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap, and it won't support high enough
speeds for many people.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which probably influences my opinions.

 

[Rod Speed]

annily wrote

B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results,
that a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had *no*
*fixed* *line* phone service - they had gone completely mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless.

There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless, regardless of trends.

ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap,

Thats a lie, hardly any of the copper is crap.

and it won't support high enough speeds for many people.

And that is a bare faced lie. Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper.

 

[kreed]

On Aug 21, 4:52 pm, annily <ann...@annily.invalid> wrote:

On 21-08-10 13:22, B J Foster wrote:



annily wrote:
On 21-08-10 06:08, B J Foster wrote:
annily wrote:
B J Foster wrote:
kreed wrote:
On Aug 18, 11:17 pm, B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote:
Don McKenzie wrote:
...

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this
last-century
technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of anyone I
know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results, that
a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had *no* *fixed*
*line* phone service - they had gone completely mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless..

There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless,
regardless of trends.

ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap, and it won't support high enough
speeds for many people.

Nothing wrong with copper lines. No matter what grand plan they

propose, its going to involve
copper line at some point. Even Coax or Cat5/6 uses copper
conductors.


ADSL 2 can go more than fast enough for the majority of people
If they want more speed than that they can pay for a second or 3rd
line & ADSL connection to double/triple their
speed as needed. The savings by using something that is already there
would be enormous.

For areas that are too far from an exchange to get ADSL, why not run a
fibre link (or similar) from exchange to
the cable pits in question to provide a local ADSL hub that is close
enough to the subscribers or maybe use repeaters
if there are not enough lines in an area (rural) in question to
justify fibre.

Remote areas can use satellite or wireless - wireless shouldn't be a
problem in remote areas as there isn't much radio traffic
to congest the band compared to the city.


Would cost a hell of a lot less than some of the silliness being
talked about.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which probably influences my opinions.

 

[annily]

On 22-08-10 03:43, Rod Speed wrote:

annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster<bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results,
that a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had *no*
*fixed* *line* phone service - they had gone completely mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless.

There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless, regardless of trends.

ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap,

Thats a lie, hardly any of the copper is crap.

Not a lie, an opinion. OK, some of the copper connections are crap, and
copper won't last forever.

and it won't support high enough speeds for many people.

And that is a bare faced lie. Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper.

Again not a lie. Many people DO want more than 24 Mbps. That's all I
said. Your statement ("most...) doesn't contradict mine.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which probably influences my opinions.

 

[Rod Speed]

kreed wrote

annily <ann...@annily.invalid> wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results,
that a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had
*no* *fixed* *line* phone service - they had gone completely
mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless.

There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless, regardless of trends.

ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap, and it won't support high enough speeds for many people.

Nothing wrong with copper lines.

They do limit the maximum speed with street distances.

No matter what grand plan they propose, its going to involve copper line at some point.

Wrong, not down the streets they dont with fibre.

Even Coax or Cat5/6 uses copper conductors.

And fibre doesnt.

ADSL 2 can go more than fast enough for the majority of people

Depends on whether you want to get DVDs and blue rays in seconds or not.

If they want more speed than that they can pay for a second or
3rd line & ADSL connection to double/triple their speed as needed.

Not practical compared with fibre.

The savings by using something that is already there would be enormous.

Yes, but the speed is much lower than with fibre.

For areas that are too far from an exchange to
get ADSL, why not run a fibre link (or similar)
from exchange to the cable pits in question to provide
a local ADSL hub that is close enough to the subscribers

Thats what RIMs and CMUXes do.

or maybe use repeaters if there are not enough
lines in an area (rural) in question to justify fibre.

Its very arguable that that is viable.

Remote areas can use satellite or wireless

Even suburban areas use wireless right now.

- wireless shouldn't be a problem in remote areas as there isn't
much radio traffic to congest the band compared to the city.

The problem is that that approach doesnt work for the longer distances.

Would cost a hell of a lot less than some of the silliness being talked about.

Yes, the NBN is certainly by far the most expensive approach.

>> Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia, which probably influences my opinions.

 

[Rod Speed]

annily wrote

Rod Speed wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster<bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results,
that a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had
*no* *fixed* *line* phone service - they had gone completely
mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless.

There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless, regardless of trends.

ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap,

Thats a lie, hardly any of the copper is crap.

Not a lie, an opinion.

Its a lie because you dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that opinion.

OK, some of the copper connections are crap, and copper won't last forever.

Nothing lasts forever. The copper will last well enough.

and it won't support high enough speeds for many people.

And that is a bare faced lie. Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper.

Again not a lie.

Corse its a lie.

Many people DO want more than 24 Mbps.

You dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that claim either.

Certainly some do, most obviously those who are stupid enough to want
to download DVDs and blue rays in seconds, but what matters is whether
it makes any sense what so ever to be spending $50B to get that capability.

That's all I said. Your statement ("most...) doesn't contradict mine.

Another lie.

 

[annily]

On 22-08-10 14:30, Rod Speed wrote:

annily wrote
Rod Speed wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster<bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial results,
that a large percentage of Australians (early adopters) had
*no* *fixed* *line* phone service - they had gone completely
mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless.

There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless, regardless of trends.

ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap,

Thats a lie, hardly any of the copper is crap.

Not a lie, an opinion.

Its a lie because you dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that opinion.

It's not a lie because I believe it to be true, and you haven't provided
any evidence to the contrary.

OK, some of the copper connections are crap, and copper won't last forever.

Nothing lasts forever. The copper will last well enough.

and it won't support high enough speeds for many people.

And that is a bare faced lie. Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper.

Again not a lie.

Corse its a lie.

Of course it's not.

Many people DO want more than 24 Mbps.

You dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that claim either.

And you haven't supplied any to the contrary.

Certainly some do, most obviously those who are stupid enough to want
to download DVDs and blue rays in seconds, but what matters is whether
it makes any sense what so ever to be spending $50B to get that capability.

Yes, but that's not what I was arguing.

That's all I said. Your statement ("most...) doesn't contradict mine.

Another lie.


Apparently you don't understand English and/or logic. Our two statements:

"it won't support high enough speeds for many people"

and

"Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper"

are not contradictory. Both can be true.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which probably influences my opinions.

 

[Rod Speed]

annily wrote

Rod Speed wrote
annily wrote
Rod Speed wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster<bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial
results, that a large percentage of Australians (early
adopters) had *no* *fixed* *line* phone service - they had
gone completely mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless.

There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless, regardless of trends.

ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap,

Thats a lie, hardly any of the copper is crap.

Not a lie, an opinion.

Its a lie because you dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that opinion.

It's not a lie because I believe it to be true,

That doesnt stop it being a lie, particularly when the lie is spewed
by someone else and you are stupid enough to buy that lie.

and you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary.

Another lie. The evidence to the contrary is the huge numbers who have a viable adsl service.

OK, some of the copper connections are crap, and copper won't last forever.

Nothing lasts forever. The copper will last well enough.

and it won't support high enough speeds for many people.

And that is a bare faced lie. Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper.

Again not a lie.

Corse its a lie.

Of course it's not.

Wota stunning line in rational argument you have there, child.

Many people DO want more than 24 Mbps.

You dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that claim either.

And you haven't supplied any to the contrary.

Dont need to.

YOU ran that stupid claim.

YOU get to substantiate that stupid claim.

THATS how it works.

Certainly some do, most obviously those who are stupid enough to want
to download DVDs and blue rays in seconds, but what matters is whether it makes any sense what so ever to be spending
$50B to get that capability.

Yes, but that's not what I was arguing.

You werent 'arguing' a damned thing, just lying.

That's all I said. Your statement ("most...) doesn't contradict mine.

Another lie.

Apparently you don't understand English and/or logic.

You never ever could bullshit and lie your way out of a wet paper bag.

Our two statements:

"it won't support high enough speeds for many people"

and

"Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper"

are not contradictory.

Another lie.

Both can be true.

Another lie.

 

[annily]

On 22-08-10 19:02, Rod Speed wrote:

annily wrote
Rod Speed wrote
annily wrote
Rod Speed wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster<bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of
anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial
results, that a large percentage of Australians (early
adopters) had *no* *fixed* *line* phone service - they had
gone completely mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless.

There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless, regardless of trends.

ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap,

Thats a lie, hardly any of the copper is crap.

Not a lie, an opinion.

Its a lie because you dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that opinion.

It's not a lie because I believe it to be true,

That doesnt stop it being a lie, particularly when the lie is spewed
by someone else and you are stupid enough to buy that lie.

Your lack of understanding of the meaning of "lie" is beyond belief.
I wasn't even aware of the claim being spewed by someone else, so I
couldn't have bought it.

and you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary.

Another lie. The evidence to the contrary is the huge numbers who have a viable adsl service.

And what about those who haven't? I didn't say anything about huge numbers.

OK, some of the copper connections are crap, and copper won't last forever.

Nothing lasts forever. The copper will last well enough.

and it won't support high enough speeds for many people.

And that is a bare faced lie. Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper.

Again not a lie.

Corse its a lie.

Of course it's not.

Wota stunning line in rational argument you have there, child.

Where's the rationality in your arguments?

Many people DO want more than 24 Mbps.

You dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that claim either.

And you haven't supplied any to the contrary.

Dont need to.

YOU ran that stupid claim.

YOU get to substantiate that stupid claim.

THATS how it works.

Nope. You called me a liar. You get to substantiate that claim. That's
how it should work.

Certainly some do, most obviously those who are stupid enough to want
to download DVDs and blue rays in seconds, but what matters is whether it makes any sense what so ever to be spending
$50B to get that capability.

Yes, but that's not what I was arguing.

You werent 'arguing' a damned thing, just lying.

There you go again. Calling me a liar without backing it up, and
apparently not recognizing what an argument is.

That's all I said. Your statement ("most...) doesn't contradict mine.

Another lie.

Apparently you don't understand English and/or logic.

You never ever could bullshit and lie your way out of a wet paper bag.

Our two statements:

"it won't support high enough speeds for many people"

and

"Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper"

are not contradictory.

Another lie.

Your lack of understanding is amazing. Please explain how those
statements are contradictory. "Many" doesn't mean "most", you know.

Both can be true.

Another lie.

Please provide some evidence for that claim.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which probably influences my opinions.

 

[B J Foster]

Arm's Length wrote:

On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 13:51:27 +1000
B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

Arm's Length wrote:
On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 06:38:00 +1000
B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

In that context, it's stupid to build *another* fixed line
solution.
The premise of your argument is fundamentally flawed. I, as a
consequence of this glaring flaw, unreservedly dispute your
argument as it stands in its contextual devaluing of progress as an
essential constituent of a thriving national life.
Spare me the garbage. I already have a cable connection. Why would I
want to pay for your silly NBN?

You either just don't get it or you're being argumentative and
insulting merely for the sake of it.

Yeah. I don't 'get it'.

Must be because no-one ever prepared a business case for it.

The latter is a greater indictment
against you than the former alongside of being suggestive of a distinct
psychological condition inherent in your personality.

There is a vast amount of pseudo-intellectualism in the modern world.
It is a pity, because it detracts from that which could be achieved
with this planetary evolution. Those of whom indulge most frequently in
it, delude themselves that they are being smart and answering
intelligently. Nothing could be further from the truth. Such as these
have contributed to the ongoing deterioration of Usenet.

I have been paying for the cable for 15 years. You must be a Labor
supporter.

Good for you. Having said that, it's all about you, isn't it? Which is,
interestingly but unfortunately, a character trait of so many amongst
the humanity of this period. Others have pointed this out about people
who hold similar and extreme ideas as you.

I wouldn't so quickly boast about your cable connection either, as the
bandwidth and speed associated with the cable of the present are
nothing compared to the bandwidth and speed possible in technologies
the human species is quite ignorant of. While we are at it, what I
do say is nothing compared to what I could reveal. But cannot
possibly reveal much to a world of which is bound to childishness and is
unappreciative of alternative presentations refuting the generally
accepted paradigmatic presentation.

Anyway, in response to your obvious ranting and inability to answer
with a co-measurement of civility as well as to the exactness of the
revealed points of conjecture, I am neither a supporter of Labor nor
any other political party. I am not even a supporter of any particular
independent. Although I am enormously interested in politics, the
politics I envisage is entirely different to the sad state of politics
on this planet and in this era. Democracy, as any other political
ideology, is not understood by the human species in its purity and
essence.

Besides, I haven't voted since I was 18 and I am now 53. I am a
conscientious objector to dictatorially inclined compulsory voting in a
nation of which purports to be democratic and free. Sue me, if you dare.

 

[B J Foster]

annily wrote:

On 22-08-10 03:43, Rod Speed wrote:
annily wrote
....

And that is a bare faced lie. Most dont even pay for the highest speed
available on the copper.



Again not a lie. Many people DO want more than 24 Mbps. That's all I
said. Your statement ("most...) doesn't contradict mine.

Many eh?

 

[keithr]

Anything that contradicts Mr Speed's opinion is by definition a lie.
Didn't you know that?

 

[Rod Speed]

annily wrote

Rod Speed wrote
annily wrote
Rod Speed wrote
annily wrote
Rod Speed wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
annily wrote
B J Foster wrote
kreed wrote
B J Foster<bjfos...@yahoo.co.invalid> wrote
Don McKenzie wrote

Option #5, Phoneline. Who still has phonelines? Isn't this last-century technology.

Pretty much everyone still has phone lines. I can't think of anyone I know who doesn't have a home phone
on copper lines.

I read somewhere in the context of Telstra's financial
results, that a large percentage of Australians (early
adopters) had *no* *fixed* *line* phone service - they had
gone completely mobile.

And probably an even larger percentage does have a fixed line.

Early adopters set the trend. Early adopters are going fully wireless.

There will still be plenty of people who don't want wireless, regardless of trends.

ROTFL. They already have fixed line. Copper.

ROTFL. Much of the copper is crap,

Thats a lie, hardly any of the copper is crap.

Not a lie, an opinion.

Its a lie because you dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that opinion.

It's not a lie because I believe it to be true,

That doesnt stop it being a lie, particularly when the lie is spewed
by someone else and you are stupid enough to buy that lie.

Your lack of understanding of the meaning of "lie" is beyond belief.

We'll see...

I wasn't even aware of the claim being spewed by someone else,

Another lie.

so I couldn't have bought it.

Another lie.

and you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary.

Another lie. The evidence to the contrary is the huge numbers who have a viable adsl service.

And what about those who haven't?

Doesnt qualify as MUCH OF THE COPPER, liar.

I didn't say anything about huge numbers.

You clearly did say MUCH OF THE COPPER, liar.

OK, some of the copper connections are crap, and copper won't last forever.

Nothing lasts forever. The copper will last well enough.

and it won't support high enough speeds for many people.

And that is a bare faced lie. Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper.

Again not a lie.

Corse its a lie.

Of course it's not.

Wota stunning line in rational argument you have there, child.

Where's the rationality in your arguments?

The evidence that huge numbers have a viable adsl service proves that much of the copper is not crap, liar.

Many people DO want more than 24 Mbps.

You dont have a shred of evidence to substantiate that claim either.

And you haven't supplied any to the contrary.

Dont need to.

YOU ran that stupid claim.

YOU get to substantiate that stupid claim.

THATS how it works.

Nope.

Yep.

You called me a liar. You get to substantiate that claim.

You never ever could bullshit and lie your way out of a wet paper bag.

That's how it should work.

Only in your pathetic little pathological liar fantasyland.

Certainly some do, most obviously those who are stupid enough to want to download DVDs and blue rays in seconds,
but what matters is whether it makes any sense what so ever to be spending $50B to get that capability.

Yes, but that's not what I was arguing.

You werent 'arguing' a damned thing, just lying.

There you go again. Calling me a liar without backing it up,

The crap you spewed is the evidence that you are a liar.

and apparently not recognizing what an argument is.

You're so stupid you cant even work out the difference between an argument and a claim.

That's all I said. Your statement ("most...) doesn't contradict mine.

Another lie.

Apparently you don't understand English and/or logic.

You never ever could bullshit and lie your way out of a wet paper bag.

Our two statements:

"it won't support high enough speeds for many people"

and

"Most dont even pay for the highest speed available on the copper"

are not contradictory.

Another lie.

Your lack of understanding is amazing.

Your pathetic exuse for bullshit and lies is nothing like that, just pathetic.

Please explain how those statements are contradictory.

It would be more profitable to try to explain it to a stone, liar.

"Many" doesn't mean "most", you know.

No one ever said it did, liar.

Both can be true.

Another lie.

Please provide some evidence for that claim.

Everyone can see for themselves that its another lie.

 

[Rod Speed]

keithr wrote:

Anything that contradicts Mr Speed's opinion is by definition a lie.

It isnt my opinion that much of the copper is not crap, its a fact, fool.