NBN Rollout Scrapped

[sptrawler]

I think you all need to cut nbnmyths some slack.
He obviously believes implicitly in the benefits, but gives factual substantiated evidence to support it.
Somewhat like smurph, who also gives grounded posts.
We can't pay out on someone who is supplying facts, just because we dissagree.

By the way, I do dissagree with fibre to the home.

When you can show his posts as being incorrect or flawed, pay out.

 

[orr]

"Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost." Thomas Jefferson.

We all know that historical context isn't one of your stronger points, sits with most of the others. What Gutenberg give to those who could afford one( a printing press Cal ) the internet and connection to it, gives to all. Viva the individual Viva ideas Viva the digital revolution Viva the NBN... Without it freedom is lost.

 

[Calliope]

I think you all need to cut nbnmyths some slack.
He obviously believes implicitly in the benefits, but gives factual substantiated evidence to support it.
Somewhat like smurph, who also gives grounded posts.
We can't pay out on someone who is supplying facts, just because we dissagree.

Myths doesn't deny that be is politically biased. There is no such thing as politically biased "factual substantiated evidence". That is an oxymoron.

 

[IFocus]

Myths doesn't deny that be is politically biased. There is no such thing as politically biased "factual substantiated evidence". That is an oxymoron.

The NBN is pursued by sections of the media (News etc) because it will be in direct competition to them.

They are attacking not in yours or any body else's interests they are running the negative campaign to protect their own and clearly you are buying in because its a Labor thing.

The NBN is in Australia's interest and I am still waiting to hear an objective argument why not so far its all sniping and personalisations. .

 

[MrBurns]

I don't follow this thread much but is anyone connected yet ?

cost ?

any faster ?

 

[IFocus]

You really do have to stop manipulating the truth.LOL
The Liberals were putting in the Mandurah line, the tunnel onto the freeway is still there (empty).
Labor chose to change the route down the centre of the freeway, taking up an extra 5 lanes of capacity.lol
This is the problem, Labor see any big spending issue has to be vote grabbing, it doesn't matter if it makes sense or not.
Running the train line down the centre of the freeway was dumb, we will end up having to spend billions to sort it out.
But that is Labor.IMO Fortunatelly the electorate seems to havewoken up to the crap, going by the latest poll the State election.
Back on track, the NBN will be cut back no matter who wins the election.IMO

Just saw this SP the freeway option was by far the best haven't heard any urban planner say it wasn't.....none.

The State Liberals made a big who har about it but the real risk was the tunnelling project associated with the freeway which turned out to be spot on so much so Barnett is looking for more of the same.

The Liberals plan really was 1/2 @rsed similar to the federal Liberals plan for NBN IMHO just means some one pays more further down the line in the future.

 

[drsmith]

Stephen Conroy in 2008,

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...50mbps-and-the-merits-of-internet-filter.html

 

[Calliope]

They are attacking not in yours or any body else's interests they are running the negative campaign to protect their own and clearly you are buying in because its a Labor thing.

Wrong again. They are doing it in the interests of the taxpayer. Remember the Pink Bats and the BER... huge wastes of the taxpayers' money, badly run and badly spent. What makes you think NBN will be any different? Naturally Conroy hates The Australian for continually holding him up to ridicule.

The NB Australia's interest and I am still waiting to hear an objective argument why

If it was in Australia's interests they wouldn't have a lunatic like Conroy running it. He is the Minister for Nastiness. Nothing Conroy does can be construed as in our interests. You would have to be brain-dead to think so.

 

[boofhead]

Calliope: Can you start playing the ball instead of the person? It reads like your bias is clouding your expressed views. I'll explain - so far most of what you said has been about the people involved or supporting the NBN and very little about the actual NBN. Do you work in Abbott's office or something?

Some in the thread have tried to discuss the NBN on information available and avoid the poor coverage by some mainstream print press. Some have tried to use the federal budget as a reason for not having it but ignore how the items are budgeted. Some want to introduce a false dichotomy. Seems to feel like a small number of people that try to have a rational discussion get goaded by those that want to make it personal.

Then again, maybe it all starts from the first post of the thread.

 

[Calliope]

Calliope: Can you start playing the ball instead of the person? It reads like your bias is clouding your expressed views.

It sure is. I have a deep seated bias against Conroy and anything he proposes. Anything that originates from him is nasty and draconian You'll just have to live with that boofy.

Feel free to defend him. Even Myths in his advocacy for the NBN won't do that, although he supports it as a Labor "enterprise", despite their record. That takes faith.

 

[IFocus]

It sure is. I have a deep seated bias against Conroy and anything he proposes. Anything that originates from him is nasty and draconian You'll just have to live with that boofy.

Feel free to defend him. Even Myths in his advocacy for the NBN won't do that, although he supports it as a Labor "enterprise", despite their record. That takes faith.

Don't think you are going to get many here who will defend Conroy, he didn't actually propose the NBN he is just the Minister, think of the program "Yes Minister" as for implementation that will be down to Quigley and less to do with government.

Speaking up about the NBN is not supporting Labor or Conroy, but if you work for serious company's that chew data and or watch the exponential increase in internet traffic and the technologies driving it then you will wonder why people just don't do a little bit of research and understand it.

 

[sydboy007]

I don't follow this thread much but is anyone connected yet ?

cost ?

any faster ?

My Dad has been connected around a year now in Kiama Downs.

He's with Exetel. He went from a ADSL + Line rental of ~ $65 a month (1.5Mbs speed) to a 12/1 Fiber connection with no line rental - free VOIP account with exetel that provides low cost mobile and untimed 10c land line calls - for $35 a month.

His first reaction after I connected his new VOIP modem was " I click and it's just there"

He's now watching catch up TV and lots of DIY videos. He's also gotten into some of the TV shows on the SMH web site. I'm scared to set him up Hulu access. Might have to upgrade the office chair in the PC room and then he'll live in their like a teenager

The demographics of Kiama are probably skewed to the older generation - certainly a lot of pensioners down there. My dad does a lot of odd jobs and lawn mowing etc and so far he's not found anyone who's not looking forward to getting connected. Yeah some of the old gals down there who never had a PC don't care, but I was surprised as to how much the internet is used by the 65+ group in Kiama.

Now for those who take everything that the LNP say as the Gospel Truth:

* It DID NOT cost $3000 to wire up my parents house so they could have the NBN - ONT in the "computer" room with Wireless router for smart phone connectivity = $0 cabling cost. I got 3 bedrooms in my house cabled with ethernet for $450, and my house is double story. /sarcasm - I know most LNP supporters are quite rich, but if they're paying $3000 to get their houses cabled then I shake my head at their lack of financial skills to get a competitive quote /sarcasm.

* My dad has halved his fixed telecommunication costs, reduced his phone call costs, gets 8 times the download speeds, 4 times the download limit, and enjoying self education opportunities he couldn't afford to do via a Telstra wholesale ADSL connection (the cost jump to an 8Mbs plan was too much for a pensioner). He IS NOT paying over $100 a month.

Hopefully MT is telling the truth and we'll have his policy out for public viewing around June / July. At the moment the only party with a fully costed PLAN is the ALP. All the LNP have so far is a slogan of Faster and Cheaper with not 1 shred of evidence to back up their claims. using examples of other countries where the incumbent carrier is rolling out the FTTN network is not relevant to Australia.

I can't wait to see the reaction of the NIMBYs who wont want Wireless internet - MT will probably triple the areas getting fixed wireless.

 

[Calliope]

Don't think you are going to get many here who will defend Conroy, he didn't actually propose the NBN he is just the Minister

Conroy notoriously sketched out the blueprint for the $37.4 billion National Broadband Network on the back of a napkin while on a VIP RAAF flight with Kevin Rudd.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...govern-our-media/story-e6frg6z6-1226596728108

 

[IFocus]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...govern-our-media/story-e6frg6z6-1226596728108

The idea had been around for awhile Labor just went FTTP and filled in the holes using wireless and satellite.

Broadband Advisory Group 2003

In a report released on 22 January 2003 the Howard government’s Broadband Advisory Group (BAG) recommended the Federal Government work with other governments and industry stakeholders to form a "national broadband network".[98] A subsequent Senate committee recommend the Federal Government replace the "increasingly obsolete" copper network with a new network based on fibre to the node (FTTN) or alternative technologies

The main problem to solve was Telstra not sure if Conroy was involved in working that out but he certainty didn't come up with the idea of a NBN.

 

[drsmith]

On time and on budget ?

These will be the biggest questions of all.

 

[drsmith]

The main problem to solve was Telstra not sure if Conroy was involved in working that out but he certainty didn't come up with the idea of a NBN.

Who was it then ?

Kevin Rudd ?

 

[Smurf1976]

Speaking up about the NBN is not supporting Labor or Conroy, but if you work for serious company's that chew data and or watch the exponential increase in internet traffic and the technologies driving it then you will wonder why people just don't do a little bit of research and understand it.

This is a bit of a long winded post. Skip to the last sentence if you just want the summary.

I think the point that many would implicitly question is whether or not there is much benefit in all that data in the first place?

The internet now is a bit like road traffic or electricity in the 1960's. It's been around long enough to become "critical" but still has huge annual growth rates which are now starting to require some serious infrastructure to support them.

People started worrying about roads when they started being put up on pillars and being "cut through" long established areas of significance to the community. Add in the huge financial cost of building them, the 1970's oil crises and the smog (and if you're under 35 you probably don't realise just how polluted even Australian cities used to be prior to emissions control improvements on cars) and the opinion of the general public and governments started to shift away from the "car is king" mentality. In any event, what was the actual point of all that traffic and all those roads? Do we really want every city to look like Los Angeles?

Electricity was much the same. Demand went up 10% per annum and that was taken for granted. Nobody really questioned where all the power was going or what the real point of it was. We just built more and bigger power stations with more and bigger coal mines to supply them. Nobody worried too much until Lake Pedder, Three Mile Island, the Franklin River, Chernobyl and what was then termed "the greenhouse effect" became household terms. Throw in the soaring financial costs, technological innovation improving energy efficiency and the realisation that it was only a matter of time until the Latrobe Valley ended up as one huge hole in the ground and opinions shifted.

Car use per capita peaked some years ago and is now trending down in much of the developed world. The car is no longer king. Electricity did the same, indeed it is declining in absolute terms not just per capita in Australia. Life has carried on quite well without doubling road traffic and power generation every 7 years it seems.

The same goes for water although I don't have the figures. Concern about the environmental effects and cost plus the need for ever more elaborate infrastrucuture changed the game there too. Building a few dams around Melbourne (for example) is one thing. Once you come to the point where you need to either dam every last creek in Victoria or bring the water from Queensland, Tasmania or a desalination plant well then things are getting out of hand somewhat. Life has carried on without hosing the driveway every weekend or leaving the sprinkler running all night.

The same questions could be asked of the internet. What, exactly, is the real world benefit of all this data? What can I actually do with 100 MBPS that I can't do with ADSL2+ or for that matter plain ADSL? What is the actual benefit here?

1. Like other industries before it, the internet started with growth of its' own and in due course moved onto replacement of pre-existing industries. First comes the obvious major benefits such as email instead of snail mail, the web instead of newspapers or cars instead of horse & cart. No questions there.

2. Next come the second level benefits. Things like downloading music or social networks. Or electric vacuum cleaners instead of dust pans and brushes. There are clear advantages over previous technology, even though we did previously have a means of achieving essentially the same end result.

3. Then we come to the point where further growth is really only replacing some other technology that does much the same with a relatively minor benefit. Downloading TV instead of watching / recording broadcast TV. Buses instead of trams. Electric clothes dryers instead of a Hills hoist. Etc. A key point here is that the service must be kept cheap in order to sustain this growth. Cheap diesel will favour buses over trams, cheap electricity and people will use it to dry clothes or heat buildings. But if it's expensive then that demand disappears due to being of relatively minor advantage compared to alternatives.

4. Then finally we come to growth for the sake of it. I don't know what the internet equivalent will be but think in terms of running down railways to the point that they cease to function thus putting everything on the roads. Or banning the installation of gas mains in new subdivisions so as to force the use of electricity. At that point it is growth for the sake of growth, with no real benefit to the community.

I read only a few days ago about a game which you play it mostly by yourself. However, it won't work without being connected to the company's server even though there is no real need for it to work this way since you're playing by yourself. Apparently the servers aren't coping, people aren't happy and even the geeks have realised that there's no actual need for it to work this way. That's stage 4 behaviour - consumption for the sake of it, rather than for an actual reason.

The NBN is essentially based on the notion that level 3 uses are driving up data volumes and that this will continue. There are benefits, but marginal utility is declining and in due course we end up at stage 4.

The unanswered question in all of this is where do we eventually end up? At some point the growth in data traffic will end, and it is already at the point of being price sensitive (nobody's would even think of downloading TV at the data costs which prevailed a few years ago). In other words, how much capacity do we actually need to build, before demand flattens out and it becomes pointless?

Will household demand for data actually exceed the capabilities of FTTN? Simply looking at current growth rates does not answer this question since in due course that growth will end.

Replacing the copper network because it is in a poor state and Telstra are difficult to deal with, rather than an a genuine need for FTTP rather than FTTN, is the rational reason to build FTTP now. If we had a good copper network and didn't have to deal with Telstra then FTTN would make sense given the uncertainty of future data demand. But if we have to replace it anyway then we may as well go all the way given that there won't be much difference in cost.

 

[IFocus]

Hi Smurf

Agree re the copper net work replacement, I do know a medium size business here in WA that has a number of sites in the state. they run all their applications from a central point but have to rent lines to run the data which costs extraordinary amounts for the speed they get (its rubbish).

With the NBN it all goes away hence vested interests oppose the NBN.

This is the case for any medium and bigger businesses, with mine site remote controls coming etc speed counts.

 

[So_Cynical]

4. Then finally we come to growth for the sake of it. I don't know what the internet equivalent will be but think in terms of running down railways to the point that they cease to function thus putting everything on the roads. Or banning the installation of gas mains in new subdivisions so as to force the use of electricity. At that point it is growth for the sake of growth, with no real benefit to the community.

I read only a few days ago about a game which you play it mostly by yourself. However, it won't work without being connected to the company's server even though there is no real need for it to work this way since you're playing by yourself. Apparently the servers aren't coping, people aren't happy and even the geeks have realised that there's no actual need for it to work this way. That's stage 4 behaviour - consumption for the sake of it, rather than for an actual reason.

SimCity 5 (the new Simcity) The Servers are there for 2 reasons, DLC (downloadable content) and MP (Multiplayer regions) a lot of unhappy people due to the login servers not coping with the demand, happens with pretty much every big game release...The Game publishers want everyone logged in so that its easier to manage their content and thus sell them more content. helps with patching to, and by all accounts Simcity will need a lot of patching to fix the game.

http://consumerist.com/2013/03/09/e...away-free-games-to-people-who-bought-simcity/

 

[Calliope]

Nobody can deny that the NBN is a product of the devious mind of Stephen Conroy, the same guy who wanted to introduce an internet filter and now wants to control the press and suppress cartoons like this.