NBN Rollout Scrapped

[drsmith]

Excuse my remarks above. I just get so frustrated with this lemon of a scheme.

Let the maths continue.

gg

The frustration gets to me too.

One moment it's about guesswork and ifs and the next it's about numbers.

 

[sydboy007]

The frustration gets to me too.

One moment it's about guesswork and ifs and the next it's about numbers.

No guess work. Morrow has come out and stated Haymarket in Sydney, New Farm and Fortitude Valley in Brisbane and South Melbourne, will have NBN services scheduled to be available to these premises in the middle of 2014.

Strangely this is to try and squash private infrastructrue investment from TPG.

It's strange considering some of those areas already have HFC, and all of them have pretty good ADSL2+ coverage. So the question is why areas that have 1 or 2 broadband options is being target in front of blackspots. Turnbull was critical of this type of rollout pre election, so why is it now acceptable?

 

[sptrawler]

Saying that the numbers don't matter is akin to saying you'd be happy with 12v electricity to your house, because so long as it's electricity then discussing the actual numbers is irrational nonsense.
].

That quote isn't as silly as it sounds, 12v for the house may be sooner than NBN for everyone.

Financialy it would make a lot more sense, the only electrical appliance that isn't feasable for domestic 12v operation is the airconditioner.
Hot water can be solar/gas and gas cooking. Most other things, lights, t.v, computer and fridge could be easily operated on 12v.
All we need is better energy density from batteries for storing the power to run overnight.
Think how much that would save.

 

[sydboy007]

That quote isn't as silly as it sounds, 12v for the house may be sooner than NBN for everyone.

Financialy it would make a lot more sense, the only electrical appliance that isn't feasable for domestic 12v operation is the airconditioner.
Hot water can be solar/gas and gas cooking. Most other things, lights, t.v, computer and fridge could be easily operated on 12v.
All we need is better energy density from batteries for storing the power to run overnight.
Think how much that would save.

Many data centres are now moving back to DC power. It always seemed silly to me to have AC feeding into UPS that then sent DC to be converted back to AC and then back to DC for the equipment to use.

Supposedly seeing 10-20% cut in electricity consumption. Another advantage is roughly a 25-40% reduction space for distribution equipment, a massive savings when you actually looking to build a new DC.

As gfor battery density, for a home / building application I'd say low cost, hgih reliability is more key than density. The old nickle iron (edison) batteries seem to tick many boxes for battery storage. They cope well under load, can be discharged to 95% and have no problems being partially recharged, rated for around 25 year life span. Only downside is they loose about 30% of their charge within a month, but not really an issue if you are always charging and discharging them. Shame only the Chinese and Russians make them any more.

 

[NBNMyths]

That quote isn't as silly as it sounds, 12v for the house may be sooner than NBN for everyone.

Financialy it would make a lot more sense, the only electrical appliance that isn't feasable for domestic 12v operation is the airconditioner.
Hot water can be solar/gas and gas cooking. Most other things, lights, t.v, computer and fridge could be easily operated on 12v.
All we need is better energy density from batteries for storing the power to run overnight.
Think how much that would save.

Offtopic, but apart from gas not being everywhere, the major downside is that when you lower the voltage, you increase the required current to do a given job. Higher current increases loss through resistance. Thus, the power lines would probably not be sufficient to do the job.

Oh, and have you ever tried to boil water with a 12v kettle? You need to plan ahead!

 

[NBNMyths]

The frustration gets to me too.

One moment it's about guesswork and ifs and the next it's about numbers.

You don't think that the plan to buy Telstra's copper and HFC and Optus' HFC, and what price they may cost (and therefore what the CBN will ultimately cost) isn't all about guesswork and ifs?

 

[drsmith]

My goodness!

Over both their heads with daylight to spare.

If I may lob another spanner….(purely guesswork)…. If I were running Foxtel, then I'd have ensured when contracting Telstra to operate the HFC cable for me, that I had exclusive rights to provide TV content over that network. Any such agreement would have to be changed in the event of the HFC moving to NBN, because all of the ISPs would then be using it to provide IPTV services over that cable, in competition to Foxtel. I can't imagine Foxtel would be too receptive to that idea.

So if they can only get the Optus HFC network, they're back to needing ~70% of leadins….

The NBN is all about numbers. That's the whole point. The 'numbers' surrounding Australia's broadband are amongst the lowest in the OECD. If the numbers make no sense to you, then I'd suggest you either learn about them or move on.

Saying that the numbers don't matter is akin to saying you'd be happy with 12v electricity to your house, because so long as it's electricity then discussing the actual numbers is irrational nonsense.

I didn't know rational was a synonym for technologically illiterate.

The frustration gets to me too.

One moment it's about guesswork and ifs and the next it's about numbers.

My bolds.

 

[sptrawler]

Offtopic, but apart from gas not being everywhere, the major downside is that when you lower the voltage, you increase the required current to do a given job. Higher current increases loss through resistance. Thus, the power lines would probably not be sufficient to do the job.

Oh, and have you ever tried to boil water with a 12v kettle? You need to plan ahead!

Ah but your missing the point, with the introduction of led lighting, advances in lower power consumption devices such as led/lcd t.v's and soft start 12v refridgerators. the requirement for 250v is diminishing.
But as you said, it's off thread.

 

[sptrawler]

No, connections currently taking place were started about 12 months ago (it takes ~12 months from the issue of construction orders for an area to activation of that area).

The Coalition have indeed kept FTTP rollout going with new construction orders, but they won't be activated for another ~6 months yet.

Reading this article in the West, it sounds as though it could be years before the NBN gets up and running here.

http://www.opieoils.co.uk/c-789-acea.aspx

 

[NBNMyths]

My goodness!

Over both their heads with daylight to spare.

Quote Originally Posted by NBNMyths
If I may lob another spanner….(purely guesswork)…. If I were running Foxtel, then I'd have ensured when contracting Telstra to operate the HFC cable for me, that I had exclusive rights to provide TV content over that network. Any such agreement would have to be changed in the event of the HFC moving to NBN, because all of the ISPs would then be using it to provide IPTV services over that cable, in competition to Foxtel. I can't imagine Foxtel would be too receptive to that idea.

So if they can only get the Optus HFC network, they're back to needing ~70% of leadins….
Quote Originally Posted by NBNMyths View Post
The NBN is all about numbers. That's the whole point. The 'numbers' surrounding Australia's broadband are amongst the lowest in the OECD. If the numbers make no sense to you, then I'd suggest you either learn about them or move on.

Saying that the numbers don't matter is akin to saying you'd be happy with 12v electricity to your house, because so long as it's electricity then discussing the actual numbers is irrational nonsense.

I didn't know rational was a synonym for technologically illiterate.
Quote Originally Posted by drsmith View Post
The frustration gets to me too.

One moment it's about guesswork and ifs and the next it's about numbers.
My bolds.

Over both their heads with daylight to spare.

My bolds.

Are you being deliberately obtuse, or do you really not understand the difference in topic between these two posts?

The purpose of the NBN project is all about numbers. It's about giving Australia a broadband network comparable (or even better than) most other countries in the OECD. The measure of a broadband network is made in numbers…. Mbps, ms etc. You cannot have make an effective argument about broadband without using and understanding those numbers.

The numbers (Mbps) deliverable over FTTP are known and consistent. By contrast, the numbers deliverable via FTTN and HFC are unknown and variable based on distance, condition etc. You only need to look at Turnbull's farce (aka mybroadband) to see that.

You complain about my other quoted arguments being "ifs" and "guesswork". Yet you don't seem to acknowledge that the Coalition's ability to acquire copper and HFC, the cost, and the condition/capability of those networks is also a huge "if", based on guesswork. ~70% of the coalition's plan is based on ifs and guesswork.

 

[Bintang]

….The purpose of the NBN project is all about numbers. It's about giving Australia a broadband network comparable (or even better than) most other countries in the OECD….

But WHY?

Is it for the same reason that we needed more pink batts in Australian houses than most other countries in the OECD or more solar panels on Australian roofs than most other countries in the OECD or more asylum seekers sucking on our welfare system than most other countries in the OECD.
Besides,WHY is doing anything 'comparable or even better than most other countries in the OECD' a criterion/justification for spending billions of Australian tax payer dollars.:shake:

 

[NBNMyths]

But WHY?

Is it for the same reason that we needed more pink batts in Australian houses than most other countries in the OECD or more solar panels on Australian roofs than most other countries in the OECD or more asylum seekers sucking on our welfare system than most other countries in the OECD.
Besides,WHY is doing anything 'comparable or even better than most other countries in the OECD' a criterion/justification for spending billions of Australian tax payer dollars.:shake:

First, you're using many strawmen…. as I suspect that the penetration of insulation is well behind most countries in the OECD, because (particularly in Europe) they're well aware of the cost benefits of properly insulating their homes. It seems that reducing energy consumption through efficient insulation is a rather apparent reason.

The benefit of increasing solar power generation I would have thought was equally obvious.

And we take well below the OECD average of refugees too.


But, to the point, why have better broadband?

Because our lives increasingly revolve around it. Businesses send terabytes of data around the world every second. The slower the network, the greater the lost productivity while people wait for data. For example, when I send files to Sydney, it takes so long that it's faster to put it on a stick and drive there, costing me 3 hours of time and $30 in fuel. With fast broadband I could send it in 20 minutes.

Fast broadband facilitates teleworking, which for many people is not possible over ADSL2 or even HFC due to slow upload speeds.

Fast broadband facilitates HD video conferencing, which can be used for business, education and medical purposes.

Those (and other known) uses aside, new uses for broadband are being developed every day. It's inevitable that with improving connectivity, our way of life will continue to evolve around it and more uses will be found.

Could you have imagined 30 years ago that you would be able to shop, research documents, learn or look up news the second it happens, while sitting at home in front of your computer or tablet? Do you really think that after only ~15 years, the possible uses for broadband have all been invented? We didn't even get cat videos on youtube until 10 years ago!

On funding….. The NBN will ultimately be paid for from user revenue, not tax revenue. Exactly the same way the Telstra (nee Telecom nee PMG) network was built….. I wonder, would you have opposed that as well? I mean, just because the rest of the World was rolling out a telephone network, there's no reason we should have. What was the benefit back in 1909 of spending millions of pounds just so housewives could gossip all day?

 

[Bintang]

First, you're using many strawmen…. as I suspect that the penetration of insulation is well behind most countries in the OECD, because (particularly in Europe) they're well aware of the cost benefits of properly insulating their homes. It seems that reducing energy consumption through efficient insulation is a rather apparent reason.

The benefit of increasing solar power generation I would have thought was equally obvious.

And we take well below the OECD average of refugees too.


But, to the point, why have better broadband?

We have already heard all these qualitative arguments ad nauseam.
Nowhere in my post did I say that a NBN has no benefits (or even that increasing solar panels or house insulation etc have no benefits). I questioned your assertion as to why Australia needs to have a system "comparable to or better than most other countries in the OECD". So you didn't answer my question because apparently you cannot.

 

[Bintang]

…..

On funding….. The NBN will ultimately be paid for from user revenue, not tax revenue. Exactly the same way the Telstra (nee Telecom nee PMG) network was built….. I wonder, would you have opposed that as well? I mean, just because the rest of the World was rolling out a telephone network, there's no reason we should have. What was the benefit back in 1909 of spending millions of pounds just so housewives could gossip all day?

What kind of system did Australia build back in 1909 relative to most other OECD countries. Was it fit for purpose or was it 'gold-plated'. Did we build a system based on its cost effectiveness or did we build one based on having something that was 'comparable to or even better than most other countries in the OECD".

 

[NBNMyths]

We have already heard all these qualitative arguments ad nauseam.
Nowhere in my post did I say that a NBN has no benefits (or even that increasing solar panels or house insulation etc have no benefits). I questioned your assertion as to why Australia needs to have a system "comparable to or better than most other countries in the OECD". So you didn't answer my question because apparently you cannot.

I told you why we need a fast broadband system. Comparing the capability/quality of our broadband network to the networks in other similar countries (i.e. the OECD) is an obvious comparison. If you have no basis for comparison, then you have no way of benchmarking yourself. We compare our nation against the OECD all the time, on hundreds of different criteria. Why should broadband capability be any different?

What kind of system did Australia build back in 1909 relative to most other OECD countries. Was it fit for purpose or was it 'gold-plated'. Did we build a system based on its cost effectiveness or did we build one based on having something that was 'comparable to or even better than most other countries in the OECD".

Why, thanks for asking.

When we decided on the telephone network, we did 'gold plate' it. We decided on the best and most expensive option available at the time: Copper pairs.

Of course then as now, there were people complaining about the cost….
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/19571372

…and arguments in Parliament about using cheaper iron wires, instead of wasting money on expensive copper....
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/06/p...wires-in-1910-makes-for-some-amazing-reading/

We were ahead of the game. It took the UK some time to change to copper, and (some years earlier) we even had the boss of the British post office saying that the telephone wash't needed at all, because there are plenty of messenger boys…
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/453.html


The more things change, the more they stay the same. No matter what new technology comes along, there's always a bunch of rusted-on conservatives complaining that change isn't needed, the current system works perfectly, it's a waste of money, a white elephant etc etc. History rarely judges them well.

 

[sydboy007]

Turnbull caught out lying AGAIN

http://delimiter.com.au/2014/04/17/turnbull-lies-nbn-triple-j-listeners/

 

[drsmith]

Turnbull caught out lying AGAIN

http://delimiter.com.au/2014/04/17/turnbull-lies-nbn-triple-j-listeners/

The only case where NBN Co would not make a return on the Government’s investment, according to the company’s Strategic Review, is in one revenue projection case for Labor’s original FTTP policy; but even then it would be expected to make only a modest loss — meaning the project would still not be listed as an expense for the Federal Government, and the Government would take only a small hit to its finances.

One problem here is that a small loss Labor style is typically not that small.

For Myths, I have a number he would do well to remember that's not based on his ifs and guesswork.

26.5%

 

[sydboy007]

One problem here is that a small loss Labor style is typically not that small.

For Myths, I have a number he would do well to remember that's not based on his ifs and guesswork.

26.5%

Lets just hope the Liberals have a better team of negotiators with Telstra and Optus than they do for managed trade deals. Hopefully they can do better than what they've been able to achieve on say beef, let alone rice access

The Liberal's CBN - a project without a target end date, just a request to build it ASAP.

If Howard hadn't been so short term in his thinking with the Telstra sale, and had sold separate wholesale and retail companies, pretty much all this debate would have never occurred.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

And back to the real world comrades.

Many people in Aitkenvale, Townsville Q. distressed by NBN.

Either can't get connected or can't understand the concept.

What a fubar.

And in 1 week they lose their phone access.

gg

 

[So_Cynical]

But WHY?

Is it for the same reason that we needed more pink batts in Australian houses than most other countries in the OECD or more solar panels on Australian roofs than most other countries in the OECD or more asylum seekers sucking on our welfare system than most other countries in the OECD.
Besides,WHY is doing anything 'comparable or even better than most other countries in the OECD' a criterion/justification for spending billions of Australian tax payer dollars.:shake:

You must of missed this post from 5 pages back.

New Bureau of Statistics internet usage figures out today, to 31st Dec 2013

Surprise surprise the 20 year trend continues with Aussies Downloading more than ever, 55% up on the same period last year with fixed line downloads more than 22 times greater than wireless, and wireless at close to capacity.

In the three months leading up to 31 December 2013, Australian internet users downloaded 860,000TB of data (823,000TB through fixed line connections and 37,400 via wireless). While that's a big figure in and of itself, it's a 55 per cent increase on the volume of data downloaded just one year earlier.

http://m.cnet.com.au/australians-downloading-more-and-at-greater-speeds-339347031.htm