NBN Rollout Scrapped

medicowallet · 8 June 2011

trainspotter said:
So we build an NBN so 64 people can play HD Games? Ummmmmmm I don't get it??

I am trying to look at it with an open mind So_Cyclical. Ummmmmmm what about training an army to shoot with FPS games? You could put on Gran Tourismo 5 and do driving lessons for 64 people. After that ya pretty much got me flummoxed.

I can see the NBN used as a great business tool for companies that require high speed internet such as the CSIRO or ATO or the Big Banks due to the volume of information crunched. I can see some smaller companies like photolabs/multi media etc gaining benefits due to the file size of their work. Schools for education and Hospitals for radiography etc are a given.

I can see the wondrous things the NBN is going to do for the country, I truly can. The problem for me is the implementation strategy. Build it where it is needed most FIRST, iron out the bugs in high density areas THEN with a higher takeup rate PAYING for it "going forward" send it to the country and high cost areas.

Not that hard really.

Sort of.

1. Purchase Telstra infrastructure.
2. Offer ADSL2 where it can be, with incentives for 3rd party ISPs to put DSLAMS into regional areas, and the current infrastructure upgraded to ADSL2 by NBN Co.

Offer NBN speeds to schools, hospitals, or businesses who don't already have speeds considerably faster than NBN can offer.

3. Save $40 billion and invest in rail, ports, manufacturing.

4. Use this guaranteed revenue stream from rail and ports to potentially upgrade the network in 10-15 years when it may need to be.

5. Listen to gaming nerds whinge. Perhaps lose some votes. Look like a hero to taxpayers. Everyone in Australia becomes wealthier. Decreased risk of investment.

NBNMyths · 8 June 2011

ghotib said:
Is this a myth? It's from another board I frequent. The writer is somewhere in northern NSW on a "crappy Sat. connection":

FWIW, at the moment we live within a hundred miles of Sydney, Wollongong, and Canberra and we have no access to ADSL. Last time our neighbours talked to Telstra about how they could improve their internet service Telstra told them they shouldn't expect any better because they're in the outback. Our wireless broadband is faster than their satellite, but speed is noticeably variable and files bigger than about 20Mb (e.g. many software upgrades) often fail to download completely.

Thanks for any info:

Ghoti

Sort of.

The NBN will do fibre to all towns with >1000 premises, plus all town with >500 premises IF they are located along the NBN backhaul route. This represents 93% of the population. This will provide speeds of up to 1000Mbps (1Gbps).

Outside this "fibre footprint", 4% will receive 4G/LTE fixed wireless, initially at up to a peak of 12Mbps. There is potential for these speeds to improve in the future.

The final 3% will get satellite at up to 12Mbps peak. There is little prospect of this improving substantially without launching new satellites.

ADSL2+ offers a maximum theoretical of 24Mbps, but in practise it's very unlikely that the homes set for wireless or sat would get those speeds due to distance from the exchange. The big problem with ADSL tech is that it gets worse, and collapses as you move away from the exchange. The max useful range is about 5km. The average ADSL2+ speed in Australia is about 9Mbps.

My guess is that the wireless customers will get a service at least as good in practise as ADSL2+ would deliver. The sat users will get the speed of ADSL/2+, but the latency (lag) will make it a poorer service.

In the fibre footprint, the copper will be decommissioned about 18 months after the fibre goes through. Remaining customers will have to either migrate to fibre, or dump their fixed line and go to a mobile connection.

Outside the fibre footprint, the copper will remain until at least July 2022. After that, its need to remain will be assessed. It could be that by then either the fibre will be expanded, or some new long-range wireless tech (eg the CSIRO's Ngara) might be able to make it redundant.

You can get an indication of which towns are slated for fibre or wireless on the NBN website:
http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/main/site-base/main-areas/our-services/coverage-maps/

cynic · 9 June 2011

NBNMyths said:
On my understanding, yes.
eg: http://www.pacoahlgren.com/does-quantum-entanglement-destroy-the-theory-of-relativity/

Wait a minute. Didn’t Einstein say the universal speed limit is bound by light? So what’s going on? The answer: nobody knows. Even Einstein was befuddled by quantum entanglement. But the ramifications are clear ”” if it’s possible for any element in nature to transmit data (or force, or whatever) instantaneously ”” and the phenomenon of quantum entanglement has been firmly established scientifically – then Special Relativity either needs to make an exception, or it needs to be remodeled in a big way.

My point is that data transmission by quantum entanglement hasn't even been established experimentally, so the chances that it will be:
a) discovered; and
b) verified; and
c) developed; and
d) commercialised

....sometime on the foreseeable future is highly implausible.

Well, from your response I can see that you don't understand Einstein's theory of relativity at all! Nor do you have an adequate comprehension of quantum entanglement theory which, whilst it may be as yet unproven, has been experimentally demonstrated!

Super light velocities of particles of matter are somewhat irrelevant to data transmission when facilitated via the application of quantum entanglement theory. Why? Put quite simply , the stimulation of one of a pair of particles results in a predictable alteration in the state of its partner, irrespective of the distance between these two particles.
Information has no mass and is not synonymous with its storage medium (whether that medium be matter,force,energy or the aforementioned particles).
So where does super light velocity fit into this equation?
Did this theory actually state that matter/mass/energy traversed these two points?
(No! It certainly did not!)

As for universal speed limits, that misconception arose from misunderstandings regarding the mathematical scope of Einstein's equations. When considering super light velocity a complex number (square root of a negative number!) appears in several of the formulae. The theory, by its very design, was never intended to accommodate the investigation of super light velocity! It neither includes nor excludes this possibility, it quite simply does not address it!

Saying we shouldn't build the NBN because of an unproven theorem is like saying we should all give up on cars, planes, trains etc from now on, because teleportation via quantum entanglement might be just around the corner.

I never made any representations as to whether or not NBN should be built! I quite simply challenged you for your audacity in declaring certain technologies as "future-proof" and dogmaticallyy defending every challenge that is posted on this thread prior to performing adequate research.

BTW I shall not be doing any more research on your behalf, BOOFHEAD,oops sorry! I meant to say NBNMyths (freudian slip on my part!)

P.S. I'm somewhat curious as to the size of the corner that NBN is just around/lurking behind. Must be pretty big! I haven't seen it in my future!

ghotib · 9 June 2011

NBNMyths said:
Sort of.

The NBN will do fibre to all towns with >1000 premises, plus all town with >500 premises IF they are located along the NBN backhaul route. This represents 93% of the population. This will provide speeds of up to 1000Mbps (1Gbps).
<snip>

Thanks Myths.

NBNMyths · 9 June 2011

cynic said:
Well, from your response I can see that you don't understand Einstein's theory of relativity at all! Nor do you have an adequate comprehension of quantum entanglement theory which, whilst it may be as yet unproven, has been experimentally demonstrated!

Super light velocities of particles of matter are somewhat irrelevant to data transmission when facilitated via the application of quantum entanglement theory. Why? Put quite simply , the stimulation of one of a pair of particles results in a predictable alteration in the state of its partner, irrespective of the distance between these two particles.
Information has no mass and is not synonymous with its storage medium (whether that medium be matter,force,energy or the aforementioned particles).
So where does super light velocity fit into this equation?
Did this theory actually state that matter/mass/energy traversed these two points?
(No! It certainly did not!)

As for universal speed limits, that misconception arose from misunderstandings regarding the mathematical scope of Einstein's equations. When considering super light velocity a complex number (square root of a negative number!) appears in several of the formulae. The theory, by its very design, was never intended to accommodate the investigation of super light velocity! It neither includes nor excludes this possibility, it quite simply does not address it!

I never made any representations as to whether or not NBN should be built! I quite simply challenged you for your audacity in declaring certain technologies as "future-proof" and dogmaticallyy defending every challenge that is posted on this thread prior to performing adequate research.

BTW I shall not be doing any more research on your behalf, BOOFHEAD,oops sorry! I meant to say NBNMyths (freudian slip on my part!)

P.S. I'm somewhat curious as to the size of the corner that NBN is just around/lurking behind. Must be pretty big! I haven't seen it in my future!

I never pretended to fully understand quantum entanglement theory (my physics education is limited to 3U HSC, BTW), nor do I plan on giving myself a crash course. Again, as I understand it from what I have read, whether quantum entanglement per se has been experimentally demonstrated or not is beside the point. Data transmission using quantum entanglement has not been demonstrated, making the point rather moot. Its relevance to any discussion on the NBN is zero.

I also never said fibre was future proof. I said it was "the most future proof solution". In other words, more future proof than the alternatives available, being copper or wireless. You're right that nothing is 100% future proof, nor will it ever be. But on the current understanding of technologies, optical fibre is the most future proof technology for use in data transmission. End of story.

Not sure I understand the boofhead remark. I assume you're implying I am a sockpuppet of BOOFHEAD. I'm sure the site admin can check this, should you wish to put a complaint in.

Is the NBN just around the corner? Well I guess that depends on where you live. You might have to wait 9 more years, by which time you will probably be cursing the former Government for not doing something 10 years ago, when Japan and SK began rolling out their fibre.

boofhead · 9 June 2011

Not sure - perhaps they're implying we're the same person. I know that isn't true.

As for use of entanglement - experimental high temperate working examples use 50 kelvin. That is very cold. It is not yet known it can happen at room temperature.

Greg · 9 June 2011

Having read the threads of NBNMyths and Cynic, I roll back in my chair, immensely impressed with the depth of this thread and the astounding intellect it attracts. In search of a break from the intensity, I simply ask, "can someone pull my finger?"
Thanks

bellenuit · 9 June 2011

NBNMyths said:
I also never said fibre was future proof. I said it was "the most future proof solution". In other words, more future proof than the alternatives available, being copper or wireless.

This is meant as a genuine question in regards to how future proof fibre is.

When you say that fibre is the most future proof solution, are you referring to the medium in general or to the specific fibre being installed by the NBN? For instance, just as UTP cabling is used for LAN implementations, as LAN speeds increased, the UTP specifications changed and we went from CAT 3 to CAT 5 and now CAT6 (although I am not sure if the latter is unshielded). So the UTP being installed in the 1990s (spec Cat 3 then) that supported 10 Mbits/sec would have to be ripped out and replaced by Cat 5 or Cat 6 UTP if we want to run reliably at 100 Mbits/sec or 1000 Mbits/sec.

So when you talk of fibre having a high degree of future proofing, do you mean that we could run significantly higher speeds than has been announced up to now down the actual fibre that is currently being laid or do you mean that the higher speeds can be supported by fibre technology but will require a fibre cable manufactured to a much higher spec than that currently being laid (and possibly required new transmission equipment at each node along the route)? The latter obviously means significant costs to provide future bandwidth upgrades compared to say wireless that may only require upgrading the transmission/receiving equipment.

NBNMyths · 9 June 2011

bellenuit said:
This is meant as a genuine question in regards to how future proof fibre is.

When you say that fibre is the most future proof solution, are you referring to the medium in general or to the specific fibre being installed by the NBN? For instance, just as UTP cabling is used for LAN implementations, as LAN speeds increased, the UTP specifications changed and we went from CAT 3 to CAT 5 and now CAT6 (although I am not sure if the latter is unshielded). So the UTP being installed in the 1990s (spec Cat 3 then) that supported 10 Mbits/sec would have to be ripped out and replaced by Cat 5 or Cat 6 UTP if we want to run reliably at 100 Mbits/sec or 1000 Mbits/sec.

So when you talk of fibre having a high degree of future proofing, do you mean that we could run significantly higher speeds than has been announced up to now down the actual fibre that is currently being laid or do you mean that the higher speeds can be supported by fibre technology but will require a fibre cable manufactured to a much higher spec than that currently being laid (and possibly required new transmission equipment at each node along the route)? The latter obviously means significant costs to provide future bandwidth upgrades compared to say wireless that may only require upgrading the transmission/receiving equipment.

No, I mean that the fibre that is actually being laid for the NBN can support significantly higher speeds than will be in place initially.

Fibre has been improved over the years, but even very old fibre can support far higher speeds than will be used for the NBN through multiplexing. It's not quite the same as copper, where there are different standards supporting vastly different speeds.

boofhead · 9 June 2011

To further the point - submarine cables joining continents and countries have been through various speed upgrades. Admittedly they are of a different design to FTTH fibre.

The main issues for fibre upgradeability would be the fibre itself - that is the material and quality along with the shielding of the fibre.

Assuming they don't scrape the bottom of the barrel for quality (no idea what conditions are placed in the tender documents) it should be upgradable by replacing termination hardware. It is similar to how copper has been extended beyond the initial call quality of the original phone systems.

noco · 9 June 2011

Oh dear, Oh dear, this surely can't be true.

http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...mail/comments/nbn_brings_wealth/#commentsmore

trainspotter · 9 June 2011

WHOAAAAAAAAAA MAMA !!!!!

THE cost of staff for the National Broadband Network has reached $132 million a year against revenue of only $3 million this year.

Executives are on big salaries - 34 NBN Co staff are on between $300,000 and $400,000 a year, putting some of them ahead of Prime Minister Julia Gillard.

Another 13 earn more than $400,000, including four executives on more than $700,000 a year for the project overseen by Communications Minister Stephen Conroy.

NBN Co chief Michael Quigley earns more than $1.8 million a year.

And, in the face of the salaries, the NBN has only about 560 customers throughout the country.

By the end of this month, NBN Co is expected to have 1000 staff, which will mean almost two employees for every customer.

None of its customers is paying to access the broadband network. The service is free to internet service providers during a trial period.

From the link noco provided !

sptrawler · 9 June 2011

Well at least it can only get better from here, oh come on it has to, please someone tell me I am dreaming. This can't be happening.

NBNMyths · 9 June 2011

noco said:
Oh dear, Oh dear, this surely can't be true.

http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...mail/comments/nbn_brings_wealth/#commentsmore

trainspotter said:
WHOAAAAAAAAAA MAMA !!!!!

From the link noco provided !

sptrawler said:
Well at least it can only get better from here, oh come on it has to, please someone tell me I am dreaming. This can't be happening.

Is there an issue here? We have a group of experienced execs, engineers etc designing and building the biggest infrastructure project in Australia's history and writing tenders and signing contracts worth (to date) ~$10 billion dollars, with another ~$25 billion to go.

How much should we be paying them?

NBN is a startup. Of course its costs and employee:customer ratio will be high to begin with. It is with any major project.

BTW, an interesting post on whirlpool:
$132m with close to 1,000 staff. $132,000 per year average on a massive infrastructure project like this actually sounds pretty reasonable.

Telstra's wage bill last year was 26% of their $21bn operating costs spread over 45,220 employees.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/telstra-wields-job-axe-with-1000-to-go/story-e6frf7jo-1225944635627
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telstra

$5.46bn / 45,220 = $120,743 per year average

So even though NBN's current employees are predominantly executives, engineers and other high-end staff, the average wage is only slightly higher than Telstra's. Even including all their store/office staff etc.

I do wonder (as an aside) that given the story is full of known errors (eg the number of customers), whether anything else in it is correct?

edit:
NBN's top 100 staff:
Of NBN Co's "top 100 employees", over half of the group had two university degrees (including four doctorates), 53 had worked in senior telco sector roles in Australia and overseas, over 15 per cent had worked in top roles in "globally recognised companies", including ASX50 companies, and 27 were engineers by training.

In addition, seven out of NBN Co chief executive's eight direct reports had lived and worked overseas in the global telecommunications industry.
http://www.zdnet.com.au/nbn-co-rejects-coalitions-talentless-slur-339305168.htm

I suspect these people are worth the money.....

So_Cynical · 10 June 2011

Foxtel lost money for over a decade...start up's burn cash, we all know that.

what's new. :dunno:

DB008 · 10 June 2011

NBNMyths said:
The NBN will do fibre to all towns with >1000 premises, plus all town with >500 premises IF they are located along the NBN backhaul route. This represents 93% of the population. This will provide speeds of up to 1000Mbps (1Gbps).

Outside this "fibre footprint", 4% will receive 4G/LTE fixed wireless, initially at up to a peak of 12Mbps. There is potential for these speeds to improve in the future.

The final 3% will get satellite at up to 12Mbps peak. There is little prospect of this improving substantially without launching new satellites.

World Internet Stats
http://www.internetworldstats.com/pacific.htm#au

AU - 21,262,641 population (2010) - Country Area: 7,682,557 sq km

Capital City: Canberra - GNI p.c.US$ 26,900 (2004), per World Bank

17,033,826 users as of Aug/09, 80.1% penetration, per Nielsen

Not saying that 80.1% has ADSL speed, but the whole "93%" line that has been touted is a bit of a marketing ploy.

DB008 · 10 June 2011

Australian Bureau of Statistics
8153.0 - Internet Activity, Australia, Dec 2010

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/

HIGHLIGHTS
At the end of December 2010, there were 10.4 million active internet subscribers in Australia (excluding internet connections through mobile handsets). This represents annual growth of 16.7% and an increase of 9.9% since the end of June 2010.

The phasing out of dial-up internet connections continued with 93% of internet connections being non dial-up. Australians also continued to access increasingly faster download speeds, with 81% of access connections offering a download speed of 1.5Mbps or greater.

Digital subscriber line (DSL) continued to be the major technology for connections, accounting for 43% of the total internet connections, followed closely by mobile wireless (40% of total internet connections). However, the DSL percentage share has decreased since June 2010 when DSL represented 44% of the total connections.

Mobile wireless (excluding mobile handset connections) was the fastest growing internet access technology in actual numbers, increasing from 2.8 million in December 2009 to 4.2 million in December 2010.

But the NBN is only just starting to become operational....

NBNMyths · 10 June 2011

DB008 said:
World Internet Stats
http://www.internetworldstats.com/pacific.htm#au

Not saying that 80.1% has ADSL speed, but the whole "93%" line that has been touted is a bit of a marketing ploy.

DB008 said:
Australian Bureau of Statistics
8153.0 - Internet Activity, Australia, Dec 2010

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/

But the NBN is only just starting to become operational....

Not sure of the point(s) you're trying to make?

1.5Mbps is hardly fast (even the lowest speed on the NBN is 12Mbps). Also, what do you mean by "93% is a marketing ploy", in relation to us having 80% internet penetration now?

trainspotter · 10 June 2011

NBN is not a startup company. It is a Government funded olygopoly. PERIOD. There is a difference. It is in it's initial phase of "design and construct" but it sure as **** aint a startup company.

Seeing one poster in particular is the full bottle on everything about the shiny blue cable why doesn't the "champion" go and find EXACTLY how many people have ACTUALLY connected to the NBN thus far?

And post it in here for all of us neophytes to revel in. Because that is their job right?

NBNMyths · 10 June 2011

trainspotter said:
NBN is not a startup company. It is a Government funded olygopoly. PERIOD. There is a difference. It is in it's initial phase of "design and construct" but it sure as **** aint a startup company.

Seeing one poster in particular is the full bottle on everything about the shiny blue cable why doesn't the "champion" go and find EXACTLY how many people have ACTUALLY connected to the NBN thus far?

And post it in here for all of us neophytes to revel in. Because that is their job right?

Well according to page 4 of the hansard of the joint committee from 16th May, as at 6th May 2011 there were 723 connections ordered in Tasmania, of which 712 had been connected as of that date. Then there were the initial 7 trial connections in Armidale as ay 18th May. So there is at least 730. On top of that, each of the 4 active RSPs is allowed to connect a few people per week in Armidale, so my guess would be that they are now up around 760.

The actual numbers aren't really the issue though. It's the fact that News quoted there being 561, when that is a demonstrably false figure. It clearly isn't hard to get accurate info, they just chose to sensationalise using incorrect info which aided their slant on the story.

NBN Rollout Scrapped

medicowallet

NBNMyths

cynic

ghotib

THIMKER

NBNMyths

boofhead

Greg

bellenuit

NBNMyths

boofhead

noco

trainspotter

sptrawler

NBNMyths

So_Cynical

The Contrarian Averager

DB008

DB008

NBNMyths

trainspotter

NBNMyths

Similar threads

NBN Rollout Scrapped

THIMKER

The Contrarian Averager

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency