Sellect a labour seat that has won narrowly in the last ellection. Than offer the winning labour member a good job ( if he knows howto think just a bit) than he would know that the present Gillard government can not last for long, so he would grabb it. Than the byellection would most likely go to the coalition. That would mean : one seat less for labour, and one more seat for the coalition. I find that such trick are used all the times in aussie politics, just as bribes are used to bribe independants, and even offering non-labour members a ministery jobs. By the way, the broadband has helped Julia Gilard to remain in the office, it is sure that broadband will cost her the office becouse it will take 8 years to roll out the optic fible cable. Only in 3 years before the next election, it will become apperent that broadband as we know it now, will become a grey haired donosour !

I think all MPs could probably double their salary overnight in the private sector.

freediver wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 9:01am:

I think all MPs could probably double their salary overnight in the private sector.

They usually do don't they after all the grubby little deals and favours they do.

It's also a sad indicment that many in private sector management, admin and B.O.D's are vastly overpaid and certainly over-rated.

The duplicity, dishonesty, envy and greed that spawned the Gillard Government will also be it`s downfall. It won`t be long before this Government destroys itself.

Quote:

Only in 3 years before the next election, it will become apperent that broadband as we know it now, will become a grey haired donosour !

It's a big statement to say that there won't be any better technologies than fibre optics in the foreseeable future, but whatever the case, the broadband solution will do the job for a long time to come.

As for Julia Gilard, I don't understand how can anyone trust her. and talk about stable government. The fact is that : Whatever is thrown at Kavin Rudd, by enyone or by julia gillard. She has supported him on every issue and sayed that she was very loyal to him. That was before she had the numbers to overthrow him. Than we all saw how loyal she was or is. As for economy record there is the fact that noone can change : they inherited huge surplus, and in 2 and half years created a huge defficit. And Julia Gillars helped to achieve that.

Amadd wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 1:55pm:

Quote: Only in 3 years before the next election, it will become apperent that broadband as we know it now, will become a grey haired donosour ! It's a big statement to say that there won't be any better technologies than fibre optics in the foreseeable future, but whatever the case, the broadband solution will do the job for a long time to come.

The problem ,amadd, is that it will take a lot longer than 3 years to build the 'broadband solution'....

I think it's sort of like painting the Sydney Harbour Bridge......by the time you get to one end, you have to go back to the other end and start over....

Quote:

I think it's sort of like painting the Sydney Harbour Bridge......by the time you get to one end, you have to go back to the other end and start over....

How so?
That's the idea behind implementing such costly infrastructure. Do it once (for a long time to come anyway) and do it properly.

Amadd wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 2:18pm:

Quote: I think it's sort of like painting the Sydney Harbour Bridge......by the time you get to one end, you have to go back to the other end and start over.... How so? That's the idea behind implementing such costly infrastructure. Do it once (for a long time to come anyway) and do it properly.

Well...basically, to lay fibre op cable to 75-80% of houses in Australia is going to take about 10 years.....

And to say there will be NO improvement on fibre in the next decade is kind of like saying summer won't be hot.....nice idea, but almost certainly wrong....
And at it's very best, underground fibre cables last 25 yrs.....fibre optic cables run along overhead cables last around 10 years.

So if it takes 10 years to install all the fibre op cable...by the time you finish, you'll need to replace all the overhead fibre optic cable.....

And that is with out allowing for technological advances, that 'may' make fibre op obselete in less than 10 years...

there is another competition, the wireless ! Remember the old telephone cables ? Countless trees had to be cutt, than thousands of tonnes of copper had to be used, than the wireless transmission was introduced. In the future there will be shift woward smaller and portable communication. that means,,,,, optic cable be useless.

I don't know if this will work. If it doesn't 'll give the link/

It is an interesting interview on the future of broadband in thhttp://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_podcasting&task=playaudio&id=29&f=10&Itemid=41is country

No it didn't


http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_podcasting&task=playaudio&id=29&f=10&Itemid=41

Amadd wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 1:55pm:

Quote: Only in 3 years before the next election, it will become apperent that broadband as we know it now, will become a grey haired donosour ! It's a big statement to say that there won't be any better technologies than fibre optics in the foreseeable future, but whatever the case, the broadband solution will do the job for a long time to come.

Actually, the CSIRO are experimenting as we speak, utilizing UHF and finding that they can split the frequency so it will carry data to more house holds and that it is as fast if not faster that future optic projections. It's cheap because the infrastructure already exists and it can be implemented a hell of a lot quicker than any optic roll out. It's also wireless.

This idea of putting all our eggs into an optic fibre basket is foolish for a nation such as ours. We should be relying on a variety of solutions that address cost, capacity and distance.

Ok its time to explain something to all of you who do not know the bush situation here in the bush. I like to apologieze for my poor english, becouse I never attended an english speaking school, but I will tray. My computer connection is via satelite, and it works ok. But we have also the wireless connection  but unfortunately we have only the telstra ,,NEXT G,, service. In the big smoke you can have ,,3 G,, and it is much cheaper than next G becouse telstra is not permitting competitors so they can we haveto pay with blood sotu speak. Before that nTelstra had the CDMA also its own desighn sothat no one could compete. Before the first and second sale of telstra, My computer connection  did cost me $100.00 a month plus, that was dialup speed, pluss the modem connection each time I connected to the internet. But after the second sale  of telstra the federal government, ( John Howard and Mr, Olsen put aside some money from the second sale of telstra , and We here in the bush were blessed with satilite connections, free installations pluss real cheak connectionsw. But there are still some single minded politicians like Barnaby Joyce who sayed that if telstra was sold, people in the bush would be worse of. If we only compare the mobile phones , our NEXT G with some optus ar wodaphone, or virgin blue we can  notice that we are still ripped of by Telstra. Now please keep in mind that, If Julia Gillard ever succeed with the broadband, it will be  made again to a government monopoly, and we in the bush will be ripped of again. This is the reality here in the bush. And the bog tham-tham is about the bush communications.

janko wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 3:29pm:

Ok its time to explain something to all of you who do not know the bush situation here in the bush. I like to apologieze for my poor english, becouse I never attended an english speaking school, but I will tray. My computer connection is via satelite, and it works ok. But we have also the wireless connection  but unfortunately we have only the telstra ,,NEXT G,, service. In the big smoke you can have ,,3 G,, and it is much cheaper than next G becouse telstra is not permitting competitors so they can we haveto pay with blood sotu speak. Before that nTelstra had the CDMA also its own desighn sothat no one could compete. Before the first and second sale of telstra, My computer connection  did cost me $100.00 a month plus, that was dialup speed, pluss the modem connection each time I connected to the internet. But after the second sale  of telstra the federal government, ( John Howard and Mr, Olsen put aside some money from the second sale of telstra , and We here in the bush were blessed with satilite connections, free installations pluss real cheak connectionsw. But there are still some single minded politicians like Barnaby Joyce who sayed that if telstra was sold, people in the bush would be worse of. If we only compare the mobile phones , our NEXT G with some optus ar wodaphone, or virgin blue we can  notice that we are still ripped of by Telstra. Now please keep in mind that, If Julia Gillard ever succeed with the broadband, it will be  made again to a government monopoly, and we in the bush will be ripped of again. This is the reality here in the bush. And the bog tham-tham is about the bush communications.

Bullshit....10 years ago I had a satellite service in the bush...it was about $100 per month..it worked on satellite download and dial-up return...

And currently the mobile phone/internet system is 4G, not 3G....

You are talking absolute rubbish....that may be how things are in China....but not here...

I suspect that while wireless may work for low volume like crackly phone calls, or for content where everyone is waching the same thing, if everyone wants to watch a different TV show or movie, in high quality, or communicate with each other over a high quality video link, you need a physical cable.

Something to do with bandwidth limits.

Fibre optics has been the best option for well over a decade now. Obviously it is possible that it could be replaced overnight, just as there was the possibility (now eventuating) that copper got replaced. Suggesting we hold off on fibre optics is like someone last century suggesting we stick with writing letters in case a new technology came along that was better than copper telephone lines.

Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.

Gizmo you are the one talking bullshit here. 10 years ago noone had sattelite srvice here. And only 4 weeks ago I have made enquiry about mobile phone and the person  using it was deffenitely G3. You seel to be generalizing the regional and the outback

janko wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 4:16pm:

Gizmo you are the one talking bullshit here. 10 years ago noone had sattelite srvice here. And only 4 weeks ago I have made enquiry about mobile phone and the person  using it was deffenitely G3. You seel to be generalizing the regional and the outback

I had a satellite service in Tootool in SW NSW in 1999....
It was satellite download and dial up up load.....that was before DSL..And it was 3 years before ADSL...


And considering I moved to a regional area, outside Wagga Wagga in 1995.....I'd guess I know more about it than you do...

freediver wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 4:03pm:

Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.

My post wasn't off topic, but it has been moved and I cannot access the place to where it has been moved.

Please listen to this podcast

What he says about the NBN will "blow it out of the water"

http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_podcasting&task=playaudio&id=29&f=10&Itemid=41

Soryy what I tried to do didn't work



[url]http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_podcasting&task=playaudio&id=29&f=10&Itemid=41[/url]

http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_podcasting&task=playaudio&id=29&f=10&Itemid=41

This is better..sorry

Interviews with experts on 2 GB



Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:55:00
The future of broadband in Australia
Chris Smith talks to independent telecommunications consultant Kevin Morgan about the future of broadband in Australia.
[url]http://podcasts.mrn.com.au.s3.amazonaws.com/chrissmith/chrissmithmorgan270810.mp3[/url]


Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:34:00
Wireless satellite internet services that offer a cheaper and faster alternative to the fibre optic NBN
Technology expert Stephen Fenech talks about wireless satellite internet services that offer a cheaper and faster alternative to the fibre optic NBN.
http://podcasts.mrn.com.au.s3.amazonaws.com/chrissmith/chrissmithfenech190810.mp3

http://podcasts.mrn.com.au.s3.amazonaws.com/chrissmith/chrissmithfenech160810.mp3

I must admit, it does sound like a bit of a dog for what we're able to get out of it.

janko wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 7:40am:

Sellect a labour seat that has won narrowly in the last ellection. Than offer the winning labour member a good job ( if he knows howto think just a bit) than he would know that the present Gillard government can not last for long, so he would grabb it. Than the byellection would most likely go to the coalition. That would mean : one seat less for labour, and one more seat for the coalition. I find that such trick are used all the times in aussie politics, just as bribes are used to bribe independants, and even offering non-labour members a ministery jobs. By the way, the broadband has helped Julia Gilard to remain in the office, it is sure that broadband will cost her the office becouse it will take 8 years to roll out the optic fible cable. Only in 3 years before the next election, it will become apperent that broadband as we know it now, will become a grey haired donosour !

#1: use a spell checker.
#2: be careful what you wish for.
the under lying reason why any gov't here wants fiber internet is NOT to help us out.
NO, NO.
it's to implement a better big brother.
i'll give some reasons:
#1: free to air TV and cable are suffering now, because they are censored.
ppl have a greater choice in info/entertainment on the internet. and minimal censorship. take this site eg, do you really think this will be here with the govt controlling broadband?
not likely, and this is a pretty mild forum.
#2: at this point, it's very easy to send moneys thru various sites from one country to another without the tax dept entering the picture. and boy, do they want that stopped.
#3: porn sites rate almost as highly as You Tube, Yahoo, et al. that's now.
whilst this site is #732,458. LOL.
#4: the media is just waiting to take the internet over. 5-6 years tops.
could go on and on, but i'm sure you get the picture or maybe you won't, in a few years time.
j.

It's here Sappho:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1284011846

cockney doll. BRAVO ! THANK YOU ! I was listening to that link you have provided hare OH DEAR ! I would recomand to averyone here to listen to the expert what they have to say about the  broadband that the labour is forcing on us. Wireless is the future, the ahole USA has  installed it for 7 billion AUD, instead of 43 billion   in australia. To campare it per capita, we australians will pay $2000.00  per man, woman and child, while  USA payed only $30.00 AUD. And the wireless is better and faster.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 2:43pm:

... technological advances, that 'may' make fibre op obselete in less than 10 years...

Then again, Earth 'may' be invaded by giant carnivorous hamsters from space, which would render this conversation academic.  :)


janko wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 3:04pm:

there is another competition, the wireless !

This is what some people who know about telecommunications had to sa about the fiction of wireless broadband:

Quote:

>> > > One of these days I'll find the Magic Wireless Fairy and whack it >> > > against the rock of physics until it's good and dead... > > > > I'll join you, and then stomp on its head a few times just to make > > sure it IS dead. pointless, it's a zombie meme - it'll just re-animate.

It's something only the ignorant and those who sell wireless peddle.

Quote:

... that means,,,,, optic cable be useless.

How do you think the wireless towers are connected?

# wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 11:57am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 2:43pm: ... technological advances, that 'may' make fibre op obselete in less than 10 years... Then again, Earth 'may' be invaded by giant carnivorous hamsters from space, which would render this conversation academic.  :) janko wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 3:04pm: there is another competition, the wireless ! This is what some people who know about telecommunications had to sa about the fiction of wireless broadband: Quote: >> > > One of these days I'll find the Magic Wireless Fairy and whack it >> > > against the rock of physics until it's good and dead... > > > > I'll join you, and then stomp on its head a few times just to make > > sure it IS dead. pointless, it's a zombie meme - it'll just re-animate. It's something only the ignorant and those who sell wireless peddle. [quote] ... that means,,,,, optic cable be useless.

How do you think the wireless towers are connected?[/quote]

Admirable effort in avoiding reality, bravo1

aussiefree2ride wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 1:13pm:

... Admirable effort in avoiding reality, bravo1

You live in a different reality? That explains a lot.

Amadd wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 5:46pm:

I must admit, it does sound like a bit of a dog for what we're able to get out of it.

Bear  :) in mind that 2GB isn't exactly unbiased.

# wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 1:28pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Sep 12th, 2010 at 1:13pm: ... Admirable effort in avoiding reality, bravo1 You live in a different reality? That explains a lot.

Different enough to be aware of the difference between a wireless broadband system and a full on fibre optic one such as the ALP are shonking around with ATM.

# wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 11:57am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 2:43pm: ... technological advances, that 'may' make fibre op obselete in less than 10 years... Then again, Earth 'may' be invaded by giant carnivorous hamsters from space, which would render this conversation academic.  :) janko wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 3:04pm: there is another competition, the wireless ! This is what some people who know about telecommunications had to sa about the fiction of wireless broadband: Quote: >> > > One of these days I'll find the Magic Wireless Fairy and whack it >> > > against the rock of physics until it's good and dead... > > > > I'll join you, and then stomp on its head a few times just to make > > sure it IS dead. pointless, it's a zombie meme - it'll just re-animate. It's something only the ignorant and those who sell wireless peddle. [quote] ... that means,,,,, optic cable be useless.

How do you think the wireless towers are connected?[/quote]


"Then again, Earth 'may' be invaded by giant carnivorous hamsters from space, which would render this conversation academic.  :)"

Absolutely....and crystal technology may be developed...or the Sun may send out a massive EMP burst that destroys all technology....

freediver wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 3:56pm:

I suspect that while wireless may work for low volume like crackly phone calls, or for content where everyone is waching the same thing, if everyone wants to watch a different TV show or movie, in high quality, or communicate with each other over a high quality video link, you need a physical cable. Something to do with bandwidth limits. Fibre optics has been the best option for well over a decade now. Obviously it is possible that it could be replaced overnight, just as there was the possibility (now eventuating) that copper got replaced. Suggesting we hold off on fibre optics is like someone last century suggesting we stick with writing letters in case a new technology came along that was better than copper telephone lines.

The response to a question on wireless by one who knows far better that I:

Quote:

For the long answer, see Shannon-Hartley theorem plus various ACMA spectrum planning documents. I understand what Beazley was talking about when he said "vomit point" (just when you think 'I'll vomit if I have to explain this one more time, that's when people start to understand it). Thought experiment: wireless broadband for all Sydney with (say) three million households Using the LTE data from slide 16 of this presentation: http://www.nbnco.com.au/publications-and-announcements/latest-announcements/doc/presentation-to-the-australian-information-industry-association 10 users per cell with a good signal can expect approx 10 Mbps. By that maths, and with the next technology, to serve 10 Mbps at peak periods you'd need 300,000 cells in Sydney. Note that I'm not getting into arguments like the "wireless will overtake fibre" nostrum that's snared the ignorant among our politicians; nor am I anywhere near familiar enough with spectrum management to imagine whether you could set up 300k cells in Sydney with what's available; nor am I considering the potential real estate costs associated with 300,000 spectrum sites, nor the capital costs, nor whether it's worth pulling fibre to 300k cells without bothering to go the extra kilometre to connect the home directly... (I have two mobile broadband devices, one 3 and one NextG. I'm not a wireless luddite.)

aussiefree2ride wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 1:58pm:

# wrote on Sep 12th, 2010 at 1:28pm: aussiefree2ride wrote on Sep 12th, 2010 at 1:13pm: ... Admirable effort in avoiding reality, bravo1 You live in a different reality? That explains a lot. Different enough to be aware of the difference between a wireless broadband system and a full on fibre optic one such as the ALP are shonking around with ATM.

It has been said that it's easier for the rich to live cheaply. They can  afford shoes that will last a lifetime, while the poor must get by with ten times as many cheaper pairs, which cost more overall.

Do we want the option that's cheap in the short term, but expensive in the long run, or would we be better off paying more now for something that will save money later? I think it's a good use of my $5 per week.

# wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 11:57am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 2:43pm: ... technological advances, that 'may' make fibre op obselete in less than 10 years... Then again, Earth 'may' be invaded by giant carnivorous hamsters from space, which would render this conversation academic.  :) Quote: ... that means,,,,, optic cable be useless. How do you think the wireless towers are connected?

But let's face it David....10 years ago, there was barely any Broadband in Australia(and what there was very very expensive,and satellite based), 20 years ago, there was almost no dial-up available outside Universities and 30 years ago there was NO internet at all in Australia....

Who knows what the next 10 years will bring.....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 2:32pm:

... Who knows what the next 10 years will bring.....

Indeed. All we can do is our best, with the information and advice available. So far, the best advice I've seen indicates fibre as the way to go, long-term.

Quote:

>> ... >> >> Say between Canberra and Sydney, how many towers, >> >> how many relays, how much power for say 45Mb compared to one fibre? >> >> Maybe a relay or two but all but built in to the cable. ... > > > > So, long term, fibre is the green alternative? Cheaper, greener.   Perhaps cheaper is the more important here. Fibre is much cheaper and less energy intensive to make and far less   energy to run than copper.  So far it has been the terminations and   optical transceivers that are more expensive.  I imagine this will   change eventually.  For instance if nearly every household in   Australia has one - it might help bring the price down.

# wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 2:49pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 12th, 2010 at 2:32pm: ... Who knows what the next 10 years will bring..... Indeed. All we can do is our best, with the information and advice available. So far, the best advice I've seen indicates fibre as the way to go, long-term. Quote: >> ... >> >> Say between Canberra and Sydney, how many towers, >> >> how many relays, how much power for say 45Mb compared to one fibre? >> >> Maybe a relay or two but all but built in to the cable. ... > > > > So, long term, fibre is the green alternative? Cheaper, greener.   Perhaps cheaper is the more important here. Fibre is much cheaper and less energy intensive to make and far less   energy to run than copper.  So far it has been the terminations and   optical transceivers that are more expensive.  I imagine this will   change eventually.  For instance if nearly every household in   Australia has one - it might help bring the price down.

Oh i grant that for intercity cabling, Fibre Optic would be great....right now......but fibre to house is very expensive, complicated and time consuming....

AND, by the time it's completed..there may well be a better and cheaper alternative available....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 4:09pm:

... Oh i grant that for intercity cabling, Fibre Optic would be great....right now......but fibre to house is very expensive, complicated and time consuming....

Repeated, because you apparently missed it first time, the response to a question on wireless by one who knows far better than I:

Quote:

For the long answer, see Shannon-Hartley theorem plus various ACMA spectrum planning documents. I understand what Beazley was talking about when he said "vomit point" (just when you think 'I'll vomit if I have to explain this one more time, that's when people start to understand it). Thought experiment: wireless broadband for all Sydney with (say) three million households Using the LTE data from slide 16 of this presentation: http://www.nbnco.com.au/publications-and-announcements/latest-announcements/doc/presentation-to-the-australian-information-industry-association 10 users per cell with a good signal can expect approx 10 Mbps. By that maths, and with the next technology, to serve 10 Mbps at peak periods you'd need 300,000 cells in Sydney. Note that I'm not getting into arguments like the "wireless will overtake fibre" nostrum that's snared the ignorant among our politicians; nor am I anywhere near familiar enough with spectrum management to imagine whether you could set up 300k cells in Sydney with what's available; nor am I considering the potential real estate costs associated with 300,000 spectrum sites, nor the capital costs, nor whether it's worth pulling fibre to 300k cells without bothering to go the extra kilometre to connect the home directly... (I have two mobile broadband devices, one 3 and one NextG. I'm not a wireless luddite.)

Quote:

AND, by the time it's completed..there may well be a better and cheaper alternative available....

AND we may be invaded by carnivorous hamsters from space, but it seems unlikely.

Fibre is good, basic infrastructure. By all reports, it has a lot of potential for further development. Hence the tenfold increase in speed that caused so much mirth when announced before the election. Actually, that was about as surprising as the news that a Ferrari can go faster that a Model T Ford on the same road. Same infrastructure, more advanced technology.

Anything's possible but there's no realistic "better and cheaper alternative" in prospect. Aren't we better off going for the probable than the remotely possible?

Quote:

AND, by the time it's completed..there may well be a better and cheaper alternative available....

You do realise that there were people who used the very same argument against the roll out of the power grid?

Life_goes_on wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 4:42pm:

Quote: AND, by the time it's completed..there may well be a better and cheaper alternative available.... You do realise that there were people who used the very same argument against the roll out of the power grid?

Who?

aussiefree2ride wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 8:09pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Sep 12th, 2010 at 4:42pm: Quote: AND, by the time it's completed..there may well be a better and cheaper alternative available.... You do realise that there were people who used the very same argument against the roll out of the power grid? Who?

What do you want me to do? name them?

There were sections that believed that given enough time for development, Nikola Tesla's method of distributing electricity could end up a more convenient and cheaper method than direct cabling.

Then there were others who believed that the existing gas and oil lighting was perfectly sufficient.

For those who don't know, Tesla championed a wireless system of electricity distribution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_energy_transfer

aussiefree2ride wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 8:09pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Sep 12th, 2010 at 4:42pm: Quote: AND, by the time it's completed..there may well be a better and cheaper alternative available.... You do realise that there were people who used the very same argument against the roll out of the power grid? Who?

Looks like we need to start working on planetary defences against carnivorous hamsters.  ::)

I`ve got wireless broadband & it`s flawless.

janko you are clueless Fibre optic is future proof for the next 20 years maybe more their is no finite speed for it as it is light... the end routers , switches are what reduces said speed ...

aussiefree2ride wrote on Sep 14^th, 2010 at 7:53pm:

I`ve got wireless broadband & it`s flawless.

Oh, dear. Flawless would imply infinite bandwidth. Do you really mean that?