The Howard legacy has been nailed shut by it and the metrosexuals can only pray that an internet-has-been can throw decent enough quantities of mud at the very thing that cost them the nod of the required independants!

The crack smokers won't put up with this!!!

WEAK AS PISS  :D :D ;D ;D ;) ;)  8-)

PLAIN SAILING, FOLKS: hmmmn..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTzdTZtUu_A

Turnbull will end up leading the Greens in a few yrs time anyway, he will win the seat of Sydney for them at the next election or just defect straight from the Libs in a few months :)

adelcrow wrote on Sep 30^th, 2010 at 6:27pm:

Turnbull will end up leading the Greens in a few yrs time anyway, he will win the seat of Sydney for them at the next election or just defect straight from the Libs in a few months :)

They won't take him!

Turnbull will bring a huge vote from both the Liberal and Labor Parties and I have no doubt that he is a natural for the Greens  :)

NBN lateline transcript

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s3025517.htm

8-)

adelcrow wrote on Sep 30^th, 2010 at 6:30pm:

Turnbull will bring a huge vote from both the Liberal and Labor Parties and I have no doubt that he is a natural for the Greens  :)

I'm sure he would but they would be tainting their reputation for not obstructing for the sake of obstruction.

 

Why should a successful and intelligent natural leader like Malcolm Turnbull waste his time being the whipping boy for Tony Abbott and the backward thinking right wing neo conservatives in the Coalition?
Turnbull is a progressive leader with a passion for Australia's future ..not a lap dog for the self serving Conservative back to the 50's brigade.

Big Mal for the Greens..2011!  :)

I think I will pop out tomorrow and print off some T Shirts  :P

This will be like when Tony Abbott back stabbed Howard for Joh's push for Canberra  :)

mellie wrote on Sep 30^th, 2010 at 6:34pm:

NBN lateline transcript http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s3025517.htm 8-)

Turnbull got his ass handed to him so why would you bother posting that?!!?

What a pity! Absolutely shameful that this bloke is being turned into the next biggest loser by giving him mission impossible ala Joe Hockey with serfchoices! What makes it worse is Turnbull has more know-how than Joe, Tony or whoever elses name you care to throw forward!

The Libs only hope is that newspoll casts TTTTTTTony aside and Malcolm takes over and works out a decent carbon price with Julia and allows Australia to move forward with full enough confidence to take advantage of the opportunites that will fast be presenting themselves in the world this century!

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 30^th, 2010 at 6:42pm:

mellie wrote on Sep 30th, 2010 at 6:34pm: NBN lateline transcript http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s3025517.htm 8-) Turnbull got his ass handed to him so why would you bother posting that?!!? What a pity! Absolutely shameful that this bloke is being turned into the next biggest loser by giving him mission impossible ala Joe Hockey with serfchoices! What makes it worse is Turnbull has more know-how than Joe, Tony or whoever elses name you care to throw forward! The Libs only hope is that newspoll casts TTTTTTTony aside and Malcolm takes over and works out a decent carbon price with Julia and allows Australia to move forward with full enough confidence to take advantage of the opportunites that will fast be presenting themselves in the world this century!

Or maybe we could vote for parties and leaders that listen to the people, come up with policies they want and then actually implement them!  Or we could vote for the ALP instead.

adelcrow wrote on Sep 30^th, 2010 at 6:37pm:

Why should a successful and intelligent natural leader like Malcolm Turnbull waste his time being the whipping boy for Tony Abbott and the backward thinking right wing neo conservatives in the Coalition? Turnbull is a progressive leader with a passion for Australia's future ..not a lap dog for the self serving Conservative back to the 50's brigade. Big Mal for the Greens..2011!  :)

Yep, allright I would like to see that but I wonder exactly how The Greens would maintain their reputation by taking on a man who is happy to argue against the NBN when he knows that it is a good deal!

He was taken to town by conroy the other day!

All in all, it's probably not a hard task: he has not as yet developed his alternative to the NBN and this will truly be interesting.

Apart from the e-mailgate scandal he has tried to keep his reputation with regards to a carbon price. This is good, obviously, for the country even if he stays Liberal: even more so!

It's all about what he says and the character he maintains: his integrity, IMHO. I am interested in his alternative to the NBN... that will be a time for drinking I suspect!

I would like to see it though!

Don't forget that The Greens have real power in that Rudd took his target for 2050 of 60% from them and they had to up it to 80%!

THAT is POWER!

 8-) 8-) :o

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2010 at 6:47pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 30th, 2010 at 6:42pm: mellie wrote on Sep 30th, 2010 at 6:34pm: NBN lateline transcript http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s3025517.htm 8-) Turnbull got his ass handed to him so why would you bother posting that?!!? What a pity! Absolutely shameful that this bloke is being turned into the next biggest loser by giving him mission impossible ala Joe Hockey with serfchoices! What makes it worse is Turnbull has more know-how than Joe, Tony or whoever elses name you care to throw forward! The Libs only hope is that newspoll casts TTTTTTTony aside and Malcolm takes over and works out a decent carbon price with Julia and allows Australia to move forward with full enough confidence to take advantage of the opportunites that will fast be presenting themselves in the world this century! Or maybe we could vote for parties and leaders that listen to the people, come up with policies they want and then actually implement them!  Or we could vote for the ALP instead.

I'm simply making the point that the Libs are wasting Turnbull with mission impossible... which is maybe what they want!

LOL

I voted for the NBN and am so glad it is Rudds legacy that killed the constant refrain about the so called Howard/Costello dream economy!

Look at the price of houses! Atleast Australia is going to get an NBN from the once in a century boom no thanks at all to Howard/Costello!

Dorothy Parker, Loon Pond

Turnbull got done over by Conroy, and worse Turnbull knew it, and sat sulking and glowering at the end of the interview, and didn't deign to match Conroy's cheerful close "thanks very much, Tony" with any words at all. Just a glower and sulk ...


loonpond.blogspot.com/.../...r-mining-tax-and.html%3A+LoonPond+%28loon+pond%29


didnt he ever

adelcrow wrote on Sep 30^th, 2010 at 6:30pm:

Turnbull will bring a huge vote from both the Liberal and Labor Parties and I have no doubt that he is a natural for the Greens  :)

He owns and uses a shower; that pretty much precludes him from the Green camp.

Why are the Libs - especially Turnbull - persisting with this anti-NBN farce!?

Surely, their own internal polling must reveal that they are doing themselves more harm the longer they carry on!?

Equitist wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 1:01pm:

Why are the Libs - especially Turnbull - persisting with this anti-NBN farce!? Surely, their own internal polling must reveal that they are doing themselves more harm the longer they carry on!?

Because they object to the expenditure of 43000 Million Dollars, when an effective result can be achieved for significantly less.  You might argue that it will be delivered for much less, especially if Telstra shareholders approve the $11b asset sale; but then you need factor in the ALP's inherent ineptitude and sloth and it will probably be back there again.

Contrary to the belief held by most of the left leaning posters on this board, no-one much cares about the NBN.  

Personally I have no need for the increased bandwith, and certainly wouldn't pay any more than I am now.  I certainly won't be upgrading my hardware to take advantage of it.  

You can deliver the data as fast as you like to my doorstep, but as soon as it hits the wireless router any improvement in that speed will be lost as the router is the weakest link.

qikvtec wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 1:13pm:

Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:01pm: Why are the Libs - especially Turnbull - persisting with this anti-NBN farce!? Surely, their own internal polling must reveal that they are doing themselves more harm the longer they carry on!? Because they object to the expenditure of 43000 Million Dollars, when an effective result can be achieved for significantly less.  You might argue that it will be delivered for much less, especially if Telstra shareholders approve the $11b asset sale; but then you need factor in the ALP's inherent ineptitude and sloth and it will probably be back there again. Contrary to the belief held by most of the left leaning posters on this board, no-one much cares about the NBN.   Personally I have no need for the increased bandwith, and certainly wouldn't pay any more than I am now.  I certainly won't be upgrading my hardware to take advantage of it.   You can deliver the data as fast as you like to my doorstep, but as soon as it hits the wireless router any improvement in that speed will be lost as the router is the weakest link.

Dubious questions of public cost-benefits notwithstanding, if Australia's potential wireless market was big and profitable enough (and technologically adequate), then private enterprise would have already taken steps that would make the concept of the NBN totally redundant...

If past trends continue over the next 5 years, the individual and collective data demands (both volume and speed) on the overall internet system will have increased exponentially - to the point that the need for the NBN will no longer in question...

Wireless networks will merely supplement the NBN - just as they do the current copper network - and the parallel existence of both services will create competitive pressures that will ultimately keep costs down for consumers in the lucrative internet market...

Can anyone honestly visualise the ALP having the expertise, the drive, the work ethic, the moral ethics required to oversee a scheme of this complexity and magnitude?

If you can, call an ambulance urgently, you`ve overdosed!

Equitist wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 1:51pm:

qikvtec wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:13pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:01pm: Why are the Libs - especially Turnbull - persisting with this anti-NBN farce!? Surely, their own internal polling must reveal that they are doing themselves more harm the longer they carry on!? Because they object to the expenditure of 43000 Million Dollars, when an effective result can be achieved for significantly less.  You might argue that it will be delivered for much less, especially if Telstra shareholders approve the $11b asset sale; but then you need factor in the ALP's inherent ineptitude and sloth and it will probably be back there again. Contrary to the belief held by most of the left leaning posters on this board, no-one much cares about the NBN.   Personally I have no need for the increased bandwith, and certainly wouldn't pay any more than I am now.  I certainly won't be upgrading my hardware to take advantage of it.   You can deliver the data as fast as you like to my doorstep, but as soon as it hits the wireless router any improvement in that speed will be lost as the router is the weakest link. Dubious questions of public cost-benefits notwithstanding, if Australia's potential wireless market was big and profitable enough (and technologically adequate), then private enterprise would have already taken steps that would make the concept of the NBN totally redundant... If past trends continue over the next 5 years, the individual and collective data demands (both volume and speed) on the overall internet system will have increased exponentially - to the point that the need for the NBN will no longer in question... Wireless networks will merely supplement the NBN - just as they do the current copper network - and the parallel existence of both services will create competitive pressures that will ultimately keep costs down for consumers in the lucrative internet market...

I wasn't alluding to a wireless network being the solution to the NBN, just that it will always be the bottleneck in my house, and I suspect many others.

A significant number of businesses and consumers already have access to cable internet and yet they chose to remain on ADSL2 since at this time it's more cost effective and sufficient for their needs.  For those that have greater need cable is an option in a major city.

Personally I believe we should get those in the sticks on reliable ADSL2 connections, which assuming they had a phone line (and correct me if I'm wrong) would only require an upgrade at their exchange and comparatively minimal expense.

It's pretty difficult to justify spending $43000 million dollars upgrading everyone to a service they just don't need.  

This thread has sparked a bit of a question in me.

Is the NBN a need or want?

Verge wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 2:25pm:

This thread has sparked a bit of a question in me. Is the NBN a need or want?

Individual wants notwithstanding...if Oz is to remain collectively-prosperous, then, the NBN is an economic need!

Unfortunately, some people will only come to this realisation retrospectively...probably in as little as 5-10 years...

Verge wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 2:25pm:

This thread has sparked a bit of a question in me. Is the NBN a need or want?

ITS A WANT Its like a new car  12months and is the old model



:D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

bwood1946 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 2:28pm:

Verge wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:25pm: This thread has sparked a bit of a question in me. Is the NBN a need or want? ITS A WANT Its like a new car  12months and is the old model :D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

And why shouldnt  the WHOLE COUNTRY PAY FOR WHAT ONLY A FEW WANT

Not going to make my sheep have more lambs
;D ;D

qikvtec wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 2:19pm:

Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:51pm: qikvtec wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:13pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:01pm: Why are the Libs - especially Turnbull - persisting with this anti-NBN farce!? Surely, their own internal polling must reveal that they are doing themselves more harm the longer they carry on!? Because they object to the expenditure of 43000 Million Dollars, when an effective result can be achieved for significantly less.  You might argue that it will be delivered for much less, especially if Telstra shareholders approve the $11b asset sale; but then you need factor in the ALP's inherent ineptitude and sloth and it will probably be back there again. Contrary to the belief held by most of the left leaning posters on this board, no-one much cares about the NBN.   Personally I have no need for the increased bandwith, and certainly wouldn't pay any more than I am now.  I certainly won't be upgrading my hardware to take advantage of it.   You can deliver the data as fast as you like to my doorstep, but as soon as it hits the wireless router any improvement in that speed will be lost as the router is the weakest link. Dubious questions of public cost-benefits notwithstanding, if Australia's potential wireless market was big and profitable enough (and technologically adequate), then private enterprise would have already taken steps that would make the concept of the NBN totally redundant... If past trends continue over the next 5 years, the individual and collective data demands (both volume and speed) on the overall internet system will have increased exponentially - to the point that the need for the NBN will no longer in question... Wireless networks will merely supplement the NBN - just as they do the current copper network - and the parallel existence of both services will create competitive pressures that will ultimately keep costs down for consumers in the lucrative internet market... I wasn't alluding to a wireless network being the solution to the NBN, just that it will always be the bottleneck in my house, and I suspect many others. A significant number of businesses and consumers already have access to cable internet and yet they chose to remain on ADSL2 since at this time it's more cost effective and sufficient for their needs.  For those that have greater need cable is an option in a major city. Personally I believe we should get those in the sticks on reliable ADSL2 connections, which assuming they had a phone line (and correct me if I'm wrong) would only require an upgrade at their exchange and comparatively minimal expense. It's pretty difficult to justify spending $43000 million dollars upgrading everyone to a service they just don't need.

The Internet is a data highway - one which has had an exponential increase in usage and data flow since it was first created...

20 years ago, it was difficult to imagine that many Australian households would have 2 or 3 cars, 3 to 5 TV's, 2 or 3 mobile phones, 2 to 5 internet-capable devices, 3 to 5 rechargeable devices plugged into power sockets every day - yet this is the reality in many households today!

Infrastructure must be planned for massive increases in usage in the medium-longer term - and therefore: it would be extremely short-sighted for our Govts to plan internet infrastructure on the basis of current demands (or even linear increases in consumption - especially since the recent trends are for exponential change)...

Infrastructure must be planned for massive increases in usage in the medium-longer term - and therefore: it would be extremely short-sighted for our Govts to plan internet infrastructure on the basis of current demands (or even linear increases in consumption - especially since the recent trends are for exponential change .And new methods of deliver  IE WIRELESS

 

Equitist wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 2:38pm:

qikvtec wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:19pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:51pm: qikvtec wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:13pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:01pm: Why are the Libs - especially Turnbull - persisting with this anti-NBN farce!? Surely, their own internal polling must reveal that they are doing themselves more harm the longer they carry on!? Because they object to the expenditure of 43000 Million Dollars, when an effective result can be achieved for significantly less.  You might argue that it will be delivered for much less, especially if Telstra shareholders approve the $11b asset sale; but then you need factor in the ALP's inherent ineptitude and sloth and it will probably be back there again. Contrary to the belief held by most of the left leaning posters on this board, no-one much cares about the NBN.   Personally I have no need for the increased bandwith, and certainly wouldn't pay any more than I am now.  I certainly won't be upgrading my hardware to take advantage of it.   You can deliver the data as fast as you like to my doorstep, but as soon as it hits the wireless router any improvement in that speed will be lost as the router is the weakest link. Dubious questions of public cost-benefits notwithstanding, if Australia's potential wireless market was big and profitable enough (and technologically adequate), then private enterprise would have already taken steps that would make the concept of the NBN totally redundant... If past trends continue over the next 5 years, the individual and collective data demands (both volume and speed) on the overall internet system will have increased exponentially - to the point that the need for the NBN will no longer in question... Wireless networks will merely supplement the NBN - just as they do the current copper network - and the parallel existence of both services will create competitive pressures that will ultimately keep costs down for consumers in the lucrative internet market... I wasn't alluding to a wireless network being the solution to the NBN, just that it will always be the bottleneck in my house, and I suspect many others. A significant number of businesses and consumers already have access to cable internet and yet they chose to remain on ADSL2 since at this time it's more cost effective and sufficient for their needs.  For those that have greater need cable is an option in a major city. Personally I believe we should get those in the sticks on reliable ADSL2 connections, which assuming they had a phone line (and correct me if I'm wrong) would only require an upgrade at their exchange and comparatively minimal expense. It's pretty difficult to justify spending $43000 million dollars upgrading everyone to a service they just don't need.   The Internet is a data highway - one which has had an exponential increase in usage and data flow since it was first created... 20 years ago, it was difficult to imagine that many Australian households would have 2 or 3 cars, 3 to 5 TV's, 2 or 3 mobile phones, 2 to 5 internet-capable devices, 3 to 5 rechargeable devices plugged into power sockets every day - yet this is the reality in many households today! Infrastructure must be planned for massive increases in usage in the medium-longer term - and therefore: it would be extremely short-sighted for our Govts to plan internet infrastructure on the basis of current demands (or even linear increases in consumption - especially since the recent trends are for exponential change)...

At any cost?

bwood1946 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 2:42pm:

Infrastructure must be planned for massive increases in usage in the medium-longer term - and therefore: it would be extremely short-sighted for our Govts to plan internet infrastructure on the basis of current demands (or even linear increases in consumption - especially since the recent trends are for exponential change .And new methods of deliver  IE WIRELESS

Surely, if wireless was potentially-adequate technology, then it would have shut down investment in ADSL services by now!?

If the Libs had not been so short-sighted in the first instance, as to sell-off the crucial national infrastructure body of Telstra, then we would probably already have a fully fibre NBN...

Hello, private enterprise would never risk investing in a national fibre network in such a vast country with a relatively-small population - which is why we have the current hotch-potch of inefficient and inadequate services...

Which is also why non-metropolitan areas are still badly suffering from internet provider attention deficits - with no hope of improvement in that condition without dramatic Govt intervention...

Face it, guys: we need an NBN - and the Libs are doing Oz citizens and businesses a great disservice by dogmatically and self-servingly undermining long-overdue progress!

qikvtec wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 2:45pm:

Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:38pm: qikvtec wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:19pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:51pm: qikvtec wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:13pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 1:01pm: Why are the Libs - especially Turnbull - persisting with this anti-NBN farce!? Surely, their own internal polling must reveal that they are doing themselves more harm the longer they carry on!? Because they object to the expenditure of 43000 Million Dollars, when an effective result can be achieved for significantly less.  You might argue that it will be delivered for much less, especially if Telstra shareholders approve the $11b asset sale; but then you need factor in the ALP's inherent ineptitude and sloth and it will probably be back there again. Contrary to the belief held by most of the left leaning posters on this board, no-one much cares about the NBN.   Personally I have no need for the increased bandwith, and certainly wouldn't pay any more than I am now.  I certainly won't be upgrading my hardware to take advantage of it.   You can deliver the data as fast as you like to my doorstep, but as soon as it hits the wireless router any improvement in that speed will be lost as the router is the weakest link. Dubious questions of public cost-benefits notwithstanding, if Australia's potential wireless market was big and profitable enough (and technologically adequate), then private enterprise would have already taken steps that would make the concept of the NBN totally redundant... If past trends continue over the next 5 years, the individual and collective data demands (both volume and speed) on the overall internet system will have increased exponentially - to the point that the need for the NBN will no longer in question... Wireless networks will merely supplement the NBN - just as they do the current copper network - and the parallel existence of both services will create competitive pressures that will ultimately keep costs down for consumers in the lucrative internet market... I wasn't alluding to a wireless network being the solution to the NBN, just that it will always be the bottleneck in my house, and I suspect many others. A significant number of businesses and consumers already have access to cable internet and yet they chose to remain on ADSL2 since at this time it's more cost effective and sufficient for their needs.  For those that have greater need cable is an option in a major city. Personally I believe we should get those in the sticks on reliable ADSL2 connections, which assuming they had a phone line (and correct me if I'm wrong) would only require an upgrade at their exchange and comparatively minimal expense. It's pretty difficult to justify spending $43000 million dollars upgrading everyone to a service they just don't need.   The Internet is a data highway - one which has had an exponential increase in usage and data flow since it was first created... 20 years ago, it was difficult to imagine that many Australian households would have 2 or 3 cars, 3 to 5 TV's, 2 or 3 mobile phones, 2 to 5 internet-capable devices, 3 to 5 rechargeable devices plugged into power sockets every day - yet this is the reality in many households today! Infrastructure must be planned for massive increases in usage in the medium-longer term - and therefore: it would be extremely short-sighted for our Govts to plan internet infrastructure on the basis of current demands (or even linear increases in consumption - especially since the recent trends are for exponential change)... At any cost?

This is a case, where the medium-longer-term opportunity costs, of not proceeding with investment in technological backbone infrastructure, will ultimately far outweigh the upfront monetary costs!

Equitist wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 2:53pm:

bwood1946 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:42pm: Infrastructure must be planned for massive increases in usage in the medium-longer term - and therefore: it would be extremely short-sighted for our Govts to plan internet infrastructure on the basis of current demands (or even linear increases in consumption - especially since the recent trends are for exponential change .And new methods of deliver  IE WIRELESS    Surely, if wireless was potentially-adequate technology, then it would have shut down investment in ADSL services by now!? If the Libs had not been so short-sighted in the first instance, as to sell-off the crucial national infrastructure body of Telstra, then we would probably already have a fully fibre NBN... Hello, private enterprise would never risk investing in a national fibre network in such a vast country with a relatively-small population - which is why we have the current hotch-potch of inefficient and inadequate services... Which is also why non-metropolitan areas are still badly suffering from internet provider attention deficits - with no hope of improvement in that condition without dramatic Govt intervention... Face it, guys: we need an NBN - and the Libs are doing Oz citizens and businesses a great disservice by dogmatically and self-servingly undermining long-overdue progress!

Didn't they just finish what the Keating Govt started?

I've yet to see any valid reason for expending 43000 million dollars especially at a time we can least afford it.

qikvtec wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 2:56pm:

Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:53pm: bwood1946 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:42pm: Infrastructure must be planned for massive increases in usage in the medium-longer term - and therefore: it would be extremely short-sighted for our Govts to plan internet infrastructure on the basis of current demands (or even linear increases in consumption - especially since the recent trends are for exponential change .And new methods of deliver  IE WIRELESS    Surely, if wireless was potentially-adequate technology, then it would have shut down investment in ADSL services by now!? If the Libs had not been so short-sighted in the first instance, as to sell-off the crucial national infrastructure body of Telstra, then we would probably already have a fully fibre NBN... Hello, private enterprise would never risk investing in a national fibre network in such a vast country with a relatively-small population - which is why we have the current hotch-potch of inefficient and inadequate services... Which is also why non-metropolitan areas are still badly suffering from internet provider attention deficits - with no hope of improvement in that condition without dramatic Govt intervention... Face it, guys: we need an NBN - and the Libs are doing Oz citizens and businesses a great disservice by dogmatically and self-servingly undermining long-overdue progress! Didn't they just finish what the Keating Govt started? I've yet to see any valid reason for expending 43000 million dollars especially at a time we can least afford it.

What did the Keating Govt start - and when and how?

Equitist wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 3:01pm:

qikvtec wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:56pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:53pm: bwood1946 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 2:42pm: Infrastructure must be planned for massive increases in usage in the medium-longer term - and therefore: it would be extremely short-sighted for our Govts to plan internet infrastructure on the basis of current demands (or even linear increases in consumption - especially since the recent trends are for exponential change .And new methods of deliver  IE WIRELESS    Surely, if wireless was potentially-adequate technology, then it would have shut down investment in ADSL services by now!? If the Libs had not been so short-sighted in the first instance, as to sell-off the crucial national infrastructure body of Telstra, then we would probably already have a fully fibre NBN... Hello, private enterprise would never risk investing in a national fibre network in such a vast country with a relatively-small population - which is why we have the current hotch-potch of inefficient and inadequate services... Which is also why non-metropolitan areas are still badly suffering from internet provider attention deficits - with no hope of improvement in that condition without dramatic Govt intervention... Face it, guys: we need an NBN - and the Libs are doing Oz citizens and businesses a great disservice by dogmatically and self-servingly undermining long-overdue progress! Didn't they just finish what the Keating Govt started? I've yet to see any valid reason for expending 43000 million dollars especially at a time we can least afford it. What did the Keating Govt start - and when and how?

Combination of OTC & Telecom under the Telecom Act 91 paved the way for the packaging and ultimate sale of Telstra and the introduction of competition.  The sale of Aussat to Optus was next.  Keating was pro privatisation and ultimately intended to offload the carrier, he was just beaten to it by the installation of the Howard Coalition in 1996, who with a mandate from the voting public swiftly went about completing the job.  

As a side note here Thy, The Telstra Corp Act of 91 allowed for the sale of Telstra with the provision the Commonwealth Govt retained a majority shareholding.  It wasn't until the Telstra Privatisation Bill of 2003 that this clause in the act was removed allowing for the full sale of TLS.

Quote:

Combination of OTC & Telecom under the Telecom Act 91 paved the way for the packaging and ultimate sale of Telstra and the introduction of competition.  The sale of Aussat to Optus was next.  Keating was pro privatisation and ultimately intended to offload the carrier, he was just beaten to it by the installation of the Howard Coalition in 1996, who with a mandate from the voting public swiftly went about completing the job.

If you go back to 1996 with Howard election promise he said that he would sell only 1/3 of Telstra and he never put to the people that he would sell anymore at any other elections, so what gave him the right to sell all of it.

John S wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 3:38pm:

Quote: Combination of OTC & Telecom under the Telecom Act 91 paved the way for the packaging and ultimate sale of Telstra and the introduction of competition.  The sale of Aussat to Optus was next.  Keating was pro privatisation and ultimately intended to offload the carrier, he was just beaten to it by the installation of the Howard Coalition in 1996, who with a mandate from the voting public swiftly went about completing the job. If you go back to 1996 with Howard election promise he said that he would sell only 1/3 of Telstra and he never put to the people that he would sell anymore at any other elections, so what gave him the right to sell all of it.

It was pretty clear to the voting public in subsequent elections that TLS would be sold off in stages.

John S wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 3:38pm:

Quote: Combination of OTC & Telecom under the Telecom Act 91 paved the way for the packaging and ultimate sale of Telstra and the introduction of competition.  The sale of Aussat to Optus was next.  Keating was pro privatisation and ultimately intended to offload the carrier, he was just beaten to it by the installation of the Howard Coalition in 1996, who with a mandate from the voting public swiftly went about completing the job. If you go back to 1996 with Howard election promise he said that he would sell only 1/3 of Telstra and he never put to the people that he would sell anymore at any other elections, so what gave him the right to sell all of it.

the same right that gillard claims for a carbon tax.

I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'.

only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 5:46pm:

John S wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 3:38pm: Quote: Combination of OTC & Telecom under the Telecom Act 91 paved the way for the packaging and ultimate sale of Telstra and the introduction of competition.  The sale of Aussat to Optus was next.  Keating was pro privatisation and ultimately intended to offload the carrier, he was just beaten to it by the installation of the Howard Coalition in 1996, who with a mandate from the voting public swiftly went about completing the job. If you go back to 1996 with Howard election promise he said that he would sell only 1/3 of Telstra and he never put to the people that he would sell anymore at any other elections, so what gave him the right to sell all of it. the same right that gillard claims for a carbon tax.

It was a central theme in the telecommunications policy of the Howard Govt., I feel he had the right because he ran with that as policy.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 5:47pm:

I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'. only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years.

Not correct Longweekend.
In order to transfer data -
the only other way is by radio communication.
There is limited bandwidth & the reception is dependent on weather.
The answer is fiber optic & always will be for unlimited data capacity
& reliabilty in all weather.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 10:13pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 5:47pm: I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'. only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years. Not correct Longweekend. In order to transfer data - the only other way is by radio communication. There is limited bandwidth & the reception is dependent on weather. The answer is fiber optic & always will be for unlimited data capacity & reliabilty in all weather.

Yup, broadband technology is limited by those dastardly laws of physics...

Hence, the day that the speed of sound exceeds that of light, will be the day when wireless broadband might supersede fibre optic technology...

Just did some interesting calculations.
There are 3 possible infrared wavelengths available:
850 nm,   1300nm,   &  1550nm.
Lets take the slowest one - the last.
frequency = velocity/wavelength

3 x 108 /  1550 x10-9 = 194,000 GHz = possible future bandwidth.

This compares to microwave frequencies of 1 to 20 GHz.
Radio has a pathetic potential bandwidth compared to fiber -
& every fiber has that potential bandwidth
( which may  be realised one day soon.)

In a nutshell, if it's truly worth the $43 billion investment then why wont the GALP do a cost/benefit analysis?

Well, I can answer this question for you too.

http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1858/PDF/04_Appendix_C.pdf

The same treasury the ALP used when discrediting Tony Abbott's more modest broadband costings.

What we have here kids, is a government willing to discredit the oppositions own broadband package upon 'treasury advice', though when this same treasury reveals their own NBN's short comings, shortcomings which didn't find their way to Wayne Swans desk until exactly one day after the election....they turn a blind eye.

Here it is in black and white, from no other than their own treasury.

Enjoy.

http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1858/PDF/04_Appendix_C.pdf

Mellie.

Quote:

In a nutshell, if it's truly worth the $43 billion investment then why wont the GALP do a cost/benefit analysis?

Labor's plan is too expensive.
We definetly need optic fiber running down all main roads
in the big cities but as for installing 100s of kms of fiber
to people in the bush - just for say - 10 customers at the other end -
forget it - Labor has gone mad.

Equitist wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 10:34pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 5:47pm: I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'. only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years. Not correct Longweekend. In order to transfer data - the only other way is by radio communication. There is limited bandwidth & the reception is dependent on weather. The answer is fiber optic & always will be for unlimited data capacity & reliabilty in all weather. Yup, broadband technology is limited by those dastardly laws of physics... Hence, the day that the speed of sound exceeds that of light, will be the day when wireless broadband might supersede fibre optic technology...

you are not seriously trying to suggest that wireless broadband operates at the 'speed of sound'? You are either making a joke that I dont get or making the worst technical blunder Ive yet seen on here.  Just for the record 'wireless' operates at the speed of light.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 10:13pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 5:47pm: I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'. only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years. Not correct Longweekend. In order to transfer data - the only other way is by radio communication. There is limited bandwidth & the reception is dependent on weather. The answer is fiber optic & always will be for unlimited data capacity & reliabilty in all weather.

and in your opinion fibre is the ultimate, never-to-be-superseded technology... just like steam engines.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 10:57pm:

Mellie. Quote: In a nutshell, if it's truly worth the $43 billion investment then why wont the GALP do a cost/benefit analysis? Labor's plan is too expensive. We definetly need optic fiber running down all main roads in the big cities but as for installing 100s of kms of fiber to people in the bush - just for say - 10 customers at the other end - forget it - Labor has gone mad.

Indeed they have, though some might argue there is an ulterior method to their illogic, and some will argue that they truly never had intentions of rolling it out at all.

Now, they are claiming they might start by June, 2011...pending whether or not Telstra and NBN co, can come to some industry monopoly arrangement to ensure it's worth their while.

So it's on the back-burner either way until mid 2011... merry Xmas, and Happy Easter too,  because we might as well discuss this then?

::)

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 11:05pm:

Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:34pm: Bobby. wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 5:47pm: I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'. only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years. Not correct Longweekend. In order to transfer data - the only other way is by radio communication. There is limited bandwidth & the reception is dependent on weather. The answer is fiber optic & always will be for unlimited data capacity & reliabilty in all weather. Yup, broadband technology is limited by those dastardly laws of physics... Hence, the day that the speed of sound exceeds that of light, will be the day when wireless broadband might supersede fibre optic technology... you are not seriously trying to suggest that wireless broadband operates at the 'speed of sound'? You are either making a joke that I dont get or making the worst technical blunder Ive yet seen on here.  Just for the record 'wireless' operates at the speed of light.

Yer, that is what I was suggesting...however, I am prepared to admit that I am wrong if I have misunderstood the physics...

Equitist wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 11:16pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 11:05pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:34pm: Bobby. wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 5:47pm: I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'. only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years. Not correct Longweekend. In order to transfer data - the only other way is by radio communication. There is limited bandwidth & the reception is dependent on weather. The answer is fiber optic & always will be for unlimited data capacity & reliabilty in all weather. Yup, broadband technology is limited by those dastardly laws of physics... Hence, the day that the speed of sound exceeds that of light, will be the day when wireless broadband might supersede fibre optic technology... you are not seriously trying to suggest that wireless broadband operates at the 'speed of sound'? You are either making a joke that I dont get or making the worst technical blunder Ive yet seen on here.  Just for the record 'wireless' operates at the speed of light. Yer, that is what I was suggesting...however, I am prepared to admit that I am wrong if I have misunderstood the physics...

you are not only wrong but I am aghast at just how wrong you are and how you could remain so wrong for so long. did you not wonder why a phone call to perth from your location (3000kms) doesnt have a SIX HOUR lag time between saying something and hearing the response?

It's now between http://www.nbnco.com.au/ and http://www.telstra.com.au/....and GALP legislation and co funding arrangements as to whether or not this thing will be commercially viable to those perhaps gunner-be backing it.

To my knowledge, our federal government have only committed part of the funding, and with this being a $43 billion adventure/ cost to the public, why cant they at least do a cost/benefit analysis?

Bear in mind, this is a $43 billion government project and cost to the public which ever way you look at it.

The United States, with a population 15 times the size of Australia is committing US$7 billion (roughly A$10 bil)...to their NBN adventure, so this gives you some idea of the enormity and extravagance of this adventure.

If it's worth lashing out $43 billion on, then why shy away from the cost/benefit analysis?

No, because treasury have already stated the obvious.

http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1858/PDF/04_Appendix_C.pdf...and so typically, landed on Wayne Swans desk just a day after the election....  along with the 'red book' report.


See,  a cost/benefit analysis would only further reinforce their stupidity. They know this, hence they are just hoping idiots don't question it.


:) Oops, too late, they are starting to.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1^st, 2010 at 11:18pm:

Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 11:16pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 11:05pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:34pm: Bobby. wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 5:47pm: I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'. only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years. Not correct Longweekend. In order to transfer data - the only other way is by radio communication. There is limited bandwidth & the reception is dependent on weather. The answer is fiber optic & always will be for unlimited data capacity & reliabilty in all weather. Yup, broadband technology is limited by those dastardly laws of physics... Hence, the day that the speed of sound exceeds that of light, will be the day when wireless broadband might supersede fibre optic technology... you are not seriously trying to suggest that wireless broadband operates at the 'speed of sound'? You are either making a joke that I dont get or making the worst technical blunder Ive yet seen on here.  Just for the record 'wireless' operates at the speed of light. Yer, that is what I was suggesting...however, I am prepared to admit that I am wrong if I have misunderstood the physics... you are not only wrong but I am aghast at just how wrong you are and how you could remain so wrong for so long. did you not wonder why a phone call to perth from your location (3000kms) doesnt have a SIX HOUR lag time between saying something and hearing the response?

OK, now I'm officially embarrassed!  :-[

Now, Bates, with your superior technical knowledge, can you please explain why you believe so strongly in your doG, ta!?

You don't have to understand the laws of physics, to know a NBN is a dead loss.

http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1858/PDF/04_Appendix_C.pdf

::)...Look, don't feel stupid I voted GALP in 2007... we all make mistakes.

Meanwhile.....Telstra and their tellicodependents are desperately trying to lock people into 24-month long contracts.

Don't sign.

Take your phone off the hook if you have to... because they just don't stop ringing.

::)

Equitist wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2010 at 12:06am:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 11:18pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 11:16pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 11:05pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:34pm: Bobby. wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 5:47pm: I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'. only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years. Not correct Longweekend. In order to transfer data - the only other way is by radio communication. There is limited bandwidth & the reception is dependent on weather. The answer is fiber optic & always will be for unlimited data capacity & reliabilty in all weather. Yup, broadband technology is limited by those dastardly laws of physics... Hence, the day that the speed of sound exceeds that of light, will be the day when wireless broadband might supersede fibre optic technology... you are not seriously trying to suggest that wireless broadband operates at the 'speed of sound'? You are either making a joke that I dont get or making the worst technical blunder Ive yet seen on here.  Just for the record 'wireless' operates at the speed of light. Yer, that is what I was suggesting...however, I am prepared to admit that I am wrong if I have misunderstood the physics... you are not only wrong but I am aghast at just how wrong you are and how you could remain so wrong for so long. did you not wonder why a phone call to perth from your location (3000kms) doesnt have a SIX HOUR lag time between saying something and hearing the response? OK, now I'm officially embarrassed!  :-[ Now, Bates, with your superior technical knowledge, can you please explain why you believe so strongly in your doG, ta!?

Because you cannot explain or discredit the notion of God using technology. He does not fit easily into a scientific explanation because we know so little of science.

NBN IS financially viable, says OptusOctober 13, 2010 10:58AM

AUSTRALIA'S number two telco has hit back at critics of the $43 billion National Broadband Network, claiming it is financially viable.
And according to Optus, owner of the second largest mobile network in Australia, wireless solutions are not the answer to Australia's slow broadband speeds either.

But the telco's director of government and corporate affairs, Maha Krishnapillai, says reports that Optus is poised to sign on the NBN are premature.

In an interview with Sydney radio station 2UE this morning, Mr Krishnapillai was blunt about whether the NBN would be affordable for consumers, saying: “We have done a lot of modelling on this, we've been through NBN Mark 1, we've been through years of modelling and work on this with the government and we know that the NBN, as it is characterised now, is commercially viable.”

Asked if wireless solutions promoted by the Coalition and some parts of the telco sector could substitute for a fibre-to-the-home network, Mr Krishnapillai said there had been “an awful lot of ill-informed speculation around these sorts of issues”.

“The reality is we own the second biggest wireless network in the country, we know and are absolutely committed to wireless and particularly mobility as a future complement to fixed networks in this country,” he said.

“(But) fibre has significant advantages in terms of direct, dedicated one-to-one type communications, rather than a shared wireless network. We are absolutely convinced that a wireless network will be an essential complement to an NBN, we strongly support it, but it won't take the place of a fibre future.”

The comments about the network will come as a blow to the Coalition.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/industry-sectors/nbn-is-financially-viable-says-optus/story-e6frg9hx-1225938048763

Interesting to read that the NSW opposition is examining congestion charging (which IMO will eventually run over the internet, directly from the car) and Google is well advanced on cars that drive themselves (which will need prolific bandwidth).

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2010 at 7:26am:

Equitist wrote on Oct 2nd, 2010 at 12:06am: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 11:18pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 11:16pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 11:05pm: Equitist wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:34pm: Bobby. wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 10:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 1st, 2010 at 5:47pm: I knew this woudl be a stupid thread when i saw the words' FUTURE-PROOF'. only a moron would declare any technology future-proof in a society that creates, improves and then discards technology trends in mere years. Not correct Longweekend. In order to transfer data - the only other way is by radio communication. There is limited bandwidth & the reception is dependent on weather. The answer is fiber optic & always will be for unlimited data capacity & reliabilty in all weather. Yup, broadband technology is limited by those dastardly laws of physics... Hence, the day that the speed of sound exceeds that of light, will be the day when wireless broadband might supersede fibre optic technology... you are not seriously trying to suggest that wireless broadband operates at the 'speed of sound'? You are either making a joke that I dont get or making the worst technical blunder Ive yet seen on here.  Just for the record 'wireless' operates at the speed of light. Yer, that is what I was suggesting...however, I am prepared to admit that I am wrong if I have misunderstood the physics... you are not only wrong but I am aghast at just how wrong you are and how you could remain so wrong for so long. did you not wonder why a phone call to perth from your location (3000kms) doesnt have a SIX HOUR lag time between saying something and hearing the response? OK, now I'm officially embarrassed!  :-[ Now, Bates, with your superior technical knowledge, can you please explain why you believe so strongly in your doG, ta!? Because you cannot explain or discredit the notion of God using technology.

Man's technology ?

If your god was techno-savvy he would have created broadband on the seventh day - instead of having a beer

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 14^th, 2010 at 8:40am:

NBN IS financially viable, says OptusOctober 13, 2010 10:58AM AUSTRALIA'S number two telco has hit back at critics of the $43 billion National Broadband Network, claiming it is financially viable. And according to Optus, owner of the second largest mobile network in Australia, wireless solutions are not the answer to Australia's slow broadband speeds either. But the telco's director of government and corporate affairs, Maha Krishnapillai, says reports that Optus is poised to sign on the NBN are premature. In an interview with Sydney radio station 2UE this morning, Mr Krishnapillai was blunt about whether the NBN would be affordable for consumers, saying: “We have done a lot of modelling on this, we've been through NBN Mark 1, we've been through years of modelling and work on this with the government and we know that the NBN, as it is characterised now, is commercially viable.” Asked if wireless solutions promoted by the Coalition and some parts of the telco sector could substitute for a fibre-to-the-home network, Mr Krishnapillai said there had been “an awful lot of ill-informed speculation around these sorts of issues”. “The reality is we own the second biggest wireless network in the country, we know and are absolutely committed to wireless and particularly mobility as a future complement to fixed networks in this country,” he said. “(But) fibre has significant advantages in terms of direct, dedicated one-to-one type communications, rather than a shared wireless network. We are absolutely convinced that a wireless network will be an essential complement to an NBN, we strongly support it, but it won't take the place of a fibre future.” The comments about the network will come as a blow to the Coalition. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/industry-sectors/nbn-is-financially-viable-says-optus/story-e6frg9hx-1225938048763

and it never occured to you that Optus - who originally said the idea was idiotic (as did all ISPs) - might be changing their tune because they want a peice of the action and for no other reason? given thatthe govt is footing the bill, VIABILITY is of zero concern to them. and since the tasmanian experience has been a 2% takeup i'd have to say that it is extremely optimistic to call it VIABLE.

Please delete wrote on Oct 14^th, 2010 at 10:21am:

Interesting to read that the NSW opposition is examining congestion charging (which IMO will eventually run over the internet, directly from the car) and Google is well advanced on cars that drive themselves (which will need prolific bandwidth).

I love the way you support the NBN so that we can enable govt to give us higher taxes and decrease our autonomy. what a wonderful use of technology!

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 15^th, 2010 at 11:35am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 14th, 2010 at 8:40am: NBN IS financially viable, says OptusOctober 13, 2010 10:58AM AUSTRALIA'S number two telco has hit back at critics of the $43 billion National Broadband Network, claiming it is financially viable. And according to Optus, owner of the second largest mobile network in Australia, wireless solutions are not the answer to Australia's slow broadband speeds either. But the telco's director of government and corporate affairs, Maha Krishnapillai, says reports that Optus is poised to sign on the NBN are premature. In an interview with Sydney radio station 2UE this morning, Mr Krishnapillai was blunt about whether the NBN would be affordable for consumers, saying: “We have done a lot of modelling on this, we've been through NBN Mark 1, we've been through years of modelling and work on this with the government and we know that the NBN, as it is characterised now, is commercially viable.” Asked if wireless solutions promoted by the Coalition and some parts of the telco sector could substitute for a fibre-to-the-home network, Mr Krishnapillai said there had been “an awful lot of ill-informed speculation around these sorts of issues”. “The reality is we own the second biggest wireless network in the country, we know and are absolutely committed to wireless and particularly mobility as a future complement to fixed networks in this country,” he said. “(But) fibre has significant advantages in terms of direct, dedicated one-to-one type communications, rather than a shared wireless network. We are absolutely convinced that a wireless network will be an essential complement to an NBN, we strongly support it, but it won't take the place of a fibre future.” The comments about the network will come as a blow to the Coalition. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/industry-sectors/nbn-is-financially-viable-says-optus/story-e6frg9hx-1225938048763 VIABILITY is of zero concern to them. and since the tasmanian experience has been a 2% takeup i'd have to say that it is extremely optimistic to call it VIABLE.

I'd re-check those figures ...


Up to 90% see the need for NBN speed
Lucy Battersby
October 18, 2010

NBN Co is overwhelmed by the number of households in mainland test sites signing up for an optical fibre connection to the national broadband network. In some regional towns nearly 90 per cent of houses will be connected.

In contrast, only 51 per cent of households in Tasmanian test sites agreed to a fibre connection, prompting some to question whether Australians would embrace the publicly funded project.

NBN is bringing fibre to 12,200 houses in five mainland test sites. Retail carriers are expected to start providing broadband and telephone services in about eight months.



http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/up-to-90-see-the-need-for-nbn-speed-20101018-16pcd.html

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 18^th, 2010 at 7:09pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 15th, 2010 at 11:35am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 14th, 2010 at 8:40am: NBN IS financially viable, says OptusOctober 13, 2010 10:58AM AUSTRALIA'S number two telco has hit back at critics of the $43 billion National Broadband Network, claiming it is financially viable. And according to Optus, owner of the second largest mobile network in Australia, wireless solutions are not the answer to Australia's slow broadband speeds either. But the telco's director of government and corporate affairs, Maha Krishnapillai, says reports that Optus is poised to sign on the NBN are premature. In an interview with Sydney radio station 2UE this morning, Mr Krishnapillai was blunt about whether the NBN would be affordable for consumers, saying: “We have done a lot of modelling on this, we've been through NBN Mark 1, we've been through years of modelling and work on this with the government and we know that the NBN, as it is characterised now, is commercially viable.” Asked if wireless solutions promoted by the Coalition and some parts of the telco sector could substitute for a fibre-to-the-home network, Mr Krishnapillai said there had been “an awful lot of ill-informed speculation around these sorts of issues”. “The reality is we own the second biggest wireless network in the country, we know and are absolutely committed to wireless and particularly mobility as a future complement to fixed networks in this country,” he said. “(But) fibre has significant advantages in terms of direct, dedicated one-to-one type communications, rather than a shared wireless network. We are absolutely convinced that a wireless network will be an essential complement to an NBN, we strongly support it, but it won't take the place of a fibre future.” The comments about the network will come as a blow to the Coalition. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/industry-sectors/nbn-is-financially-viable-says-optus/story-e6frg9hx-1225938048763 VIABILITY is of zero concern to them. and since the tasmanian experience has been a 2% takeup i'd have to say that it is extremely optimistic to call it VIABLE. I'd re-check those figures ... Up to 90% see the need for NBN speed Lucy Battersby October 18, 2010 NBN Co is overwhelmed by the number of households in mainland test sites signing up for an optical fibre connection to the national broadband network. In some regional towns nearly 90 per cent of houses will be connected. In contrast, only 51 per cent of households in Tasmanian test sites agreed to a fibre connection, prompting some to question whether Australians would embrace the publicly funded project. NBN is bringing fibre to 12,200 houses in five mainland test sites. Retail carriers are expected to start providing broadband and telephone services in about eight months. http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/up-to-90-see-the-need-for-nbn-speed-20101018-16pcd.html

keep reminding yourself that connection is FREE and STILL half of tasmanians didnt want it. that's not the rate at which people are buing services - just the rate of connection. when you cant GIVE AWAY something you know you are in trouble for the next phase of actually selling something!

Telstra is worth $34 Billion. It already has cables to almost all metropolitan household. Certainly down every metropolitan street.

The NBN is costed - before any substantial work has started - at $43 billion (so you can be confident that it will be at least double). Under the proposed scheme, at the cost of $43 billion, the government wants to build a pararallel network and forbid telstra to compete with it.




That's absolute madness - and also ALP policy.

Broadband speeds have jumped 20 per cent during the past eight months according to a report based on thousands of consumer experiences, but experts warn that Australia still falls well short of its peers internationally.

Regional areas also still lagged well behind Australian cities, based on the 10,000 real-life speed tests captured by online broadband comparison website, http://www.broadbandexpert.com.au/

It said average rural speeds of 4.29Mbps compared negatively with the 5.28Mbps enjoyed by city dwellers and  also revealed that Optus broadband networks were faster than Telstra's BigPond by an average of almost 1.5Mbps.

“A 20 per cent increase in average speed in such a short period of time is an impressive result. However, it's important to remember that regional Australia is still being left behind,” said Rob Webber, commercial director at Broadband Expert.

The Broadband Expert calculates average UK and US broadband speeds at 5.93Mbps and 5.75Mbps respectively.

According to telecoms analyst, Paul Budde, the figures released by Broadband Expert, are indicative of current trends in the market.

“I think the trend is correct. Yes we are making progress, but at the same time we are still way behind some of the leaders in the market and the gap between us and others is actually increasing."However Budde said the real speeds of the average Australian were likely to be substantially lower than those highlighted by Broadband Expert, with the majority (50 to 60 percent) of broadband users sitting at between 1.5 to 2mbps.

“More broadband savvy people would most likely visit the site and of course they would already have a higher speed, therefore I think the results could be skewed," he said.

Budde believes only 20 per cent of broadband users enjoy speeds of between 5 and 9Mbps – a factor that he said would be remedied by the National Broadband Network that the government has begun rolling out in selected sites around Australia.


http://www.theage.com.au/technology/broadband-getting-faster-but-still-too-slow-20101019-16rqt.html

Talk about "Zig Heil "  !!!!!!!




In Tasmania, the only place currently where the NBN is live, of the 4000 homes that were initially offered access, only 45 per cent consented to having the free box and fibre installed, according to The Mercury.

But those who didn't consent could foot a bill of up to $300 if a retail service provider - or ISP such as iPrimus, Internode or iiNet - passes on the connection fee that is required for an installation after the initial roll-out.....................


..................In an emailed statement, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy's spokeswoman said: "If you still want a fixed-line you will need to migrate onto fibre – NBN Co is [initially] installing fibre at no charge".



http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/connect-to-nbn-now-or-pay-up-to-300-for-phone-line-20101015-16ms3.html

What’s pissing me off now about this NBN is when the rollout passes my house I will be required too pay for the connection even if I do not want it. Else face loosing my land line. And it will also require me to supply electricity too power the unit yet another on going cost.

BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on Oct 20^th, 2010 at 8:20am:

What’s pissing me off now about this NBN is when the rollout passes my house I will be required too pay for the connection even if I do not want it. Else face loosing my land line. And it will also require me to supply electricity too power the unit yet another on going cost.

MORE nonsense and negative propaganda from the right wing "wreckers" department



It is more logical for consumers to sign up for a connection as soon as it’s available, as the initial rollout has a free set-up, whereas later connections are expected to come at a cost to the homeowner.

http://www.comparebroadband.com.au/article_720_Up-to-90-of-mainland-Australians-agree-to-NBN-connection.htm

nichy wrote on Oct 20^th, 2010 at 6:53am:

Talk about "Zig Heil "  !!!!!!! In Tasmania, the only place currently where the NBN is live, of the 4000 homes that were initially offered access, only 45 per cent consented to having the free box and fibre installed, according to The Mercury. But those who didn't consent could foot a bill of up to $300 if a retail service provider - or ISP such as iPrimus, Internode or iiNet - passes on the connection fee that is required for an installation after the initial roll-out..................... ..................In an emailed statement, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy's spokeswoman said: "If you still want a fixed-line you will need to migrate onto fibre – NBN Co is [initially] installing fibre at no charge". http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/connect-to-nbn-now-or-pay-up-to-300-for-phone-line-20101015-16ms3.html

It all sounds quite  BIZZARE !
Close to 100% take-up on the mainland - and just on half in Appalachia ?



NBN Co has reported a higher level of support for fibre optic broadband in mainland Australia than expected, with a 90% consent rate in some test towns.

The reason this result has been such a shock is because the Tasmanian NBN Co, the first to roll out fibre optic test sites in Australia, saw a disappointing 51% of Tasmanian homes agree to the connection. This caused many to pause and question the viability and necessity of such a massive publicly funded infrastructure project.

Now, the NBN is being rolled out to over 12 thousand homes in five areas around mainland Australia. Resellers of retail-based fibre optic broadband will begin offering both broadband and telephone services in around eight months time. Wholesale pricing of the fibre optic service has yet to be finalised, but it will have to be approved by competition analysts first, which should mean the cost would be affordable to the masses.

NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley recently told BusinessDay: "We are very happy with what we are finding in the first release sites on the mainland … That is a number considerably above what we had anticipated.''

Mr Quigley was referring to the consent ratios in the four towns of Armidale, NSW; Townsville, QLD; Kiama, NSW; and Willunga, SA. Homes within the fifth test area of Brunswick in the Northern suburbs of Melbourne will be receiving consent forms later this week.

Armidale has come out on top as the most ‘broadband hungry’ location thus far, with 87% of all homes in the test zone asking to be connected to a super-fast broadband service.


http://www.comparebroadband.com.au/article_720_Up-to-90-of-mainland-Australians-agree-to-NBN-connection.htm

The reason the NBN Co needs a homeowner’s consent form is because the final part of the roll-out process involves laying several metres of fibre on the actual property, as well as connecting equipment near the house.

It’s hard to say why Tasmanians haven’t warmed up to the NBN like the rest of Australia. The Tasmanian state government has been forced to draft laws making a connection compulsory, in an opt-out paradigm where only people who outright refuse are not connected. It is more logical for consumers to sign up for a connection as soon as it’s available, as the initial rollout has a free set-up, whereas later connections are expected to come at a cost to the homeowner.

As the nation moves towards fibre optic broadband, so too will our telephone services. Earlier this year Telstra made a deal with the NBN Co to move customers over from the traditional copper landline network to a fibre optic phone service.

http://www.comparebroadband.com.au/article_720_Up-to-90-of-mainland-Australians-agree-to-NBN-connection.htm





There is obviously quite a wide chasm between the "knowledge rich" and "knowledge poor" of the mainland and Appalachia

Much like the optic fibre knowledge and familiarity divide in the Labor and Liberal camps

The ONLY optic fibre broadband savvy person in the Liberal Party is the one given the unenviable task of trashing it

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 20^th, 2010 at 5:46am:

Broadband speeds have jumped 20 per cent during the past eight months according to a report based on thousands of consumer experiences, but experts warn that Australia still falls well short of its peers internationally. Regional areas also still lagged well behind Australian cities, based on the 10,000 real-life speed tests captured by online broadband comparison website, http://www.broadbandexpert.com.au/ It said average rural speeds of 4.29Mbps compared negatively with the 5.28Mbps enjoyed by city dwellers and  also revealed that Optus broadband networks were faster than Telstra's BigPond by an average of almost 1.5Mbps. “A 20 per cent increase in average speed in such a short period of time is an impressive result. However, it's important to remember that regional Australia is still being left behind,” said Rob Webber, commercial director at Broadband Expert. The Broadband Expert calculates average UK and US broadband speeds at 5.93Mbps and 5.75Mbps respectively. According to telecoms analyst, Paul Budde, the figures released by Broadband Expert, are indicative of current trends in the market. “I think the trend is correct. Yes we are making progress, but at the same time we are still way behind some of the leaders in the market and the gap between us and others is actually increasing."However Budde said the real speeds of the average Australian were likely to be substantially lower than those highlighted by Broadband Expert, with the majority (50 to 60 percent) of broadband users sitting at between 1.5 to 2mbps. “More broadband savvy people would most likely visit the site and of course they would already have a higher speed, therefore I think the results could be skewed," he said. Budde believes only 20 per cent of broadband users enjoy speeds of between 5 and 9Mbps – a factor that he said would be remedied by the National Broadband Network that the government has begun rolling out in selected sites around Australia. http://www.theage.com.au/technology/broadband-getting-faster-but-still-too-slow-20101019-16rqt.html

I dont know a single person whose speed is less than 5Mbps. this so-called 'average' they are sprouting must include dlai-up to be so low. ADLS2+ has up to 24Mbs with an average of 12Mbps.

WHO CARES ABOUT THE SPEED????

No one ever says anythign about download limits. I want 80GB. and i'd rather have it at 12Mbs as currently rather than twice as fast for 1Gb

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 20^th, 2010 at 9:53am:

BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on Oct 20th, 2010 at 8:20am: What’s pissing me off now about this NBN is when the rollout passes my house I will be required too pay for the connection even if I do not want it. Else face loosing my land line. And it will also require me to supply electricity too power the unit yet another on going cost. MORE nonsense and negative propaganda from the right wing "wreckers" department It is more logical for consumers to sign up for a connection as soon as it’s available, as the initial rollout has a free set-up, whereas later connections are expected to come at a cost to the homeowner. http://www.comparebroadband.com.au/article_720_Up-to-90-of-mainland-Australians-agree-to-NBN-connection.htm

Surprising in a recent study 99.9% of respondents when asked if they wanted a Ferrari agreed.  When you told them afterwards it was going to cost them $100 more a day than their current vehicle, not too many were keen.

There is no way on earth I will agree to the NBN connection to my home until I can determine the retail cost of the services and their comparison to my current costs.  Essentially I have no need for the additional speed and would prefer not to pay any more for it than my current service.

Its interesting because at the lunch table at work many things have made discussion points for the last few months.  Those being;
War in Afghanistan
The Burka
Fairwork act (big topic after getting screwed by fairwork for the staff)
ETS
Mining Tax
Gay Marriage
Increase in minimum wage
Paid maternity leave

The interesting one to not get a single gong yet is the NBN.  Funny how its obviously not the big deal the ALP is making it out to be.

Verge wrote on Oct 20^th, 2010 at 8:08pm:

Its interesting because at the lunch table at work many things have made discussion points for the last few months.  Those being; War in Afghanistan The Burka Fairwork act (big topic after getting screwed by fairwork for the staff) ETS Mining Tax Gay Marriage Increase in minimum wage Paid maternity leave The interesting one to not get a single gong yet is the NBN.  Funny how its obviously not the big deal the ALP is making it out to be.

In our office they all sit at the lunch table connecting via the office wireless router on their iphones checking out facebook and playing games.

qikvtec wrote on Oct 20^th, 2010 at 8:19pm:

Verge wrote on Oct 20th, 2010 at 8:08pm: Its interesting because at the lunch table at work many things have made discussion points for the last few months.  Those being; War in Afghanistan The Burka Fairwork act (big topic after getting screwed by fairwork for the staff) ETS Mining Tax Gay Marriage Increase in minimum wage Paid maternity leave The interesting one to not get a single gong yet is the NBN.  Funny how its obviously not the big deal the ALP is making it out to be. In our office they all sit at the lunch table connecting via the office wireless router on their iphones checking out facebook and playing games.

Gee, missing out.  Ours is pretty sociable.  Plenty of debate about what ever is in the daily paper.  Since there is only the one paper, one reads it, and the other 7 or 8 debate the major headlines.  Its good fun.

Like I said, no mention of the NBN.

There is still a fair amount of natter, I usually eat at my desk and keep on with the job.  No time to stop, that's what after hours are for.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 20^th, 2010 at 5:10pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 20th, 2010 at 5:46am: Broadband speeds have jumped 20 per cent during the past eight months according to a report based on thousands of consumer experiences, but experts warn that Australia still falls well short of its peers internationally. Regional areas also still lagged well behind Australian cities, based on the 10,000 real-life speed tests captured by online broadband comparison website, http://www.broadbandexpert.com.au/ It said average rural speeds of 4.29Mbps compared negatively with the 5.28Mbps enjoyed by city dwellers and  also revealed that Optus broadband networks were faster than Telstra's BigPond by an average of almost 1.5Mbps. “A 20 per cent increase in average speed in such a short period of time is an impressive result. However, it's important to remember that regional Australia is still being left behind,” said Rob Webber, commercial director at Broadband Expert. The Broadband Expert calculates average UK and US broadband speeds at 5.93Mbps and 5.75Mbps respectively. According to telecoms analyst, Paul Budde, the figures released by Broadband Expert, are indicative of current trends in the market. “I think the trend is correct. Yes we are making progress, but at the same time we are still way behind some of the leaders in the market and the gap between us and others is actually increasing."However Budde said the real speeds of the average Australian were likely to be substantially lower than those highlighted by Broadband Expert, with the majority (50 to 60 percent) of broadband users sitting at between 1.5 to 2mbps. “More broadband savvy people would most likely visit the site and of course they would already have a higher speed, therefore I think the results could be skewed," he said. Budde believes only 20 per cent of broadband users enjoy speeds of between 5 and 9Mbps – a factor that he said would be remedied by the National Broadband Network that the government has begun rolling out in selected sites around Australia. http://www.theage.com.au/technology/broadband-getting-faster-but-still-too-slow-20101019-16rqt.html I dont know a single person whose speed is less than 5Mbps. this so-called 'average' they are sprouting must include dlai-up to be so low. ADLS2+ has up to 24Mbs with an average of 12Mbps.

I get 2mbps
As low as half a mbps in bad weather
ADSL is unavailable due to being more than 3km from an exchange - and the privatised Telstra gave a rough quote of $5K to lay a land-line (compared to the regular $250 for urban clients)
Out of range for wireless

Satellite was my ONLY option

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 21^st, 2010 at 9:10am:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 20th, 2010 at 5:10pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 20th, 2010 at 5:46am: Broadband speeds have jumped 20 per cent during the past eight months according to a report based on thousands of consumer experiences, but experts warn that Australia still falls well short of its peers internationally. Regional areas also still lagged well behind Australian cities, based on the 10,000 real-life speed tests captured by online broadband comparison website, http://www.broadbandexpert.com.au/ It said average rural speeds of 4.29Mbps compared negatively with the 5.28Mbps enjoyed by city dwellers and  also revealed that Optus broadband networks were faster than Telstra's BigPond by an average of almost 1.5Mbps. “A 20 per cent increase in average speed in such a short period of time is an impressive result. However, it's important to remember that regional Australia is still being left behind,” said Rob Webber, commercial director at Broadband Expert. The Broadband Expert calculates average UK and US broadband speeds at 5.93Mbps and 5.75Mbps respectively. According to telecoms analyst, Paul Budde, the figures released by Broadband Expert, are indicative of current trends in the market. “I think the trend is correct. Yes we are making progress, but at the same time we are still way behind some of the leaders in the market and the gap between us and others is actually increasing."However Budde said the real speeds of the average Australian were likely to be substantially lower than those highlighted by Broadband Expert, with the majority (50 to 60 percent) of broadband users sitting at between 1.5 to 2mbps. “More broadband savvy people would most likely visit the site and of course they would already have a higher speed, therefore I think the results could be skewed," he said. Budde believes only 20 per cent of broadband users enjoy speeds of between 5 and 9Mbps – a factor that he said would be remedied by the National Broadband Network that the government has begun rolling out in selected sites around Australia. http://www.theage.com.au/technology/broadband-getting-faster-but-still-too-slow-20101019-16rqt.html I dont know a single person whose speed is less than 5Mbps. this so-called 'average' they are sprouting must include dlai-up to be so low. ADLS2+ has up to 24Mbs with an average of 12Mbps. I get 2mbps As low as half a mbps in bad weather ADSL is unavailable due to being more than 3km from an exchange - and the privatised Telstra gave a rough quote of $5K to lay a land-line (compared to the regular $250 for urban clients) Out of range for wireless Satellite was my ONLY option

developing opinion and policy based on YOUR situation is hardly altruistic. we already know and accept that the broadband situation in the bush is pathetic and needs to be fixed. thats why Howard signed contracts to give ALL regional areas ADLS 2+ by end 2009.

Pity Rudd cancelled it...

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 21^st, 2010 at 9:10am:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 20th, 2010 at 5:10pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 20th, 2010 at 5:46am: Broadband speeds have jumped 20 per cent during the past eight months according to a report based on thousands of consumer experiences, but experts warn that Australia still falls well short of its peers internationally. Regional areas also still lagged well behind Australian cities, based on the 10,000 real-life speed tests captured by online broadband comparison website, http://www.broadbandexpert.com.au/ It said average rural speeds of 4.29Mbps compared negatively with the 5.28Mbps enjoyed by city dwellers and  also revealed that Optus broadband networks were faster than Telstra's BigPond by an average of almost 1.5Mbps. “A 20 per cent increase in average speed in such a short period of time is an impressive result. However, it's important to remember that regional Australia is still being left behind,” said Rob Webber, commercial director at Broadband Expert. The Broadband Expert calculates average UK and US broadband speeds at 5.93Mbps and 5.75Mbps respectively. According to telecoms analyst, Paul Budde, the figures released by Broadband Expert, are indicative of current trends in the market. “I think the trend is correct. Yes we are making progress, but at the same time we are still way behind some of the leaders in the market and the gap between us and others is actually increasing."However Budde said the real speeds of the average Australian were likely to be substantially lower than those highlighted by Broadband Expert, with the majority (50 to 60 percent) of broadband users sitting at between 1.5 to 2mbps. “More broadband savvy people would most likely visit the site and of course they would already have a higher speed, therefore I think the results could be skewed," he said. Budde believes only 20 per cent of broadband users enjoy speeds of between 5 and 9Mbps – a factor that he said would be remedied by the National Broadband Network that the government has begun rolling out in selected sites around Australia. http://www.theage.com.au/technology/broadband-getting-faster-but-still-too-slow-20101019-16rqt.html I dont know a single person whose speed is less than 5Mbps. this so-called 'average' they are sprouting must include dlai-up to be so low. ADLS2+ has up to 24Mbs with an average of 12Mbps. I get 2mbps As low as half a mbps in bad weather ADSL is unavailable due to being more than 3km from an exchange - and the privatised Telstra gave a rough quote of $5K to lay a land-line (compared to the regular $250 for urban clients) Out of range for wireless Satellite was my ONLY option

I know you aren't in favour of cost analysis, but what's the satellite connection worth annually?

$900.00 per annum
4gb peak
6gg off peak


ISP  Skymesh

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 10:37am:

$900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh

Ouch.  We only update our prepaid wireless with $50 a month and we now have about $100 credit on top of that.  Im not sure of our speed, but its pretty quick.

I remember having satelite a few years ago, pretty ordinary.

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 10:37am:

$900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh

OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM

Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps

18 gig a month

10 gig peak

8 gig off peak

bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 10:50am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak

I'd GO for that
If I could get wireless reception
Like 10% of Australia

And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 12:06pm:

bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:50am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak Does your mobile phone woprk in your area If so try ringing optus and ask I'd GO for that If I could get wireless reception Like 10% of Australia And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page

Does your mobile phone woprk in your area

If so try ringing optus and ask


;)

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 12:06pm:

bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:50am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak I'd GO for that If I could get wireless reception Like 10% of Australia And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page

I have Bigpuddle wireless.

$50/month for 3 Gigs, then slowed.

Service ranges (randomly) from good to effing abysmal.

3.2Mbps at best (VERY RARELY).

Unusable (slower than dialup) at worst, IF it will hold a connection.

Often, you can't even open an email, and as for
loading the Bigpuddle home-page...forget it!

bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 12:24pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:06pm: bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:50am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak Does your mobile phone woprk in your area If so try ringing optus and ask I'd GO for that If I could get wireless reception Like 10% of Australia And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page Does your mobile phone woprk in your area If so try ringing optus and ask ;)

NO


Optus (the "service" I had when I muved here) is ZILCH
I am now with Telstra, which can be used from a location we refer to as "the talking tree"

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 2:51pm:

bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:24pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:06pm: bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:50am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak Does your mobile phone woprk in your area If so try ringing optus and ask I'd GO for that If I could get wireless reception Like 10% of Australia And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page Does your mobile phone woprk in your area If so try ringing optus and ask ;) NO Optus (the "service" I had when I muved here) is ZILCH I am now with Telstra, which can be used from a location we refer to as "the talking tree"

We have a talking TANK at our place up NSW  the rest of the property's in a valley  NO SERVICE

;D ;D ;D

iinet  ADSL2

100GB peak
100GB off peak

$ 40,00 per month

(Not bundled with a phone though)

Great reception in a regional area -  no problems

nichy wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 3:17pm:

iinet  ADSL2 100GB peak 100GB off peak $ 40,00 per month (Not bundled with a phone though) Great reception in a regional area -  no problems

We can only get  wireless or sat  we are 20k from exchange

;)     And only lines too  26 houses  


;)

Kat wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 12:48pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:06pm: bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:50am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak I'd GO for that If I could get wireless reception Like 10% of Australia And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page I have Bigpuddle wireless. $50/month for 3 Gigs, then slowed. Service ranges (randomly) from good to effing abysmal. 3.2Mbps at best (VERY RARELY). Unusable (slower than dialup) at worst, IF it will hold a connection. Often, you can't even open an email, and as for loading the Bigpuddle home-page...forget it!

It's a BAD situation
You don't realise just HOW BAD till you experience life in 'the bush'
I'd hate to be running a business dependent on it
I saw ONE story from a woman who runs an air charter company in FNQ who lost a large contract due to her satellite internet connection (along with her phone and fax) being down for 2 hours

THESE situations support the case put forward by Oakeshott, Windsor and Joyce for a NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK

I hope it makes it MY WAY, before Abbott is in the position to TRASH it

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2010 at 10:24pm:

Kat wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:48pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:06pm: bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:50am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak I'd GO for that If I could get wireless reception Like 10% of Australia And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page I have Bigpuddle wireless. $50/month for 3 Gigs, then slowed. Service ranges (randomly) from good to effing abysmal. 3.2Mbps at best (VERY RARELY). Unusable (slower than dialup) at worst, IF it will hold a connection. Often, you can't even open an email, and as for loading the Bigpuddle home-page...forget it! It's a BAD situation You don't realise just HOW BAD till you experience life in 'the bush' I'd hate to be running a business dependent on it I saw ONE story from a woman who runs an air charter company in FNQ who lost a large contract due to her satellite internet connection (along with her phone and fax) being down for 2 hours THESE situations support the case put forward by Oakeshott, Windsor and Joyce for a NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK

actually all it supports is the case for fixing the problem where it actually exists - in the bush - as Howard contracted for and would now be fixed. the NBN proposes a solution to fix a problem that doesnt exist (broadband in the city) as well as the problem in the bush. thats why it wil take ten times as long and ten times as much money.  I dont understand why you oppose the solution you would have already been using in preference to a solution that is years away and may still never eventuate.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2010 at 6:47am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:24pm: Kat wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:48pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:06pm: bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:50am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak I'd GO for that If I could get wireless reception Like 10% of Australia And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page I have Bigpuddle wireless. $50/month for 3 Gigs, then slowed. Service ranges (randomly) from good to effing abysmal. 3.2Mbps at best (VERY RARELY). Unusable (slower than dialup) at worst, IF it will hold a connection. Often, you can't even open an email, and as for loading the Bigpuddle home-page...forget it! It's a BAD situation You don't realise just HOW BAD till you experience life in 'the bush' I'd hate to be running a business dependent on it I saw ONE story from a woman who runs an air charter company in FNQ who lost a large contract due to her satellite internet connection (along with her phone and fax) being down for 2 hours THESE situations support the case put forward by Oakeshott, Windsor and Joyce for a NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK actually all it supports is the case for fixing the problem where it actually exists - in the bush - as Howard contracted for and would now be fixed.

Did he plan to control weather patterns in rural areas - to give a clear path for satellite signals ?

Or was he going to blanket the country in telephone exchanges, no more than 6km from the next, to give everyone ADSL access ?

Let's face it ....
NO-ONE in the Coalition has anything more than a rudimentary knowlege of internet technology, aside from Turnbull - the shadow cabinet member given the task of trashing our NBN
Abbott has called it a high-fibre network
We're all the All-Bran set

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2010 at 8:35am:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 23rd, 2010 at 6:47am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:24pm: Kat wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:48pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:06pm: bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:50am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak I'd GO for that If I could get wireless reception Like 10% of Australia And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page I have Bigpuddle wireless. $50/month for 3 Gigs, then slowed. Service ranges (randomly) from good to effing abysmal. 3.2Mbps at best (VERY RARELY). Unusable (slower than dialup) at worst, IF it will hold a connection. Often, you can't even open an email, and as for loading the Bigpuddle home-page...forget it! It's a BAD situation You don't realise just HOW BAD till you experience life in 'the bush' I'd hate to be running a business dependent on it I saw ONE story from a woman who runs an air charter company in FNQ who lost a large contract due to her satellite internet connection (along with her phone and fax) being down for 2 hours THESE situations support the case put forward by Oakeshott, Windsor and Joyce for a NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK actually all it supports is the case for fixing the problem where it actually exists - in the bush - as Howard contracted for and would now be fixed.   Did he plan to control weather patterns in rural areas - to give a clear path for satellite signals ? Or was he going to blanket the country in telephone exchanges, no more than 6km from the next, to give everyone ADSL access ? Let's face it .... NO-ONE in the Coalition has anything more than a rudimentary knowlege of internet technology, aside from Turnbull - the shadow cabinet member given the task of trashing our NBN Abbott has called it a high-fibre network We're all the All-Bran set

It was a combo of fibre backbone and wireless - a solution that would ahve worked for you but because Rudd was elected it all got cancelled and replaced with... nothing. and now the NBN which may or may not happen and may get to your area in the next 5 years. sounds like a dumb choice to me.

ADSL is now cheaper than dial up used to be. All the while bandwith
and speeds have been increasing so that customers are now getting much more for much less.


NBN Is The Future

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2010 at 11:20am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 23rd, 2010 at 8:35am: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 23rd, 2010 at 6:47am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:24pm: Kat wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:48pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 12:06pm: bwood1946 wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:50am: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:37am: $900.00 per annum 4gb peak 6gg off peak ISP  Skymesh OPTUS      $840  PER ANNUM Wireless   5.5  mbps  to 7mbps 18 gig a month 10 gig peak 8 gig off peak I'd GO for that If I could get wireless reception Like 10% of Australia And not have to wait 60 seconds to download a page I have Bigpuddle wireless. $50/month for 3 Gigs, then slowed. Service ranges (randomly) from good to effing abysmal. 3.2Mbps at best (VERY RARELY). Unusable (slower than dialup) at worst, IF it will hold a connection. Often, you can't even open an email, and as for loading the Bigpuddle home-page...forget it! It's a BAD situation You don't realise just HOW BAD till you experience life in 'the bush' I'd hate to be running a business dependent on it I saw ONE story from a woman who runs an air charter company in FNQ who lost a large contract due to her satellite internet connection (along with her phone and fax) being down for 2 hours THESE situations support the case put forward by Oakeshott, Windsor and Joyce for a NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK actually all it supports is the case for fixing the problem where it actually exists - in the bush - as Howard contracted for and would now be fixed.   Did he plan to control weather patterns in rural areas - to give a clear path for satellite signals ? Or was he going to blanket the country in telephone exchanges, no more than 6km from the next, to give everyone ADSL access ? Let's face it .... NO-ONE in the Coalition has anything more than a rudimentary knowlege of internet technology, aside from Turnbull - the shadow cabinet member given the task of trashing our NBN Abbott has called it a high-fibre network We're all the All-Bran set It was a combo of fibre backbone and wireless - a solution that would ahve worked for you

It was a combo of fibre backbone and wireless
And Abbott is STILL adhering to this "band-aid" remedy ?

If i can repeat, yet AGAIN, I have TRIED wireless
It is more useless than satellite in inclement weather conditions

AS I mentioned previously, with the woman who runs the air charter company in FNQ
Business does not wait till wireless and satellite services return from 2 hour "lunch breaks"

Quote:

It was a combo of fibre backbone and wireless

And that wouldn't do anything for me either.
Im in a mobile black spot with zero wireless signal strength.
While only 5kms in physical distance from the nearest ADSL2 enabled exhange, I'm at roughly 7.5kms cable distance from it via poor quality copper (highest dialup speed I can get is 28k - usual is 19k).

So it's satellite for me. Slow, expensive and unreliable satellite.

My neighbours can get ADSL, but being at near the end of the copper run, their speed can be absolutely woeful during times of high useage in the area.

Life_goes_on wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2010 at 7:48pm:

My neighbours can get ADSL, but being at near the end of the copper run, their speed can be absolutely woeful during times of high useage in the area.

Ditto here - and the move to ADSL2+ has merely highlighted the problem of bandwidth in the evenings...

Conroy NOW in Insiders

Malcolm Turnbull has come out and compared Australia's NBN with the American network on a per capita basis to cast doubt on it's viability....using this formula Australia will never build any infrastructure unless it is sub standard and the bush will get nothing.....spending in the bush can never be justified on a per capita basis when you compare it to a country with 300 million people….if Turnbull thinks Australia must justify spending on a per capita basis by comparing us to America we will have no problem running surpluses well into the future….we will not build anything!!!

Quote:

we will have no problem running surpluses well into the future….we will not build anything!!!

I thought that was obvious.

But we will have a surplus. Children will laugh again, adults will be smiling, knowing that they can sleep peacefully because we have a surplus.

Whats justified about spending 43 BILLION DOLLARS on just ONE piece of technology ???? PHILPERTH.


Why dont you explain ???

stryder wrote on Oct 24^th, 2010 at 10:58am:

Whats justified about spending 43 BILLION DOLLARS on just ONE piece of technology ???? PHILPERTH. Why dont you explain ???

I don’t know.....perhaps the NBN is a bad idea....but what I do know is comparing Australia on a per capita basis with a country that has 15x the population as a cost analysis will mean no spending will be viable....it is a deceitful argument!!!

;D ;D ;D

This dumb stupid idiotic laced labor government couldnt even roll out the pink batts, the BER, the solar rebates, or cant sercure our borders by sea, properly.


HOW ON EARTH ARE WE SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE THAT THIS DUMB LABOR GOVERNMENT CAN ROLL THIS OUT ???????


The stupidity of Labor is phenomenal.

and you laborites expect us to believe it  ;D ;D ;D

There hasnt even been a REAL cost net benefit analysis of this NBN anyWAY.

stryder wrote on Oct 24^th, 2010 at 11:07am:

HOW ON EARTH ARE WE SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE THAT THIS DUMB LABOR GOVERNMENT CAN ROLL THIS OUT ???????

The roll-out for our National Broadband is ...

A/ Ahead of schedule
B/ Under budget

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 24^th, 2010 at 11:06am:

stryder wrote on Oct 24th, 2010 at 10:58am: Whats justified about spending 43 BILLION DOLLARS on just ONE piece of technology ???? PHILPERTH. Why dont you explain ??? I don’t know.....perhaps the NBN is a bad idea....but what I do know is comparing Australia on a per capita basis with a country that has 15x the population as a cost analysis will mean no spending will be viable....it is a deceitful argument!!!

on the same basis of construction , compareing AUST TOO KOREA, JAPAN, and so on no were near the Geographic AREA

APPLES AN ORANGES


>:( >:(

stryder wrote on Oct 24^th, 2010 at 11:12am:

There hasnt even been a REAL cost net benefit analysis of this NBN anyWAY.

Where's the POINT ?
Abbott has stated he will STILL trash it, REGARDLESS of the findings of any cost net benefit analysis

It's just a delaying strategy



NBN cost-benefit just wastes time: Conroy
October 24, 2010 - 11:39AM

AAP

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has ruled out a full cost-benefit analysis of the $43 billion national broadband network (NBN) because it would just waste time and money.

Senator Conroy said the opposition remained determined to demolish the NBN, despite suggestions from opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull that a Productivity Commission tick would be incredibly persuasive.

He said Opposition Leader Tony Abbott had set Mr Turnbull one task, to demolish NBN."They have refused to allow debate in the Senate. They said we had to release the ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) report. They said we had to release McKinsey's report," he told ABC television on Sunday.

"We have done all of that. Now what do they want? Another report."

Senator Conroy said Mr Turnbull had indicated he might be prepared to accept the NBN although Mr Abbott had made it clear the opposition's policy would not change.

"Malcolm Turnbull has got lots of fine words but he is still not prepared to say, if this was positive, we would support it," he said.

He said another cost-benefit analysis would waste time and money.

"This is just another time-wasting proposal by the opposition that are desperate to stop the rollout," he said.

Senator Conroy said cost-benefit analyses had been carried out into broadband networks all round the world and all had been overwhelmingly positive.

He said the government wasn't just relying on overseas studies and NBN's own internal business case.

The $25 million McKinsey report showed the financial case was viable and it would provide a return to taxpayers and affordable prices.

Access Economics and IBM commissioned a report into the productivity case for a fibre-to-the-node network, less ambitious than what the government proposed, and found the case overwhelmingly positive.
Senator Conroy said the NBN board had now concluded its business case and would put that to the government, providing significant information on costs, pricing and rates of return.


http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/nbn-costbenefit-just-wastes-time-conroy-20101024-16yvo.html

The 2 structures built at our school cost $2 mil. These 2 same structures could have been built for less than 1 mil if handled correctly. What were the 2 structures......a large hayshed(COLA) and and an extension to a building.

Disgusting waste of tax payer dollars.

Every scheme that Labor have undertaken under Rudd and Gillard has been a disgusting waste of tax dollars.......

Turnbull will have NO problems winning because Labor cannot manage money!!

Key federal independent MP Tony Windsor won't back any move for a Productivity Commission analysis of the $43 billion national broadband network.

The Coalition will later today introduce legislation that requires the network to be the subject of a cost-benefit analysis.

"If they'd done a cost-benefit analysis on the Snowy Hydro Scheme ... it would probably show up that it wouldn't be a viable operation," Mr Windsor told ABC Radio.
The New England MP has been a strong supporter of the national broadband network, citing it has one of the reasons he backed a minority Labor government following the August 21 election.

Another crossbencher Bob Katter has signalled he won't support the coalition move either.

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/nbn-row-windsor-wont-back-cost-analysis-20101025-16zjs.html

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 25^th, 2010 at 10:19am:

Key federal independent MP Tony Windsor won't back any move for a Productivity Commission analysis of the $43 billion national broadband network. The Coalition will later today introduce legislation that requires the network to be the subject of a cost-benefit analysis. "If they'd done a cost-benefit analysis on the Snowy Hydro Scheme ... it would probably show up that it wouldn't be a viable operation," Mr Windsor told ABC Radio. The New England MP has been a strong supporter of the national broadband network, citing it has one of the reasons he backed a minority Labor government following the August 21 election. Another crossbencher Bob Katter has signalled he won't support the coalition move either. http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/nbn-row-windsor-wont-back-cost-analysis-20101025-16zjs.html

problem is that Windsor is an idiot. the snowy mountain scheme is PROFITABLE - something laborites seem to neither know nor understand. people arent even PRETENDING that the NBN wil lbe profitable except conroy and if you believe him then you'd believe anything. This is when people bring up telstra's investment in the NBN. keep in mind that telstra gets to give up its copper network and hand over that part of their business to the NBN. I wonder if any of the bozos that show this as a support for the NBN understand that Telstras copper network is barely profitable and expected to be a loss-maker pretty soon. so they get to sell a dying bit of infrastructure to the govt for more than its worth and rid itself of a dead weight. THIS is why telstra supprots the NBN!

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 25^th, 2010 at 5:38pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 25th, 2010 at 10:19am: Key federal independent MP Tony Windsor won't back any move for a Productivity Commission analysis of the $43 billion national broadband network. The Coalition will later today introduce legislation that requires the network to be the subject of a cost-benefit analysis. "If they'd done a cost-benefit analysis on the Snowy Hydro Scheme ... it would probably show up that it wouldn't be a viable operation," Mr Windsor told ABC Radio. The New England MP has been a strong supporter of the national broadband network, citing it has one of the reasons he backed a minority Labor government following the August 21 election. Another crossbencher Bob Katter has signalled he won't support the coalition move either. http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/nbn-row-windsor-wont-back-cost-analysis-20101025-16zjs.html problem is that Windsor is an idiot. the snowy mountain scheme is PROFITABLE - something laborites seem to neither know nor understand. people arent even PRETENDING that the NBN wil lbe profitable except conroy and if you believe him then you'd believe anything. This is when people bring up telstra's investment in the NBN. keep in mind that telstra gets to give up its copper network and hand over that part of their business to the NBN. I wonder if any of the bozos that show this as a support for the NBN understand that Telstras copper network is barely profitable and expected to be a loss-maker pretty soon. so they get to sell a dying bit of infrastructure to the govt for more than its worth and rid itself of a dead weight. THIS is why telstra supprots the NBN!

The trouble is  ECONOMICS IS AN IMPERFECT SCIENCE AND DOESN'T UNDERSTAND what 'profitable' means! {We could say that the bible tells us to be aware of false profits but this is possible not the time!}

Regulation of markets is profitable in the sense that if markets weren't regulated your house would more than likely fall down!

Regulation means that houses are built to not be fire hazards! Must I go on!??!

The Liberal Party has lost its way because it feels that delaying the inevitable is 'profitable'! How selfish and the Libs will lose seats following this path, hence Turnbulls astute turning of direction in the matter! Hence Howards imploring of Turnbull to stay on!!

It is fairly hard to fight the higher ideal I hope you know!

JUST SAYING!  :D :D :D  ;)  :D :D :D  ;)  ;D ;D ;D  :o :o

Turnbull on Insight.....what a deceitful piece of work this bloke is.....he keeps bringing up what the Americans are doing with broadband (knowing their economy is stuffed)....yet he does not accept reports from other countries that support building a fiber network....it would appear as though the Coalition are only interested in what supports there argument and not what benefits Australia....if the cost benefit analysis from other surveys is not adequate for Turnbull then why is what the Americans doing so important.....what did the Yanks cost benefit analysis come up with.....nothing because they never did one???

Abstracted from an article in today's Washington Post.

Broadband service in Japan is eight to thirty times as fast as in the United States and considerably cheaper. Japan has the world's fastest internet connections, delivering more data at a lower cost than anywhere else. Accelerating broadband speed in Japan, South Korea and much of Europe is pushing open doors to internet innovation that are likely to remain closed for years to come in much of the U.S.

Median download speeds in megabits per second:
Japan 61mbps
South Korea 46 mbps
Finland 21mbps
Sweden 18mbps
Canada 8mbps
U.S. 2mbps
Japanese can watch broadcast-quality full-screen television over the internet, an experiece that mocks the grainy wallet-sized images Americans endure. Ultra-high speed applications are being rolled out for low-cost high-definition teleconferencing, telemedicine--which allows urban doctors to diagnose diseases from a distance--and advanced telecommuting to help traffic-choked Japan meet its goal of doubling the number of people who work from home by 2010.

Japan has surged ahead of the U.S. on the wings of better wire and more aggressive government regulation. The copper wire used to hook up Japanese homes is newer and runs in shorter loops to telephone exchanges than in the U.S. DSL is often five to ten times as fast as U.S. cable providers--for as little as $22 a month--and cable internet access is not widespread in Japan.

Nine million Japanese homes have fiber-optic lines, nine times the number in the U.S.

Japanese pathologists can examine tissue samples from patients without access to major hospitals. All they need is a clinic with the right microscope and a fiber connection.

Japan's lead may shift internet innovation away from the United States.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=70996

It shouldn't be too much of a surprise that the Internet has evolved into a force strong enough to reflect the greatest hopes and fears of those who use it. After all, it was designed to withstand nuclear war, not just the puny huffs and puffs of politicians and religious fanatics.
Denise Caruso, (digital commerce columnist, New York Times)

We would not be having this debate if it was not for the internet.....we should not try to limit ourselves to mediocrity!!!

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26^th, 2010 at 10:12pm:

Turnbull on Insight.....what a deceitful piece of work this bloke is.....he keeps bringing up what the Americans are doing with broadband (knowing their economy is stuffed)....yet he does not accept reports from other countries that support building a fiber network....it would appear as though the Coalition are only interested in what supports there argument and not what benefits Australia....if the cost benefit analysis from other surveys is not adequate for Turnbull then why is what the Americans doing so important.....what did the Yanks cost benefit analysis come up with.....nothing because they never did one???

PHIL i would say without a doubt its Conroy that is the deceitful one..he spent the whole program on high octane to prove that the $43billion will be a good investment and worthwhile.. all Turnbull was doing was proving he is ALONE in the world thinking like that..conroys body language told a hell of a lot..his little neck sticks up and his eyes pop..thinks he is in the senate where he doesnt have to speak english..just gobbledegoop.Turnbull said no one agrees with conroy and what aust is doing.. and the nerd didnt have an answer to that just more gobble.. he also didnt say that we should follow America. he was compareing that is all.. but of course you were only half listening I am sure.. before you say anything I dont pretend to understand any of what they are talking about computer language may as well be Swalhili as far as I am concerned.. however I do understand $43billion..and I do understand it wont make all that much difference in the long run. and I also understand not much of what this govt has done has worked out beneficial or under cost.. and that is of concern.some woman also said about the length of time it took to build in Tas.. something like 5 months 24/7 heaps of man power..and just a few homes connected.. she didnt connect btw.

codswal wrote on Oct 27^th, 2010 at 6:42am:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26th, 2010 at 10:12pm: Turnbull on Insight.....what a deceitful piece of work this bloke is.....he keeps bringing up what the Americans are doing with broadband (knowing their economy is stuffed)....yet he does not accept reports from other countries that support building a fiber network....it would appear as though the Coalition are only interested in what supports there argument and not what benefits Australia....if the cost benefit analysis from other surveys is not adequate for Turnbull then why is what the Americans doing so important.....what did the Yanks cost benefit analysis come up with.....nothing because they never did one??? PHIL i would say without a doubt its Conroy that is the deceitful one..he spent the whole program on high octane to prove that the $43billion will be a good investment and worthwhile.. all Turnbull was doing was proving he is ALONE in the world thinking like that..conroys body language told a hell of a lot..his little neck sticks up and his eyes pop..thinks he is in the senate where he doesnt have to speak english..just gobbledegoop.Turnbull said no one agrees with conroy and what aust is doing.. and the nerd didnt have an answer to that just more gobble.. he also didnt say that we should follow America. he was compareing that is all.. but of course you were only half listening I am sure.. before you say anything I dont pretend to understand any of what they are talking about computer language may as well be Swalhili as far as I am concerned.. however I do understand $43billion..and I do understand it wont make all that much difference in the long run. and I also understand not much of what this govt has done has worked out beneficial or under cost.. and that is of concern.some woman also said about the length of time it took to build in Tas.. something like 5 months 24/7 heaps of man power..and just a few homes connected.. she didnt connect btw.

Conroy does not imperss me Cods.....his internet filter is something I will NEVER support......however if Australia does not build a state of the art fibre network that actually delivers the full potential of the internet to all Australians then why bother building fibre at all.....we should just stick with the current copper wire system......However as we know fibre is the best option and has the potential for growth and inovation that will dwarf anything that currently exists......copper will restrict communication.....fibre will drive it!!!

Independant analysis

The National Broadband Network (NBN) has been given strong endorsement by the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) which at the same time has called for hard data from Labor on the economic benefits of the infrastructure project.

Speaking on Network Ten on Sunday, ACCI chief executive, Peter Anderson, said the Australian business community realised the benefits to the economy which national broadband infrastructure initiatives could bring.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/361294/australian_chamber_commerce_industry_backs_national_broadband_network/

AS the NBN rollout gains momentum, it is essential to think strategically about a number of issues.

These include usability, applications, social and cultural concerns, geographical constraints and the digital divide.

According to last month's report of the Broadband Commission for Digital Development to the UN, the digital divide is a development obstacle that must quickly be bridged."We firmly believe that today, the social and economic development of every country on earth will depend on accessible and affordable access to broadband networks as the basis of human opportunity for all citizens -- wherever they live and whatever their circumstances," says the report, which represents the views of 58 international stakeholders and decision-makers, including Senator Stephen Conroy.

A national broadband network will deliver economic and social benefits for any nation that builds one.

Research by management consultancy Booz & Company indicates that a 10 per cent increase in broadband penetration in a year delivers a 1.5 per cent rise in labour productivity over the next five years. The study also suggests countries in the top tier of broadband penetration achieve 2 per cent higher GDP growth than those in the bottom tier.

Booz & Co's findings are reinforced by consultancy McKinsey & Co, which estimates that a 10 per cent increase in broadband household penetration boosts national GDP by 0.1-1.4 per cent.

Beyond the economic benefits, there are short- and long-term jobs created by the construction of the broadband infrastructure.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/opinion/national-broadband-network-requires-strategic-thinking/story-e6frgb0o-1225940388030

This is the expert Cods quoted to support her argument.....lol!!!

some woman also said about the length of time it took to build in Tas.. something like 5 months 24/7 heaps of man power..and just a few homes connected.. she didnt connect btw

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Oct 26^th, 2010 at 6:13pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 25th, 2010 at 5:38pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 25th, 2010 at 10:19am: Key federal independent MP Tony Windsor won't back any move for a Productivity Commission analysis of the $43 billion national broadband network. The Coalition will later today introduce legislation that requires the network to be the subject of a cost-benefit analysis. "If they'd done a cost-benefit analysis on the Snowy Hydro Scheme ... it would probably show up that it wouldn't be a viable operation," Mr Windsor told ABC Radio. The New England MP has been a strong supporter of the national broadband network, citing it has one of the reasons he backed a minority Labor government following the August 21 election. Another crossbencher Bob Katter has signalled he won't support the coalition move either. http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/nbn-row-windsor-wont-back-cost-analysis-20101025-16zjs.html problem is that Windsor is an idiot. the snowy mountain scheme is PROFITABLE - something laborites seem to neither know nor understand. people arent even PRETENDING that the NBN wil lbe profitable except conroy and if you believe him then you'd believe anything. This is when people bring up telstra's investment in the NBN. keep in mind that telstra gets to give up its copper network and hand over that part of their business to the NBN. I wonder if any of the bozos that show this as a support for the NBN understand that Telstras copper network is barely profitable and expected to be a loss-maker pretty soon. so they get to sell a dying bit of infrastructure to the govt for more than its worth and rid itself of a dead weight. THIS is why telstra supprots the NBN! The trouble is  ECONOMICS IS AN IMPERFECT SCIENCE AND DOESN'T UNDERSTAND what 'profitable' means! {We could say that the bible tells us to be aware of false profits but this is possible not the time!} Regulation of markets is profitable in the sense that if markets weren't regulated your house would more than likely fall down! Regulation means that houses are built to not be fire hazards! Must I go on!??! The Liberal Party has lost its way because it feels that delaying the inevitable is 'profitable'! How selfish and the Libs will lose seats following this path, hence Turnbulls astute turning of direction in the matter! Hence Howards imploring of Turnbull to stay on!! It is fairly hard to fight the higher ideal I hope you know! JUST SAYING!  :D :D :D  ;)  :D :D :D  ;)  ;D ;D ;D  :o :o

you dont know what PROFITABLE means?? no wonder you support the labor party. PROFIT is actually very very easy to define (although not always easy to achieve!)

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26^th, 2010 at 10:12pm:

Turnbull on Insight.....what a deceitful piece of work this bloke is.....he keeps bringing up what the Americans are doing with broadband (knowing their economy is stuffed)....yet he does not accept reports from other countries that support building a fiber network....it would appear as though the Coalition are only interested in what supports there argument and not what benefits Australia....if the cost benefit analysis from other surveys is not adequate for Turnbull then why is what the Americans doing so important.....what did the Yanks cost benefit analysis come up with.....nothing because they never did one???

economies of scale... ever heard of it? people love to use singapore as an example - a country 1/3000 the size of ours. major infrastructure in this country is never cheap because of the enormous distances between population centres. roads, water, electricity and communication are all more expensive here than tiny european countries or large population countries liek USA. thats the reason why a fibre network is so expensive and so risky. and thats why a cost benefit analysis shoudl be mandatory - so that we know PRECISELY what we are getting into.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26^th, 2010 at 10:47pm:

Abstracted from an article in today's Washington Post. Broadband service in Japan is eight to thirty times as fast as in the United States and considerably cheaper. Japan has the world's fastest internet connections, delivering more data at a lower cost than anywhere else. Accelerating broadband speed in Japan, South Korea and much of Europe is pushing open doors to internet innovation that are likely to remain closed for years to come in much of the U.S. Median download speeds in megabits per second: Japan 61mbps South Korea 46 mbps Finland 21mbps Sweden 18mbps Canada 8mbps U.S. 2mbps Japanese can watch broadcast-quality full-screen television over the internet, an experiece that mocks the grainy wallet-sized images Americans endure. Ultra-high speed applications are being rolled out for low-cost high-definition teleconferencing, telemedicine--which allows urban doctors to diagnose diseases from a distance--and advanced telecommuting to help traffic-choked Japan meet its goal of doubling the number of people who work from home by 2010. Japan has surged ahead of the U.S. on the wings of better wire and more aggressive government regulation. The copper wire used to hook up Japanese homes is newer and runs in shorter loops to telephone exchanges than in the U.S. DSL is often five to ten times as fast as U.S. cable providers--for as little as $22 a month--and cable internet access is not widespread in Japan. Nine million Japanese homes have fiber-optic lines, nine times the number in the U.S. Japanese pathologists can examine tissue samples from patients without access to major hospitals. All they need is a clinic with the right microscope and a fiber connection. Japan's lead may shift internet innovation away from the United States. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=70996 It shouldn't be too much of a surprise that the Internet has evolved into a force strong enough to reflect the greatest hopes and fears of those who use it. After all, it was designed to withstand nuclear war, not just the puny huffs and puffs of politicians and religious fanatics. Denise Caruso, (digital commerce columnist, New York Times) We would not be having this debate if it was not for the internet.....we should not try to limit ourselves to mediocrity!!!

Japan is a tiny island with a population density most of us could not even fathom. I could set up a 1Gb connection to cover my entire street and minimal cost and risk. It isnt until I try to connect to another city that the expense arises. In japan the nearest 'million person city' is as close as our next suburb. You really do need to understand the differecen in the scale of the NBN to a japanese network.

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 27^th, 2010 at 11:04am:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26th, 2010 at 10:12pm: Turnbull on Insight.....what a deceitful piece of work this bloke is.....he keeps bringing up what the Americans are doing with broadband (knowing their economy is stuffed)....yet he does not accept reports from other countries that support building a fiber network....it would appear as though the Coalition are only interested in what supports there argument and not what benefits Australia....if the cost benefit analysis from other surveys is not adequate for Turnbull then why is what the Americans doing so important.....what did the Yanks cost benefit analysis come up with.....nothing because they never did one??? economies of scale... ever heard of it? people love to use singapore as an example - a country 1/3000 the size of ours. major infrastructure in this country is never cheap because of the enormous distances between population centres. roads, water, electricity and communication are all more expensive here than tiny european countries or large population countries liek USA. thats the reason why a fibre network is so expensive and so risky. and thats why a cost benefit analysis shoudl be mandatory - so that we know PRECISELY what we are getting into.

Yes.....and I agree....so why is Turnbull using the example of America to support his argument.....you must agree his comparison is dishonest to say the least......that is why I gave a varied example of countries that have built a fiber network.....lets face it, the Coalition will never accept the NBN no matter what evidence is provided to support it's construction.....perhaps we should be asking why shouldn’t we build the NBN......why does the Coalition have to follow America with every decision they make???

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 27^th, 2010 at 11:09am:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26th, 2010 at 10:47pm: Abstracted from an article in today's Washington Post. Broadband service in Japan is eight to thirty times as fast as in the United States and considerably cheaper. Japan has the world's fastest internet connections, delivering more data at a lower cost than anywhere else. Accelerating broadband speed in Japan, South Korea and much of Europe is pushing open doors to internet innovation that are likely to remain closed for years to come in much of the U.S. Median download speeds in megabits per second: Japan 61mbps South Korea 46 mbps Finland 21mbps Sweden 18mbps Canada 8mbps U.S. 2mbps Japanese can watch broadcast-quality full-screen television over the internet, an experiece that mocks the grainy wallet-sized images Americans endure. Ultra-high speed applications are being rolled out for low-cost high-definition teleconferencing, telemedicine--which allows urban doctors to diagnose diseases from a distance--and advanced telecommuting to help traffic-choked Japan meet its goal of doubling the number of people who work from home by 2010. Japan has surged ahead of the U.S. on the wings of better wire and more aggressive government regulation. The copper wire used to hook up Japanese homes is newer and runs in shorter loops to telephone exchanges than in the U.S. DSL is often five to ten times as fast as U.S. cable providers--for as little as $22 a month--and cable internet access is not widespread in Japan. Nine million Japanese homes have fiber-optic lines, nine times the number in the U.S. Japanese pathologists can examine tissue samples from patients without access to major hospitals. All they need is a clinic with the right microscope and a fiber connection. Japan's lead may shift internet innovation away from the United States. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=70996 It shouldn't be too much of a surprise that the Internet has evolved into a force strong enough to reflect the greatest hopes and fears of those who use it. After all, it was designed to withstand nuclear war, not just the puny huffs and puffs of politicians and religious fanatics. Denise Caruso, (digital commerce columnist, New York Times) We would not be having this debate if it was not for the internet.....we should not try to limit ourselves to mediocrity!!! Japan is a tiny island with a population density most of us could not even fathom. I could set up a 1Gb connection to cover my entire street and minimal cost and risk. It isnt until I try to connect to another city that the expense arises. In japan the nearest 'million person city' is as close as our next suburb. You really do need to understand the differecen in the scale of the NBN to a japanese network.

Japan is not the only country on the list....where is your condemnation of Turnbull’s analogy with America’s network???

:)

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 27^th, 2010 at 6:03pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 27th, 2010 at 11:09am: philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26th, 2010 at 10:47pm: Abstracted from an article in today's Washington Post. Broadband service in Japan is eight to thirty times as fast as in the United States and considerably cheaper. Japan has the world's fastest internet connections, delivering more data at a lower cost than anywhere else. Accelerating broadband speed in Japan, South Korea and much of Europe is pushing open doors to internet innovation that are likely to remain closed for years to come in much of the U.S. Median download speeds in megabits per second: Japan 61mbps South Korea 46 mbps Finland 21mbps Sweden 18mbps Canada 8mbps U.S. 2mbps Japanese can watch broadcast-quality full-screen television over the internet, an experiece that mocks the grainy wallet-sized images Americans endure. Ultra-high speed applications are being rolled out for low-cost high-definition teleconferencing, telemedicine--which allows urban doctors to diagnose diseases from a distance--and advanced telecommuting to help traffic-choked Japan meet its goal of doubling the number of people who work from home by 2010. Japan has surged ahead of the U.S. on the wings of better wire and more aggressive government regulation. The copper wire used to hook up Japanese homes is newer and runs in shorter loops to telephone exchanges than in the U.S. DSL is often five to ten times as fast as U.S. cable providers--for as little as $22 a month--and cable internet access is not widespread in Japan. Nine million Japanese homes have fiber-optic lines, nine times the number in the U.S. Japanese pathologists can examine tissue samples from patients without access to major hospitals. All they need is a clinic with the right microscope and a fiber connection. Japan's lead may shift internet innovation away from the United States. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=70996 It shouldn't be too much of a surprise that the Internet has evolved into a force strong enough to reflect the greatest hopes and fears of those who use it. After all, it was designed to withstand nuclear war, not just the puny huffs and puffs of politicians and religious fanatics. Denise Caruso, (digital commerce columnist, New York Times) We would not be having this debate if it was not for the internet.....we should not try to limit ourselves to mediocrity!!! Japan is a tiny island with a population density most of us could not even fathom. I could set up a 1Gb connection to cover my entire street and minimal cost and risk. It isnt until I try to connect to another city that the expense arises. In japan the nearest 'million person city' is as close as our next suburb. You really do need to understand the differecen in the scale of the NBN to a japanese network. Japan is not the only country on the list....where is your condemnation of Turnbull’s analogy with America’s network??? :)

America is always an argument to counter any other argument. the 'land of the free' with the highest incarceration rate in the free world. 'bring us your poor'  and stay that way. 'bring us your sick' so we can watch you die because we dont believe in healthcare for all.

America - richest nation on earth yet with the highest rate of poverty in the western world.

Americas broadband network exists SOLEY to make money. no other reason. they have discovered that there is not a lot of money in broadband beyond a certain level. Ther might be a clue there... Youcan have superfast broadband in the USA but you have to (shock horro) pay for it. somewhere between the uber-capitalists of the USA and the idiotic bankrupt socialists of Europe lies a compromise society called Australia. it is not accident we have the best economy inthe world.

how much is the NBN going to cost

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26^th, 2010 at 10:12pm:

Turnbull on Insight.....what a deceitful piece of work this bloke is.....he keeps bringing up what the Americans are doing with broadband (knowing their economy is stuffed)....yet he does not accept reports from other countries that support building a fiber network....it would appear as though the Coalition are only interested in what supports there argument and not what benefits Australia....if the cost benefit analysis from other surveys is not adequate for Turnbull then why is what the Americans doing so important.....what did the Yanks cost benefit analysis come up with.....nothing because they never did one???

Hmmmmmmmmn THAT IS INTERESTING!  :o

codswal wrote on Oct 27^th, 2010 at 6:42am:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26th, 2010 at 10:12pm: Turnbull on Insight.....what a deceitful piece of work this bloke is.....he keeps bringing up what the Americans are doing with broadband (knowing their economy is stuffed)....yet he does not accept reports from other countries that support building a fiber network....it would appear as though the Coalition are only interested in what supports there argument and not what benefits Australia....if the cost benefit analysis from other surveys is not adequate for Turnbull then why is what the Americans doing so important.....what did the Yanks cost benefit analysis come up with.....nothing because they never did one??? PHIL i would say without a doubt its Conroy that is the deceitful one..he spent the whole program on high octane to prove that the $43billion will be a good investment and worthwhile.. all Turnbull was doing was proving he is ALONE in the world thinking like that..conroys body language told a hell of a lot..his little neck sticks up and his eyes pop..thinks he is in the senate where he doesnt have to speak english..just gobbledegoop.Turnbull said no one agrees with conroy and what aust is doing.. and the nerd didnt have an answer to that just more gobble.. he also didnt say that we should follow America. he was compareing that is all.. but of course you were only half listening I am sure.. before you say anything I dont pretend to understand any of what they are talking about computer language may as well be Swalhili as far as I am concerned.. however I do understand $43billion..and I do understand it wont make all that much difference in the long run. and I also understand not much of what this govt has done has worked out beneficial or under cost.. and that is of concern.some woman also said about the length of time it took to build in Tas.. something like 5 months 24/7 heaps of man power..and just a few homes connected.. she didnt connect btw.

hEY, do you dare examine the Libs body language in regards to all things broadband related!

I thought not!

The Libs are losing much skin ove rthis and that is why Turnbull is preparing the ground for an about face! GO ON- TELL ME I'M DREMING... YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO....(WHAT?!!?...PLEASE DON'T CRY!)  :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[  :D ;D ;)

longweekend58 wrote on Oct 27^th, 2010 at 11:01am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Oct 26th, 2010 at 6:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Oct 25th, 2010 at 5:38pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 25th, 2010 at 10:19am: Key federal independent MP Tony Windsor won't back any move for a Productivity Commission analysis of the $43 billion national broadband network. The Coalition will later today introduce legislation that requires the network to be the subject of a cost-benefit analysis. "If they'd done a cost-benefit analysis on the Snowy Hydro Scheme ... it would probably show up that it wouldn't be a viable operation," Mr Windsor told ABC Radio. The New England MP has been a strong supporter of the national broadband network, citing it has one of the reasons he backed a minority Labor government following the August 21 election. Another crossbencher Bob Katter has signalled he won't support the coalition move either. http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/nbn-row-windsor-wont-back-cost-analysis-20101025-16zjs.html problem is that Windsor is an idiot. the snowy mountain scheme is PROFITABLE - something laborites seem to neither know nor understand. people arent even PRETENDING that the NBN wil lbe profitable except conroy and if you believe him then you'd believe anything. This is when people bring up telstra's investment in the NBN. keep in mind that telstra gets to give up its copper network and hand over that part of their business to the NBN. I wonder if any of the bozos that show this as a support for the NBN understand that Telstras copper network is barely profitable and expected to be a loss-maker pretty soon. so they get to sell a dying bit of infrastructure to the govt for more than its worth and rid itself of a dead weight. THIS is why telstra supprots the NBN! The trouble is  ECONOMICS IS AN IMPERFECT SCIENCE AND DOESN'T UNDERSTAND what 'profitable' means! {We could say that the bible tells us to be aware of false profits but this is possible not the time!} Regulation of markets is profitable in the sense that if markets weren't regulated your house would more than likely fall down! Regulation means that houses are built to not be fire hazards! Must I go on!??! The Liberal Party has lost its way because it feels that delaying the inevitable is 'profitable'! How selfish and the Libs will lose seats following this path, hence Turnbulls astute turning of direction in the matter! Hence Howards imploring of Turnbull to stay on!! It is fairly hard to fight the higher ideal I hope you know! JUST SAYING!  :D :D :D  ;)  :D :D :D  ;)  ;D ;D ;D  :o :o you dont know what PROFITABLE means?? no wonder you support the labor party. PROFIT is actually very very easy to define (although not always easy to achieve!)

MATE, we're all grown ups here so don't hold back will ya!

 ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)  :D

aikmann4 wrote on Oct 27^th, 2010 at 9:03pm:

how much is the NBN going to cost

Not 43 billion!  ;)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Oct 28^th, 2010 at 8:56pm:

aikmann4 wrote on Oct 27th, 2010 at 9:03pm: how much is the NBN going to cost Not 43 billion!  ;)

ONly thinkg u ever got right. it will cost way more than that. How do I know? because NOTHING the govt ever does comes in on time or on budget.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 26^th, 2010 at 10:12pm:

Turnbull on Insight.....what a deceitful piece of work this bloke is.....he keeps bringing up what the Americans are doing with broadband (knowing their economy is stuffed)....yet he does not accept reports from other countries that support building a fiber network....it would appear as though the Coalition are only interested in what supports there argument and not what benefits Australia....if the cost benefit analysis from other surveys is not adequate for Turnbull then why is what the Americans doing so important.....what did the Yanks cost benefit analysis come up with.....nothing because they never did one???

Not only that. It was said on that show that Turnbull and the opposition turned its back  and refused to be involved in the industry discussions that were taking place on th NBN. AND IT GETS NO MEDIA COVERAGE.
The Liberals are without a doubt getting away with a lot.

I wouldn't discount Turnbull's opinions on the NBN, it appears he isn't the only one thinking that the NBN is a waste of money.


Masayoshi Son, who heads Japanese internet and mobile giant Softbank and counts Apple's Steve Jobs and Microsoft's Bill Gates among his friends, attacked the Gillard government's signature project yesterday.

Quizzed about the NBN by The Weekend Australian after delivering a speech in Tokyo, Mr Son said it was completely unnecessary to spend so much taxpayers' money.

"It's a waste; it's a stupid solution," he said. "Without using taxpayers' money you can get 21st-century infrastructure."

Mr Son had just finished delivering his own vision of how to deliver fibre-to-the-home connections throughout Japan without any taxpayer contribution.

http://www.tasmantimes.com.au/nbn-a-waste-of-money-says-japan-it-mogul/

nichy wrote on Oct 30^th, 2010 at 10:43am:

I wouldn't discount Turnbull's opinions on the NBN, it appears he isn't the only one thinking that the NBN is a waste of money. Masayoshi Son, who heads Japanese internet and mobile giant Softbank and counts Apple's Steve Jobs and Microsoft's Bill Gates among his friends, attacked the Gillard government's signature project yesterday. Quizzed about the NBN by The Weekend Australian after delivering a speech in Tokyo, Mr Son said it was completely unnecessary to spend so much taxpayers' money. "It's a waste; it's a stupid solution," he said. "Without using taxpayers' money you can get 21st-century infrastructure." Mr Son had just finished delivering his own vision of how to deliver fibre-to-the-home connections throughout Japan without any taxpayer contribution. http://www.tasmantimes.com.au/nbn-a-waste-of-money-says-japan-it-mogul/

LOL...perhaps your good Mr Son needs a lesson in spatial geography and demographics - not to mention economies of scale...

Hint: if the private sector was gonna make a buck out of doing it here in Oz, then it would have been done long ago!

Of course you know better than Mr Son equitist,  he only  heads Japanese internet and mobile giant Softbank.

Mr Son said that while Australia faced obvious technical challenges in terms of distances and sparse population, Japan's mountainous terrain and thousands of islands posed challenges, too.

Some relevant stats for Nichy et al, per Wiki: -



Japan: -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/Japan_%28orthographic_projection%29.svg/250px-Japan_%28orthographic_projection%29.svg.png


Quote:

Area -        Total      377,944 km2 [4](61st) 145,925 sq mi -        Water (%)      0.8 Population -        2010 estimate      127,360,000[5] (10th) -        2004 census      127,333,002 -        Density      337.1/km2 (36th) 873.1/sq mi GDP (nominal)      2010 estimate -        Total      $5.273 trillion[6] (2nd) -        Per capita      $41,366[6] (17th)

Australia: -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7d/Australia_%28orthographic_projection%29.svg/220px-Australia_%28orthographic_projection%29.svg.png


Quote:

Area -        Total      7,617,930 km2 (6th) 2,941,299 sq mi Population -        2010 estimate      22,505,459[3] (52nd) -        2006 census      19,855,288[4] -        Density      2.833/km2 (232nd) 7.3/sq mi GDP (PPP)      2009 estimate -        Total      $848.862 billion[5] -        Per capita      $38,663[5]

Of course Equitist YOU'RE the EXPERT.  You know it all,  we know that, but it's very interesting to see what what the head of a huge internet and mobile firm has to say.  Maybe he could come to you for advice .

nichy wrote on Oct 30^th, 2010 at 10:48am:

Of course you know better than Mr Son equitist,  he only  heads Japanese internet and mobile giant Softbank. Mr Son said that while Australia faced obvious technical challenges in terms of distances and sparse population, Japan's mountainous terrain and thousands of islands posed challenges, too.

So, in your own knowledgeable and expert opinion, did Mr Son successfully service the entire population of Japan - or close to it - including those living in mountainous regions and islands!?

As I understand it, that is what is planned,  but I'm certain he would welcome your plans and advice.

As for me, I make NO claims of being expert or knowledgeable about broadband rollouts,  I simply read and process that information in an attempt to learn,  but I believe that the opinion of a  person with the knowledge of  Mr Son is worth noting.

He claimed that his solution, recently put to Prime Minister Naoto Kan and several members of his cabinet, would deliver basic fibre connections for just 1150 yen ($15) a month, far cheaper than what is envisaged under the NBN.


That is also far cheaper than the current typical monthly price of Y5000 ($63) for cable in Japan.

Mr Son's proposal involves splitting the part-government-owned NTT into telco services and fibre network businesses and rolling out cable to all homes within five years.

Softbank and fellow carrier KDDI would fold their fibre cable infrastructure into the merged network business, which would then be 40 per cent owned by the government and 60 per cent by NTT, Softbank and KDDI.

Mr Son said that a one-time rollout of fibre -- similar to the NBN proposal -- would cost just one-third as much as cabling individual homes on an on-demand basis.

nichy wrote on Oct 30^th, 2010 at 11:07am:

As I understand it, that is what is planned,  but I'm certain he would welcome your plans and advice. As for me, I make NO claims of being expert or knowledgeable about broadband rollouts,  I simply read and process that information in an attempt to learn,  but I believe that the opinion of a  person with the knowledge of  Mr Son is worth noting. He claimed that his solution, recently put to Prime Minister Naoto Kan and several members of his cabinet, would deliver basic fibre connections for just 1150 yen ($15) a month, far cheaper than what is envisaged under the NBN. That is also far cheaper than the current typical monthly price of Y5000 ($63) for cable in Japan. Mr Son's proposal involves splitting the part-government-owned NTT into telco services and fibre network businesses and rolling out cable to all homes within five years. Softbank and fellow carrier KDDI would fold their fibre cable infrastructure into the merged network business, which would then be 40 per cent owned by the government and 60 per cent by NTT, Softbank and KDDI. Mr Son said that a one-time rollout of fibre -- similar to the NBN proposal -- would cost just one-third as much as cabling individual homes on an on-demand basis.

Perhaps you and/or others have failed to understand the similarities and differences in the proposals in question - on top of the geospatial, demographic and economic realities...

Equitist wrote on Oct 30^th, 2010 at 11:25am:

nichy wrote on Oct 30th, 2010 at 11:07am: As I understand it, that is what is planned,  but I'm certain he would welcome your plans and advice. As for me, I make NO claims of being expert or knowledgeable about broadband rollouts,  I simply read and process that information in an attempt to learn,  but I believe that the opinion of a  person with the knowledge of  Mr Son is worth noting. He claimed that his solution, recently put to Prime Minister Naoto Kan and several members of his cabinet, would deliver basic fibre connections for just 1150 yen ($15) a month, far cheaper than what is envisaged under the NBN. That is also far cheaper than the current typical monthly price of Y5000 ($63) for cable in Japan. Mr Son's proposal involves splitting the part-government-owned NTT into telco services and fibre network businesses and rolling out cable to all homes within five years. Softbank and fellow carrier KDDI would fold their fibre cable infrastructure into the merged network business, which would then be 40 per cent owned by the government and 60 per cent by NTT, Softbank and KDDI. Mr Son said that a one-time rollout of fibre -- similar to the NBN proposal -- would cost just one-third as much as cabling individual homes on an on-demand basis. Perhaps you and/or others have failed to understand the similarities and differences in the proposals in question - on top of the geospatial, demographic and economic realities...

and what you fail to understand, nemesis is... well... EVERYTHING!!!  it doesnt matter who and how credible they are, you reject ANY opinion on ANY topic not 100% in line with your own. And this from a person whose technical expertise doesnt even extend as far as know that wireless operates at the speed of light. I think it woudl be fair to assume that Mr Son is aware of the differences between australia and japan.

and what you fail to understand, nemesis is... well... EVERYTHING!!!  it doesnt matter who and how credible they are, you reject ANY opinion on ANY topic not 100% in line with your own. And this from a person whose technical expertise doesnt even extend as far as know that wireless operates at the speed of light. I think it woudl be fair to assume that Mr Son is aware of the differences between australia and japan.  
Back to top    



whats that old saying expert on everything master of none..something like that...

nem hasnt taken into account the number of people that are being serviced...slightly more in Japan I would think... being no expert on the NBN or Japan for that matter.. the way I read it the NBN is being rolled out a bit at a time.. it isnt going to be one long cable/fibre link all around Australia..is it??.. or is it.. nothing would surprise me with labor...they know better after all said and done..and nobody else is worth listening too.. we found that out with Human climate change didnt we..

I understand as well that gillard has made it a treasonable offence to even discuss how much this blooming thing is going to cost or how many are going to sign up for the exhorbitant cost of doing so...its all secret... Y..I ask YYYYYYYYYYY... we do have rights you know.!.. not many now I grant you.

codswal wrote on Nov 1^st, 2010 at 8:38am:

and what you fail to understand, nemesis is... well... EVERYTHING!!!  it doesnt matter who and how credible they are, you reject ANY opinion on ANY topic not 100% in line with your own. And this from a person whose technical expertise doesnt even extend as far as know that wireless operates at the speed of light. I think it woudl be fair to assume that Mr Son is aware of the differences between australia and japan.   Back to top     whats that old saying expert on everything master of none..something like that... nem hasnt taken into account the number of people that are being serviced...slightly more in Japan I would think... being no expert on the NBN or Japan for that matter.. the way I read it the NBN is being rolled out a bit at a time.. it isnt going to be one long cable/fibre link all around Australia..is it??.. or is it.. nothing would surprise me with labor...they know better after all said and done..and nobody else is worth listening too.. we found that out with Human climate change didnt we.. I understand as well that gillard has made it a treasonable offence to even discuss how much this blooming thing is going to cost or how many are going to sign up for the exhorbitant cost of doing so...its all secret... Y..I ask YYYYYYYYYYY... we do have rights you know.!.. not many now I grant you.

LOL, Cods...I suggest that you read back a little on this thread...

Hint: I provided the latest relevant geographic, demographic and GDP data according to Wiki.

Either way, I can't help it if you are unable to make the necessarily logical connections in your own mind...

NBN is good for Gillard, not taxpayers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted : Tuesday, September 07, 2010

Michael Stutchbury's article on the issue was also published in The Australian

Labor's $43 billion National Broadband Network may be the most politically rewarding pork barrel of all if it gets Julia Gillard over the line with the country independents.

But, like most politically driven investment, it is unlikely to provide the best return for taxpayers and even telco users. Broadband Minister Stephen Conroy doesn't really contest this point in continuing to dodge the simple question of why Labor refuses to put the infrastructure project through a cost-benefit analysis.

Instead, Conroy points to the study he commissioned from McKinsey and KPMG that found the NBN could be built with the $43bn price tag and be "affordable for all Australians".

"We've got on with the job as we promised at the last election of building the national broadband network," he argued on the Sky News program Australian Agenda.

Except that the McKinsey "implementation study" was required to take the NBN as a given, not consider any less expensive alternatives and not conduct a cost-benefit study as urged by the Productivity Commission and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. And except that the advertised bill has blown out from $4.7bn at the last election to $43bn.

Shortly after the election, country independent Tony Windsor suggested the $43bn figure was "fictitious" and he wanted to see the "real trail" of numbers. But after being briefed, Windsor backed Labor's NBN on the weekend, describing the Coalition's $6bn alternative as "retrograde".



http://www.ceda.com.au/research/current-topics/ace/2010/09/07/nbn_stutchbury.aspx

Equitist wrote on Nov 1^st, 2010 at 9:12am:

codswal wrote on Nov 1st, 2010 at 8:38am: and what you fail to understand, nemesis is... well... EVERYTHING!!!  it doesnt matter who and how credible they are, you reject ANY opinion on ANY topic not 100% in line with your own. And this from a person whose technical expertise doesnt even extend as far as know that wireless operates at the speed of light. I think it woudl be fair to assume that Mr Son is aware of the differences between australia and japan.   Back to top     whats that old saying expert on everything master of none..something like that... nem hasnt taken into account the number of people that are being serviced...slightly more in Japan I would think... being no expert on the NBN or Japan for that matter.. the way I read it the NBN is being rolled out a bit at a time.. it isnt going to be one long cable/fibre link all around Australia..is it??.. or is it.. nothing would surprise me with labor...they know better after all said and done..and nobody else is worth listening too.. we found that out with Human climate change didnt we.. I understand as well that gillard has made it a treasonable offence to even discuss how much this blooming thing is going to cost or how many are going to sign up for the exhorbitant cost of doing so...its all secret... Y..I ask YYYYYYYYYYY... we do have rights you know.!.. not many now I grant you. LOL, Cods...I suggest that you read back a little on this thread... Hint: I provided the latest relevant geographic, demographic and GDP data according to Wiki. Either way, I can't help it if you are unable to make the necessarily logical connections in your own mind...

The problem is you think ANYONE'S opinion that isnt 100% the same as yours is wrong. You will find it impossible to find a country whose geography and demographics match our own. That doesnt mean that comparisons and international opinions lose validity. It may not have occured to you, but some people are actually clever enough to take those things into account!

The problem is you think ANYONE'S opinion that isnt 100% the same as yours is wrong. You will find it impossible to find a country whose geography and demographics match our own. That doesnt mean that comparisons and international opinions lose validity. It may not have occured to you, but some people are actually clever enough to take those things into account!


she wont worry about that small point longy... the thing is if its all so bloody perfect and great for everyone why the secrecy?...why go to the GG to get a silencer put on any information regarding the cost of the rollout plus the cost to each household.. does nem realise that each and every Australian is going to be paying for this monster from here to kingdom come..I have read where the fibre rollout is only given 15 years warranty after that guess whos problem it is..maybe thats what gillard doesnt want us to know..

The Australian has been caught out misrepresenting the views of the richest man in Japan, Korean-Japanese IT billionaire Masayoshi Son, as part of its campaign against the National Broadband Network.


http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/11/02/dump-your-copper-network-says-japan-it-mogul-the-story-you-werent-told/

Dump your copper network, says Japan IT mogul — the story you weren’t told. by Bernard Keane

wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2010 at 4:51pm:

The Australian has been caught out misrepresenting the views of the richest man in Japan, Korean-Japanese IT billionaire Masayoshi Son, as part of its campaign against the National Broadband Network. http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/11/02/dump-your-copper-network-says-japan-it-mogul-the-story-you-werent-told/ Dump your copper network, says Japan IT mogul — the story you weren’t told. by Bernard Keane

You'd have more credibility if you gave some air play to opposing opinions in that skull of yours. it is JUST POSSIBLE that the truth is neither a labor policy nor a liberal policy but somewhere in between where commercial realities and user demands intersect.

codswal wrote on Nov 1^st, 2010 at 8:38am:

and what you fail to understand, nemesis is... well... EVERYTHING!!!  it doesnt matter who and how credible they are, you reject ANY opinion on ANY topic not 100% in line with your own. And this from a person whose technical expertise doesnt even extend as far as know that wireless operates at the speed of light. I think it woudl be fair to assume that Mr Son is aware of the differences between australia and japan.   Back to top     whats that old saying expert on everything master of none..something like that... nem hasnt taken into account the number of people that are being serviced...slightly more in Japan I would think... being no expert on the NBN or Japan for that matter.. the way I read it the NBN is being rolled out a bit at a time.. it isnt going to be one long cable/fibre link all around Australia..is it??.. or is it.. nothing would surprise me with labor...they know better after all said and done..and nobody else is worth listening too.. we found that out with Human climate change didnt we.. I understand as well that gillard has made it a treasonable offence to even discuss how much this blooming thing is going to cost or how many are going to sign up for the exhorbitant cost of doing so...its all secret... Y..I ask YYYYYYYYYYY... we do have rights you know.!.. not many now I grant you.

Jebus: IT SOUNDS LIKE THE LIBS ARE BLEEDING OVER THIS!

 :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D  ;) :) :) ;)

nichy wrote on Nov 1^st, 2010 at 9:56am:

NBN is good for Gillard, not taxpayers -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted : Tuesday, September 07, 2010 Michael Stutchbury's article on the issue was also published in The Australian Labor's $43 billion National Broadband Network may be the most politically rewarding pork barrel of all if it gets Julia Gillard over the line with the country independents. But, like most politically driven investment, it is unlikely to provide the best return for taxpayers and even telco users. Broadband Minister Stephen Conroy doesn't really contest this point in continuing to dodge the simple question of why Labor refuses to put the infrastructure project through a cost-benefit analysis. Instead, Conroy points to the study he commissioned from McKinsey and KPMG that found the NBN could be built with the $43bn price tag and be "affordable for all Australians". "We've got on with the job as we promised at the last election of building the national broadband network," he argued on the Sky News program Australian Agenda. Except that the McKinsey "implementation study" was required to take the NBN as a given, not consider any less expensive alternatives and not conduct a cost-benefit study as urged by the Productivity Commission and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. And except that the advertised bill has blown out from $4.7bn at the last election to $43bn. Shortly after the election, country independent Tony Windsor suggested the $43bn figure was "fictitious" and he wanted to see the "real trail" of numbers. But after being briefed, Windsor backed Labor's NBN on the weekend, describing the Coalition's $6bn alternative as "retrograde". http://www.ceda.com.au/research/current-topics/ace/2010/09/07/nbn_stutchbury.aspx

tURNBULL SWALLOWED THE OTHER NIGHT: the Libs have nothing if they keep following this losing battle!

 :-[ :-[ :-[ FMDrunk! Tony knows that he won't get lucky next time and so Joe will go and possibly Julie aswell but it still won't mean a baked bean until they admit that the sonic boom delivered nothing and the 1950s attitude has to go in favor of a positive direction for more than the rich!

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2010 at 6:55pm:

wrote on Nov 2nd, 2010 at 4:51pm: The Australian has been caught out misrepresenting the views of the richest man in Japan, Korean-Japanese IT billionaire Masayoshi Son, as part of its campaign against the National Broadband Network. http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/11/02/dump-your-copper-network-says-japan-it-mogul-the-story-you-werent-told/ Dump your copper network, says Japan IT mogul — the story you weren’t told. by Bernard Keane You'd have more credibility if you gave some air play to opposing opinions in that skull of yours. it is JUST POSSIBLE that the truth is neither a labor policy nor a liberal policy but somewhere in between where commercial realities and user demands intersect.

UH-OH spaghettios! Someone has a problem with potential spin!

Everyone get paranoid NOW! "GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

 :D :D

I wonder : do newspapers 'spin'?!?

Now if that aint a question I don't know what is!

Man, let us all rally to restore the fear!!!!!! ['cos I just aint getting enough!]

Go free-market bullshit artists and their treasurer-in-waiting, 'COMRADE' Hockey!

MFDrunk: who votes with a beanie and scarf much????????????!!!!??????

 ;) ;)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2010 at 7:13pm:

I wonder : do newspapers 'spin'?!? Now if that aint a question I don't know what is! Man, let us all rally to restore the fear!!!!!! ['cos I just aint getting enough!] Go free-market bullshit artists and their treasurer-in-waiting, 'COMRADE' Hockey! MFDrunk: who votes with a beanie and scarf much????????????!!!!??????  ;) ;)

WHAT AN ABSOLUTE DISGRACE: TALK ABOUT A SHONKY EDUCATION SYSTEM!

Let us all get ready for another skills shortage in the building sector and reap the sonic boom for our childrens children!

Go markets! Go economic shysterism! Go fat idiots in suits laughing off their place of birth!

 :o :o

It is just possible that deathridesahorse will say something that makes sense. After all, I do believe in miracles!

grow a brain, moron!

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2010 at 7:20pm:

It is just possible that deathridesahorse will say something that makes sense. After all, I do believe in miracles! grow a brain, moron!

hey did you even watcdh the bit about when they started taling about the foxtel cables!

Go on, let it all out  :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(  :-X  :-[ :-[  8-) !!!!

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2010 at 7:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 2nd, 2010 at 7:20pm: It is just possible that deathridesahorse will say something that makes sense. After all, I do believe in miracles! grow a brain, moron! hey did you even watcdh the bit about when they started taling about the foxtel cables! Go on, let it all out  :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(  :-X  :-[ :-[  8-) !!!!

Oh, and the electronic medical stuff LOL

Aw, FMDrunk!  :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D  ;) ;)  :(  :-X  :-[ LOLlybagLol!!!

CONTROVERSIAL plans to extend the monopoly reach of the $43 billion high-speed broadband network could add $30 a month to phone bills.

It could also disadvantage regional economies, including Tasmania's.

NBN Co's plans have come under attack from a company selected for a $250 million government contract to build competing wholesale services to areas where Telstra is usually the only choice of broadband supplier.

Nextgen Networks has warned that NBN Co's proposal to limit the number of "points of interconnect" - the points at which retailers will be able to hook into the NBN - could crowd out competition and lead to such inefficient transit of phone calls that charges could rise by $30 a month. This would double the costs of a standard telephone service for some voice-only customers.

Nextgen, owned by construction giant Leighton Holdings, argues the extra $30 would have to be paid by either the consumer, NBN Co or through a universal-service-obligation mechanism.

Optus director of government and corporate affairs Maha Krishnapillai backed the $30 figure.

Under NBN Co's proposal, if a local call were made, say, in the NSW regional town of Armidale, it could have to be carried all the way back to Sydney to an interconnect there, then back to Armidale, he said.

This would bypass many existing backhaul network providers that could have carried the data.

"Clearly that's going to add significant cost to that particular product or service  and that's dead right," Mr Krishnapillai said. "It precludes the development of local, regional providers and it also adds costs across the board."

NBN Co yesterday dismissed the concern.



Of course they did -  it seems it will cost the consumers dearly

wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2010 at 4:51pm:

The Australian has been caught out misrepresenting the views of the richest man in Japan, Korean-Japanese IT billionaire Masayoshi Son, as part of its campaign against the National Broadband Network. http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/11/02/dump-your-copper-network-says-japan-it-mogul-the-story-you-werent-told/ Dump your copper network, says Japan IT mogul — the story you weren’t told. by Bernard Keane

!!

Hey, when is Turnbull going to start talking about FOXTEL cables again????

 :o :o :o :o :o  8-)

And so the uncertainties on the Government's "wonder rollout" keep on coming !


OECD sees dangers in NBN haste
Annabel Hepworth From: The Australian
November 15, 2010 12:00AM

THE OECD has urged the Gillard government to slow down the rollout of its $43 billion high-speed broadband network.

It has warned that the project is installing a public monopoly that could choke off the development of better internet technologies.

The Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has declared that a more gradual approach would allow a better assessment of the costs and potential benefits associated with the National Broadband Network.

In a new report, the OECD said the government had adopted a "picking-the-winner strategy" on the NBN that could hinder the development of "as yet unknown, superior technological alternatives". The report also found "substantial financial uncertainties" with the massive project - which is expected to have $26bn worth of equity funding from the government - and cautioned that it may not be the most cost-effective strategy.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 13^th, 2010 at 7:46pm:

Hey, when is Turnbull going to start talking about FOXTEL cables again????  :o :o :o :o :o  8-)

Cables are a lot better than satelitte

It also says that while the NBN promises large benefits, it may not be the most cost-effective strategy.

It says $43 billion project entails "substantial financial uncertainties".

Part of the plan is to shut down Telstra's existing copper network and the country's main cable network.

"While establishing a monopoly in this way would protect the viability of the government's investment project, it may not be optimal for cost efficiency and innovation," the OECD says.

It says research has stressed the value of competition between technological platforms for the providing broadband services.

"It would therefore be preferable to maintain competition between technologies in the broadband sector and, within each technology, between internet service providers," it says.

OECD's each-way bet on NBN
By Alan Kohler

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41014.html


most comments also worth a read...

"In a new report, the OECD said the government had adopted a "picking-the-winner strategy" on the NBN that could hinder the development of "as yet unknown, superior technological alternatives". "....
---

So the OECD wants us to wait for "as yet unknown, superior technological alternatives".

Just how long would they like the world to 'Mark Time'?

;)

Is there any updates on the take up rates in Tasmania yet?

Our mission

OECD brings together the governments of countries committed to democracy and the market economy from around the world to:    

Support sustainable economic growth
Boost employment
Raise living standards
Maintain financial stability
Assist other countries' economic development
Contribute to growth in world trade
---
And have the world stand still until  "as yet unknown, superior technological alternatives" come along...

Yeah, right!!!

;)

UPDATE ....





The Coalition's attempt to have the Productivity Commission examine the Government's $43 billion National Broadband Network (NBN) has failed, with its bill voted down in the House of Representatives.

Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull had introduced a private members bill to refer the NBN to the commission, arguing it needed more scrutiny.

But he was unable to secure the votes of enough independents to pass the legislation and it went down by one vote.

Independent MP Rob Oakeshott supported the bill, but Andrew Wilkie, Tony Windsor and Bob Katter sided with Labor as did Greens MP Adam Bandt.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/18/3069806.htm

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 2:03pm:

UPDATE .... The Coalition's attempt to have the Productivity Commission examine the Government's $43 billion National Broadband Network (NBN) has failed, with its bill voted down in the House of Representatives. Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull had introduced a private members bill to refer the NBN to the commission, arguing it needed more scrutiny. But he was unable to secure the votes of enough independents to pass the legislation and it went down by one vote. Independent MP Rob Oakeshott supported the bill, but Andrew Wilkie, Tony Windsor and Bob Katter sided with Labor as did Greens MP Adam Bandt. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/18/3069806.htm

if there were no problems with the NBNimplementation and value the govt woudl send everyone in the country a copy. but they are hiding it. no guesses as to why.

Doesn't the fact that Turnbull can't get his bill across the line equal an epic fail, by the standards you apply to Labor, mr longweekend?

Please delete wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 3:33pm:

Doesn't the fact that Turnbull can't get his bill across the line equal an epic fail, by the standards you apply to Labor, mr longweekend?

maybe you havent heard yet, but LABOR is the govt. it is almost UNHEARD of for an opposition to get a bill passed thru the parliament without bipartisan support.

try again...

No, my clear recollection is that you equate inability to get legislation passed, even if that failure is in a hostile senate, as a failure, as poor legislation.

Please delete wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 3:37pm:

No, my clear recollection is that you equate inability to get legislation passed, even if that failure is in a hostile senate, as a failure, as poor legislation.

then your recollection is - as usual - rather poor. a GOVT that fails to get legislation thru a hostile senate (as almost every senate has been) is often one that refuses to negotiate. the lower house is a different matter as it is almost unheard of for an opposition to pass a bill

tickfen wrote on Nov 15^th, 2010 at 6:51am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 13th, 2010 at 7:46pm: Hey, when is Turnbull going to start talking about FOXTEL cables again????  :o :o :o :o :o  8-) Cables are a lot better than satelitte

And, your p  :(  oint is...?!!?

nichy wrote on Nov 15^th, 2010 at 8:06am:

It also says that while the NBN promises large benefits, it may not be the most cost-effective strategy. It says $43 billion project entails "substantial financial uncertainties". Part of the plan is to shut down Telstra's existing copper network and the country's main cable network. "While establishing a monopoly in this way would protect the viability of the government's investment project, it may not be optimal for cost efficiency and innovation," the OECD says. It says research has stressed the value of competition between technological platforms for the providing broadband services. "It would therefore be preferable to maintain competition between technologies in the broadband sector and, within each technology, between internet service providers," it says.

Hey, we could have done without the telephone for a good 30 years... so i'm led to believe!

 :D :D :D

Lobo wrote on Nov 15^th, 2010 at 6:41pm:

"In a new report, the OECD said the government had adopted a "picking-the-winner strategy" on the NBN that could hinder the development of "as yet unknown, superior technological alternatives". ".... --- So the OECD wants us to wait for "as yet unknown, superior technological alternatives". Just how long would they like the world to 'Mark Time'?

What did that independant say about, potentially,  waiting for the telephone the other day!??!

The Libs will never get passed such remarks: especially coming from the independant that actually backed them!

LOL   :D :D  ;)

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 2:03pm:

UPDATE .... The Coalition's attempt to have the Productivity Commission examine the Government's $43 billion National Broadband Network (NBN) has failed, with its bill voted down in the House of Representatives. Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull had introduced a private members bill to refer the NBN to the commission, arguing it needed more scrutiny. But he was unable to secure the votes of enough independents to pass the legislation and it went down by one vote. Independent MP Rob Oakeshott supported the bill, but Andrew Wilkie, Tony Windsor and Bob Katter sided with Labor as did Greens MP Adam Bandt. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/18/3069806.htm

Go Bob!

LOllybag LOL: Tony must be getting a little worried about his leadership !

I don't think Tony will be there at the next election!  :o :o  :D

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 3:31pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 2:03pm: UPDATE .... The Coalition's attempt to have the Productivity Commission examine the Government's $43 billion National Broadband Network (NBN) has failed, with its bill voted down in the House of Representatives. Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull had introduced a private members bill to refer the NBN to the commission, arguing it needed more scrutiny. But he was unable to secure the votes of enough independents to pass the legislation and it went down by one vote. Independent MP Rob Oakeshott supported the bill, but Andrew Wilkie, Tony Windsor and Bob Katter sided with Labor as did Greens MP Adam Bandt. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/18/3069806.htm if there were no problems with the NBNimplementation and value the govt woudl send everyone in the country a copy. but they are hiding it. no guesses as to why.

Yeh, as if a loser like you would know!  :o :o  ;)

Please delete wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 3:33pm:

Doesn't the fact that Turnbull can't get his bill across the line equal an epic fail, by the standards you apply to Labor, mr longweekend?

Mr Longweekends standars vary on the amount of leftovers you leave him in the crackpipe!

 :D :D

You think I'm lying?!!?  8-) 8-)  :-?

These silver spooners care not for anything outside their priveleged position: they smoke crack to try and keep up with their Mummy and Daddys cold persona as they think that is what gave them their established position in life... they don't see the hard work and the very friendships they had to give up!

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 3:35pm:

Please delete wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 3:33pm: Doesn't the fact that Turnbull can't get his bill across the line equal an epic fail, by the standards you apply to Labor, mr longweekend? maybe you havent heard yet, but LABOR is the govt. it is almost UNHEARD of for an opposition to get a bill passed thru the parliament without bipartisan support. try again...

Mate: we are not your multiplicity of crackpipes... go find them and cry into them!

Failing that, get out the weetbix...... SON!

 :D :D :D  :o :o

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 4:22pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 2:03pm: UPDATE .... The Coalition's attempt to have the Productivity Commission examine the Government's $43 billion National Broadband Network (NBN) has failed, with its bill voted down in the House of Representatives. Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull had introduced a private members bill to refer the NBN to the commission, arguing it needed more scrutiny. But he was unable to secure the votes of enough independents to pass the legislation and it went down by one vote. Independent MP Rob Oakeshott supported the bill, but Andrew Wilkie, Tony Windsor and Bob Katter sided with Labor as did Greens MP Adam Bandt. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/18/3069806.htm Go Bob! LOllybag LOL: Tony must be getting a little worried about his leadership ! I don't think Tony will be there at the next election!  :o :o  :D

one of the stupidest comments yet... bob katter couldnt even lead a ONE man party.

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 4:31pm:

one of the stupidest comments yet... bob katter couldnt even lead a ONE man party.

wAS THAT THE GIST OF THE CONVERSATION WAS IT?!!?

oh MY, AREN'T WE DEALING WITH A REAL INTELLECTUAL HERE!

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 4:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 4:31pm: one of the stupidest comments yet... bob katter couldnt even lead a ONE man party. wAS THAT THE GIST OF THE CONVERSATION WAS IT?!!? oh MY, AREN'T WE DEALING WITH A REAL INTELLECTUAL HERE!

not the sharpest tool inthe shed are we??

moron.

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 4:39pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 4:36pm: longweekend58 wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 4:31pm: one of the stupidest comments yet... bob katter couldnt even lead a ONE man party. wAS THAT THE GIST OF THE CONVERSATION WAS IT?!!? oh MY, AREN'T WE DEALING WITH A REAL INTELLECTUAL HERE! not the sharpest tool inthe shed are we?? moron.

Don't tell me: Daddykins pays you in crack and a safehouse( the spare rental) to sell it... aslong as you spread the propaganda and he doesn't have to listen to you!

Is that about it?!!?

Mate, that's what happens in WA!

A bunch of tryhards over here!

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 3:31pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 2:03pm: UPDATE .... The Coalition's attempt to have the Productivity Commission examine the Government's $43 billion National Broadband Network (NBN) has failed, with its bill voted down in the House of Representatives. Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull had introduced a private members bill to refer the NBN to the commission, arguing it needed more scrutiny. But he was unable to secure the votes of enough independents to pass the legislation and it went down by one vote. Independent MP Rob Oakeshott supported the bill, but Andrew Wilkie, Tony Windsor and Bob Katter sided with Labor as did Greens MP Adam Bandt. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/18/3069806.htm if there were no problems with the NBNimplementation and value the govt woudl send everyone in the country a copy

In the same spirit the government of the day did with the Overland Telegraph, Snowy Mountains Scheme, Sydney Harbour Bridge and Great Ocean Road infrastructures

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 5:53pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 3:31pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 2:03pm: UPDATE .... The Coalition's attempt to have the Productivity Commission examine the Government's $43 billion National Broadband Network (NBN) has failed, with its bill voted down in the House of Representatives. Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull had introduced a private members bill to refer the NBN to the commission, arguing it needed more scrutiny. But he was unable to secure the votes of enough independents to pass the legislation and it went down by one vote. Independent MP Rob Oakeshott supported the bill, but Andrew Wilkie, Tony Windsor and Bob Katter sided with Labor as did Greens MP Adam Bandt. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/18/3069806.htm if there were no problems with the NBNimplementation and value the govt woudl send everyone in the country a copy In the same spirit the government of the day did with the Overland Telegraph, Snowy Mountains Scheme, Sydney Harbour Bridge and Great Ocean Road infrastructures

i DON'T THINK YOU realise that longweekend has no idea!

WHERE has tickfen gone??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????  :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[  :o

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 3:58pm:

Please delete wrote on Nov 18th, 2010 at 3:37pm: No, my clear recollection is that you equate inability to get legislation passed, even if that failure is in a hostile senate, as a failure, as poor legislation. then your recollection is - as usual - rather poor. a GOVT that fails to get legislation thru a hostile senate (as almost every senate has been) is often one that refuses to negotiate. the lower house is a different matter as it is almost unheard of for an opposition to pass a bill

The fact is that in the current lower house, Turnbull could have persuaded enough cross benchers to support his bill, but FAILED.

No different from Labor's failure to convince the independent senators over the ETS, for example.