But seriously, where will the NBN cables go?

Rosie says:

11:28am | 01/12/10

BobbyDan I am with Julia, my house was built in 1915 and already in my street we have too many modern visual pollution appearing before our eyes. No thanks I don’t want the NBN because I am very happy with all the modern technology that I already have. My house was renovated to its former glory and had to add an extra room to faciltate the computer etc.

I agree NBN & Gay Marriage are diversion issues for a minority govt who trying to fix the “hangover” from the former Rudd Labor Govt whom they axed its leader, our PM because it had lost its way. PM Gillard is still lost and looking for the right path to follow.

The Badger says:

01:59pm | 01/12/10

Rosie
It’s not all about you!

excellent that you didn’t slip in something about a childless atheist living in sin. The Therapy must be working - somewhat. - keep at it.

Rosie says:

03:14pm | 01/12/10

Correct Badger it is not about me but did you get the bit about the Govt, led by the dithery Julia Gillard in using Gay Marriage and the NBN as a diversion because she can’t implement the more important issues that concerns all Australians! He! He! she is at loggerheads with the very people that she aligned herself to. In case you have forgotten it is the Good Old Greens!

ilandrah says:

01:06pm | 05/12/10

BobbyDan said “I have a liittle hoo-tickie that plugs into my notebook and I can move all over the place without dragging a cable behind or plugging it into anything.” That’s wireless mate - you know, what the opposition proposed and was lampooned for….

persephone says:

06:56am | 01/12/10

dead to me

and you accuse the PM of lacking intelligence!!

Firstly what has a strike in QLD health got to do with the PM? Nurses and other health professionals are employed by the state, and I’m not aware that there’s any proposal to change this. Pick on Anna Bligh if you want, but this is none of the PM’s business.

Secondly, the NBN will do something about health care, particularly for those in the regions, by making services more accessible. It will improve health care for anyone who travels away from home and needs medical care.

Thirdly, it’s not $43 billion.

Fourthly, it’s always silly to play the game of saying we shouldn’t spend in one area because funds are needed in another. We all disagree with some aspect s of government spending, but if you put everyone’s lists together, chances are everyone has different objections.

That’s why I never indulge in “Why are we spending X money on Y when we could be spending it on Q”  because it’s just silly.

Like your post, really.

Jane says:

08:47am | 01/12/10

As usual Pers, trotting out the same lines as the Government, no “independent”  thought coming from you again.

NicoleG says:

08:57am | 01/12/10

Oh yes pers, I can just see the benefits to health with the NBN. I can just picture you performing an operation, with a doctor on your monitor, guiding you through it. Now that’s going to work yes? And no, it’s certainly not $43billion. My bet is it’ll blow out to about $60billion. An absolute waste of money.

persephone says:

09:18am | 01/12/10

Nicole

you’re just being silly, but it suits you.

When we’re quoting figures, we normally quote the ones provided officially. Anyone with any brain at all knows that no cost projection can be entirely accurate; sometimes they come in under, sometimes they come in over.  But the convention is that you go with the figure provided, because anything else is just plucking stuff out of….somewhere dark and round.

So the convention has been to talk of $43 billion, because that was the original projection. Now that’s changed, the convention should, too.

It’s $37 billion. Get over it.

As for what I’ve said about health, did you look at the link I provided yesterday on stroke rehabilitation? Have you read the countless articles
about the potential for real time transfer of health documentation?

As for your example: this sort of thing happens at present, in emergency situations. Husbands are talked through unexpected births, children are told by 101 how they can help mummy breathe, and I certainly know of one doctor who performed an operation well outside his area of expertise with the help from a specialist on the phone (obviously an extreme emergency).

If - and I know that, even with the NBN, this won’t be possible in all homes - you can value add to those kind of experiences with real time visual streaming, then yes, there will be cases where emergency operations are supervised by specialists remotely.

However, that was not what I was talking about. I was talking about making SERVICES more accessible, not operations, as you well know (because you can read).

So, for example, patients should be able to have ‘virtual’ consultations with their specialist (who can be based, well, anywhere…) rather than travelling for this. Medical imagery and test results can be delivered across the country in real time, no matter how far away the patient is. And, as I discussed yesterday, there are already rehabitlitation programs being delivered to those recovering from strokes in the comfort of their own home, instead of these patients, who are often in a very fragile condition, being forced to travel.

Strangely enough, no one is trialling providing such programs via wireless…..I wonder why not?

MarK says:

10:12am | 01/12/10

Oh pers….did not the Labor federal government take responsibility for health services? Or is that still coming? I get so confused with all the backflips and reassignment of time lines.

On the NBN cost. Please you get over it. You haven’t read the report properly.

The $37billion. That is the expected capex. As long as funding can be obtained. As long as take up rates are as per the plan . As long as every other assumption in the plan comes to fruition. Interestingly enough they used the same interest rate assumptions the coalition did in there pre election costings. Of course Labor changed the assumptions to suit itself and “found” a black hole. I will leave it up to you to come to a conclusion about that farce.

What you have failed to do is take into consideration any of the opex funding that will occur. Of course this is all oremised on the fact that projections are met. Also by moving the Telstra buy out (I will call it that for simplicity) to opex they have effectively cut $14billion from the quoted capex cost which is the headline figure.

It is all inthe summary.

” Targets & Projections
Full Deployment Key Metrics (Rounded) (Nominal Dollars)
Capex
$35.7 billion total Capex (of which $1.3 billion for Replacement and Maintenance and $9.9 billion for fibre connections) by June 2020.
Telstra Agreements
$13.8 billion decommissioning and infrastructure payments by June 2020”

That is form the report page 29

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/nbn-business-plan-the-full-text/story-fn59niix-1225960292455

link tot he text dfor your ease of reading

So simply by reclassifying the spend we have (rounded the $37billion you quote + $14billion to Telstrs from opex IF IT ALL GOES EXACTLY TO PLAN.

I make that $50 billion by 2020 before interest. Before blow outs. Before the assumptions that everyone knows are optimistic fail to materialise

Who do you think stumps up for the rest?

Give a rest pers.. Like your xray jpg that you think cannot be delivered over the net you are wrong in fact.

Here is the link you posted yesterday to back up your claims of medical advances made possible by the NBN

http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2010/064

Your link

I encourage everyone to read it.

It merely highlights the duplicitous nature of the government when talking about the “possibilities” of the NBN. The press release is about delivering rehab over the net via the Wii gaming platform for stroke victims. In other words delivering exercise classes which the Wii is known for. This can be done already. I game - along with millions of Australians internationally over the net. Read the release closely. t is being made possible because the NBN IS DONATING $2million for the scheme. The spin is to tie it to the NBN making it possible. The company called the NBN. The technology of the NBN is not.

This is able to be delivered NOW with existing infrastructure we have.

Real time streaming of video is available now. And it works well

also this line is wrong. Very wrong.

”  Strangely enough, no one is trialling providing such programs via wireless…..I wonder why not?”

How the hell do you think the majority of people get the data feed from their router to their PC? Not by a damn cable. Most is by wireless.

How do you think this data os streamed to a TV set. Look at AppleTV for an easy demo on the net. Wireless.

How do you know that these people getting rehab are not using wireless or satellite connections.

The fact is you do not know. You do not understand the subject matter. Your numbers are wrong. Your spin is rampant.

Please stop. You are not on the same page as everyone else.

simon says:

10:12am | 01/12/10

Here we go, persephone dribbling rubbish again. You know i think persephone is Stephen Conroy using a pseudonym!!!!

CaptainCrunch says:

10:21am | 01/12/10

Pers, you supply extreme examples when to you need to be making more mainstream examples.

The idea of an NBN is great - I want one. But the way the Govt have handled this is consistent with the bumbling way they have administered other schemes. You may have confidence in them - but I don’t and at least half the country agrees.

Lets get the right NBN - not one that is a last ditch effort of a struggling Govt that has not got the runs on the board.

hugh says:

10:29am | 01/12/10

persephone:
“That’s why I never indulge in “Why are we spending X money on Y when we could be spending it on Q”  because it’s just silly.”

Its called oppotunity cost - and the RBA governor noted the losses we will invoke in his questioning in the Senate last week

“It’s $37 billion. Get over it.”
Are you 100% sure it will come in on budget??

Finally - are you advocating that medical procedures are now performed in the home rather than by the GP?
Sure doctors would love this (they can bill much more readily without leaving their office) - but for the implications of patient care, this is very very poot

NicoleG says:

10:33am | 01/12/10

Pers, I’ve got a bridge in Sydney for sale. Do you want to buy it? Just deposit funds in to my account and I’ll transfer it over to you.

I know it’s an old one, but judging by your gullibility to believe everything that’s fed to you by Labor, it wouldn’t surprise me one little bit if you said yes.

*Rolls Eyes*

CaptainCrunch says:

10:35am | 01/12/10

Nice work MarK - thanks for that.

I enjoy the daily “to and fro” between you and Pers. I enjoy it more seeing Pers getting called out and shown to be not as smart as she thinks she is.

I would respect her opinion if it were not such blatant ALP lobbying.

TheRealDave says:

10:37am | 01/12/10

@MarK “This is able to be delivered NOW with existing infrastructure we have. Real time streaming of video is available now. And it works well”

I know you’ve built a computer or two but have you ever worked in a Business/Corporate environment? We can get crappy quality video conferencing. With limited users and dodgy quality. If you want the full NCIS/24 Cisco backed video conferencing package that you see in TV and in the glossy brochures its going to cost you a bucketload more.

Just coincidentally, I got a fax from Exetel today telling me that they had rolled out Ethernet Broadband access in my area and for a limited time they were going to wave the $2750.00 installation fee and prices ranged from $450.00 per month for 4mb up/4mb down to $700.00 per month for a 20mb up/ 20mb down connection. Yes, PER MONTH. And thats Exetel ethernet. Have you seen the Telstra prices on shitty 1mbup/down to 4mb/up down connections?? We are talking thousands per month. Thats THOUSANDS every MONTH.

And come the NBN we are going to have 25, 50 and 100mb connections at the same prices we are paying right now i.e. $49.95 - $120.00 - which will make that fancy video conferencing available to EVERYONE and not need expensive solutions.

And thats only 1 minute facet of the NBN.I see far more advancements in data access for business WANs who will no longer be held hostage to Telstra’s extortionate pricing monopoly. Same with remote backups and the like. We are holding more and more data and its growing daily, hell hourly. Its just not cost effective to nightly backup the hundreds of Terrabytes of data we are accumulating across the comms links we have now.

This is the tip of the iceberg. But you seem to want to confuse the issue with glib statements like ‘We have video conferencing now’ and hoping people are thinking about simple once a week one to one conversations on Skype and Messenger instead of actual video conferencing in the business/corporate arena.

MarK says:

11:46am | 01/12/10

Yes I have RealDave i have.

How many people really NEED videoconferencing though. Do we have to give 100% of the nation the ability to do it for a $60 billion spend.

It is not as if business is screaming for it now. If they were private enterprise would have supplied it.

Would it be good? You betcha.

To say that this or that is possible/better/ blah blah blah is not the point. It is listing all of these things. Sorting the wheat from the chaff and deciding if $60billion+ is worth it.

If you are just looking at Telstra for business solutions and pricing you are nuts anyway. Plenty of others provide services as well.

Look I know what you are saying but as usual you are taking the narrow view. Justify the total spend against the benefits received.

Ensure there is no other alternative.

This was a wet dream Rudd and Conroy had on a plane ride. The fate of the governments credibility now rides on it simply being started let alone delivered.

Think.

All Gillard and Conroy are focusing on is starting the bloody thing as a symbol of political victory.

Her disdain for what will happen to the nature strips and the other detail of the project is evident. But this will affect all of us in the hip pocket, visually, in the future and in many many other ways. Once we spend this cash it is gone. It cannot be magically made to reappear.

Note well how when Gillard does not have an answer or she is not over the detail of a topic she resorts to either hyperbolic attack or outright political doublespeak packed with slogans. It is a serious deficiency she has which makes her very transparent.

If you really think there is just way to “NBN” this country and Labor has got it right I question your rational thought process to be honest.

Just the premise that Labor expected people to vote on a idea that is being supported by a business case they are keeping secret is enough to set alarm bells ringing I would have thought.

Gregg says:

11:51am | 01/12/10

@ pers
And you are showing your same usual bias everyone can see.
. A lot of government funding goes into all matters health or so we’re led to believe and that should perhaps also see that with a supposed nationally funded system there should be adequate remuneration.
The truth is far from Rudd & Roxon would have had you believe and probably even going to be further from what Gillard and Roxon will say and you will gulp down.
Careful though you could get constipation and need medical attention.

The NBN bill could be $37B, 57B or 157B for all we and any supposed NBN experts could take a guess at and then what of ongoing maintenance costs for users in respect to the mammoth ammount of hardware compared to what is needed now.

And the NBN making health care more accessible!
Don’t kid yourself for there are already contact systems in place between medicos and a faster broadband is not going to make health care any more accessible.
How many doctors do you think are prepared to deliver treatment over FO cable to just anyone and want to accept responsibility, that is if they could get their insurance to cover anything like that and if that was a possibility as remote as it is, the premiums would be enormous and who do you think ultimately pays.
People in the bush are btw probably a damm side healthier than their city counterparts and do pretty well with what they have or in some cases do not even have if a doctor is not resident in nearest town which is a quite frequent occurrence.

Once again, you are all full of BS persey.

Gordon says:

12:14pm | 01/12/10

MarK…I have enjoyed reading the exchanges between persephone and you the last couple of days on the NBN.

I am still undecided about whether the NBN is good or not. I am concerned about the amount of money and the risk of any cost blow outs as the project progresses. It sounds like you have experience in the area.

Can I ask 2 questions:

1. What is your view on the coalitions plan?

2. What do you think we should be doing ?

Hope you pick up this email.

Josh Q says:

12:25pm | 01/12/10

Health has now become a Federal/State co-management issue, if the PM can’t get health under control after years of talk, talk, spend, spend how do we expect her to implement the NBN without a $100 billion dollar blowout?

Liam says:

12:54pm | 01/12/10

I find it absolutely hilarious when people deride Persephone for ‘towing the party line’, and then sprout paragraphs that could be taken directly from a Coalition press release.

Steve Woy Woy says:

01:00pm | 01/12/10

@NicoleG Stuff the bridge there is no money in that now! But I’ll tell you what there are lots of spare shares being off loaded from an old telecommunications company that laid thousand of kilometres of cables all over Australia all paid for by us as well!! I know it is hard to believe this but it was a $10billion per year cash cow for the owners…  and they sold it so we could all make lots of money from it and buy shares that were going to skyrocket out of this world…... I can see your just making a play to off load yours aren’t you??

MarK says:

01:16pm | 01/12/10

@ Gordon

1. The Libs plan is hasty, ill thought out and shit. It is cheaper than Labor’s and considers the retention of assets and does not duplicate unnecessaraly. That is good.

Overall meh. At least it doesn’t cost a bomb.

2. You go cap in hand to Simon Hackett of Ineternode. You ask him to assemble a team of his choosing that he will chair that will give you 3 or 4 different architecture options. He does this stuff for a living and he knows what the industry needs. If he can survive and prosper under Testra like he has then he is the man.

You send them off for cost benefit analysis. You pick the one that appears to offer what is best for now and the future.

All of this is too rushed to be honest.

Politically Labor cannot back away from its proposal. it would end the government. So we are locked into a political decision devoid of reason that people don’t understand and merely argue about on a party political basis.

It is nuts.

I really do not mind what a “NBN” costs as long as it is justified and thought out. This decision was made by Conroy and Rudd on a plane trip. The result is everything has been shoehorned to fit the decison, not the other way around.

It is Rudds do it this way or not at all style manifest.

We need clear open discussion on the matter with impartial industry advice. Hackett would provide that. He is a genius, pragmatic and sensible.

Here is one thing that worries me Gordon. The business case assumes a real growth in price received for telecommunications. This is actually going against the industry trend where over rent times (20-130 years) real price received has fallen world wide. How the NBN thinks it will buck this trend without artificial throttling of technology, services or quality in the future is beyond me.

So to sum up.

Cease and desist. get a guy in whose knows the industry inside out. Listen to him. Do some sums and proper investigation.

Get on with it after proper due diligence.

Prosper.

It ain’t that hard.

Gregg says:

01:34pm | 01/12/10

@ Gordon,
Whether or not Mark gets back to you there are a number of issues aside from the cost which obviously is not inconsiderable and I suppose a lot of thinking about that cost is not just whate else could the money be funding but what it could blow out to and what ongoing operational costs are going to be.
Julia mentions in her article the weather patterns of Brisbane/Queensland and they are not alone in having storms and television footage of some initial installations down Hobart way show an enormous ammount of hardware on street poles so exposure to the elements is something to be taken into account.
More specifically re your comments:
1. What is your view on the coalitions plan?
The coalition is not against communications upgrading and that has been going on for decades under Telstra and other organisations.
Separating Telstra’s network and commercial/customer activities has not been opposed by the coalition but they certainly have wanted more information on the NBN proposal and ultimately for a proper assessment of it, the existing NBN/consultants reporting of expected costs/returns all based on the public uptake as funding for the NBN would ultimately come from the NBN wholesale fees from the various service providers, that in turn coming from consumers [ Us ].
We may ultimately have very little say in the uptake for if the Telstra cessation of the copper network is part of the deal, you may be offered NBN or nothing!
There is a precedent fot that occurring right now with phase out of Analogue television for Digital.
The coalition recognises that new technology is often if not always driven by the private sector to meet consumer demand and thus more gradual developments on a User pays principle -you want it, then you can pay for what you want just like you can now with all sorts of download/upload/speed packages, that principle also to apply with service providers operating on the NBN FO.
The big difference right now is that the majority of Australians are probably reasonably content with what is available to them with dedicated cable, ADSL on copper, or the various wireless services and so the $43B WTF! , especially when there are other pressing more essential services.

The productivity/benefit claims btw are all a huge wank for so much information has been digitised and transmitted for decades now and the need for online connections for immediate referral are just so non existent, more people for instance likely to die in our cities because of heatwaves and shortage of hospital beds than are ever dying in remoter locations that could supposedly get better service.
I myself was actually transmitting Xrays to be reviewed at another location all of 12 years ago and it had been occurring for a few years prior to that and doctors have such a fear of being sued I do not think there is going to be a whole new industry developed of medical servicing over the internet.
Doctors need all sorts of tests to be done for starting a diagnosis and they’ll get all that together to then consider a next step, perhaps further testing only available close to where a specialist is based or visits, MRIs or CAT scans and then perhaps exploratory surgery and an NBN supe fast speed is not going to be of any benefit to the processes involved.

2. What do you think we should be doing ?
Don’t know about Mark but I reckon we ought to let demand drive supply and not to oversupply and hope people will create the demand.
There’s many people economically tightening belts in this country, aside from all levels of government it often seems and there’s likely a lot more belt tightening needed so we do not go any earlier than we have to down the paths that the likes of US, Greece, Ireland and UK are heading down.
We will soon enough but the more that governments blow now, the further down the path will have gone and it’ll be uphill on the way back.
Non essential infrastructure should be in the hands of the Private Sector which the government claims they will do with the NBN anyway, if they can find a buyer!
Some equity group could end up getting a bargain at taxpayers expense and then continue paying for it is how it’ll probably go.
We have ageing Power stations/grids and are upping demand by putting in desalination plants instead of newer dams that could even give hydro generation whilst alleviating water shortages.
Is there really any doubt about what essentials taxpayer funds ought to be directed to?

Troy says:

02:13pm | 01/12/10

@MarK - i do not question your apparent expertise on this subject, but a quick google search showed me that Simon Hackett seems to be all for the NBN.  Here is what he said following the gov’nts announcement. 

http://www.internode.on.net/news/2009/04/133.php

A quote:

“Mr. Hackett said although the project [NBN] could take as long as 10 years to build, it would deliver a “future-proof” broadband service that could operate for decades. “Just as copper served Australia well during the 20th century, fibre will provide the country’s nervous system for the 21st century,” he said.”

What am I missing?  Has he changed his mind on this?

persephone says:

02:20pm | 01/12/10

Gregg

The vast bulk of the cabling is already underground. It will continue to be underground. Lightning stikes are thus the only worry (and I don’t think they damage fibre the same way they do copper).

if the Opposition has not opposed the structural separation of Telstra, why did they vote against it??

We’ve waited for the demand to be privately driven for years, but there aren’t any takers, largely because the Telstra monopoly of the existing infrastructure made costs prohibiltive.

Now, instead of duplicating what’s already there, we can use it and upgrade it to something which should meet our needs for the next 50 years.

The Coalition’s proposal (which I would like to see them release a CBA on, and lead by example) barely delivers optic fibre broadband outside of the capitals. In Victoria, major centres would miss out entirely and remain dependant on wireless.

The Badger says:

02:26pm | 01/12/10

Troy
He also said
“So while I’m naturally pleased that the Government has decided to opt for the right technical solution - a Fibre to the Home network on a wholesale-only basis, independent of Telstra - I’m astonished they’ve been brave enough to do it.
In these challenging economic times, such nation-building investment is exactly the right response to the telecommunications challenges Australia faces for the next decade.”

Simon’s beef is with the decommissioning of the copper network over time and forcing ISP’s to move away from ADSL2 to a fibre based solution, because that will mean the ISP’s have some re-tooling to do.

Simon wants it both ways. Fibre and copper to the home, so he can continue to sell ADSL2 solutions.

MarK says:

02:58pm | 01/12/10

Hi Troy - no you are missing nothing. Also I am by means an expert. Not in the least.

He is for the NBN but you need to put it in context. I am for the NBN too.
I am just not 100% sure that we have justified spending all this money on the system as it stands right now and political expediency is pushing us to the conclusion regardless of risk.

That is my issue. They say it stands alone on business case. Well fine release the details and show us. Simon was ecstatic when the announcement was made and still will be - he doesn’t have to pay for it after all and will get the benefit as a business man from it.

I will also say Simon has put in a lot of his own DSLAM’s around the country particularly in SA . He also operates on a large scale - plenty of info on the site.

Out of interest read this

http://www.internode.on.net/news/2008/01/71.php

Been using WImax for years they have.

Works fine.

/shrug. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

The main thing for Simon is that he will be out from the yoke of Telstra and will have certainty in his prices going forward.

http://blog.internode.on.net/2010/09/24/price-squeeze-update/

Another excellent article by Simon that will give you a feel for the system he has worked under and will be happy to be rid of under the NBN.

This is a guy we should be utilising to get the totality of the system right. Give him a brief and let him go at it.

Randy McCain says:

03:36pm | 01/12/10

I love it how people like MarK use all sorts of incorrect technological arguments to support their obvious political bias.  It is also quite obvious the MarK has little knowledge of IT coms.

The fact is MarK that we need to replace the aging 100 year old copper network.  We need to do this eventually, NBN or not.  Copper has had it’s shot, it’s time to more forward. Fibre is the only option here at this point in time.

The wireless from your router to your PC, used by AppleTV and other devices,  is not the same wireless you get on your mobile phone or 3G/4G modem.  Your Router is connected via a copper or cable connection to the net, and sharing it’s connection with these other devices.  What happens MarK if you were to connect 50 devices to your wireless router?  Your speed would be slow, and probably unusable!

Same principle with 3G/4G though…fine with 1000 people using it in one area.  TImes that by 1000 and it would be slow…. no where near 100mbps.

MarK says:

04:19pm | 01/12/10

Hi Randy.

You came in to this late and missed all the fun.

Been done to death.

It is more than obvious I am no expert in IT comms as you so quaintly put it. It is also glaringly obvious that you are not either or you would have dazzled us with your brilliance instead of pointing out a fact done to death.

Seriously. All this woreless hate. Why?

Oh and since you are peer reviewing my musings Randy please show me where I have advocated for a full wireless system.

Anywhere.

Ever.

Thanks so much for joining in. Hope to see you around more.

@ Badger

Isn’t it interesting that a guy that runs one of the best companies as far as service goes that I have ever come across and has made a real go of it in a bottlenecked and stymied industry beset with competition issues doesn’t think we should just toss all that investment we have away.

Hmm.

Must be another one of those Liberal luddite stooges eh?

You people are so myopic it is terrifying.

The Badger says:

07:10pm | 01/12/10

He’s doing it to protect his business interests and minimize the cost exposure of having to “do” solely fibre.
His politics are of no interest because his intentions are obvious to me.

Escapes you somehow. must be the stooge thing you suffer from.

Northern Steve says:

10:18pm | 01/12/10

Randy,
Ironic that you have a go at MarK for lack of technical knowledge, and then go and show your own lack of knowledge.

I do not recall anyone anywhere saying that the copper had to be replaced because it was getting old.  It still works as well as it always has, and technology is improving its bandwidth all the time.  I remember at uni (studying my Communications Engineering degree) being shown the mathematical proof that 48k was the best speed we would get down the copper lines.  Now we’re up to what 20MBps?

Secondly, 3G/4G/LTE are all highly scalable.  More use in an area?  Add an extra transmitter, and increase the spectrum being used.  New estate?  No need to install fibre to every home.  Fibre to the base station will do, with scalable transmitters being installed as population increases

What do you do with fibre to the house when an older house is pulled down for a block of flats?  You need to dig in a fibre for each apartment.

And talking about sharing bandwidth, even fibre gets combined at some stage, most likely at the local exchange.  Where does your personal 100MBps go to?  To Google?  No.  It will be shared with others in your local area.

Rob says:

08:43am | 01/12/10

They send electricity through fibre-optic now?

Joel B1 says:

09:14am | 01/12/10

Well they do in some FO-cables to power the repeaters, but in this case I meant the supplier has 240V (or 1KV or what-ever) electricity wires AND fibre-optic cables.

TimB says:

08:53am | 01/12/10

That was Persephone’s mate wasn’t it?

Then again maybe they’re all mates.

persephone says:

09:20am | 01/12/10

Nah, it wasn’t. It was a failure of basic comprehension on the part of some of the posters yesterday, who apparently can’t distinguish the difference between a building and a submarine.

It’s OK, they’ll learn to read properly one day.

MarK says:

10:14am | 01/12/10

Yesterday it was all about security. Now it is becasue when you build a new building you tend to cable it with CAT5 data cables. They are the blue ones pers by the way.

Story changes day by day

Tom says:

10:23am | 01/12/10

Thanks TimB, I believe you are right. It is perse’s mate.

persephone says:

11:05am | 01/12/10

No, it doesn’t, MarK.

My original post talked about why the ADF, in its new building outside of Canberra, were not using wireless.

I was very careful to make it clear i was not talking about anything else.

I’m glad you’re now agreeing with me that it was only common sense on the ADF’s part to use cable, given its greater security.

TheRealDave says:

11:11am | 01/12/10

Some of us use Cat6 MarK and I can get it it more colours than just blue - by the way

MarK says:

11:47am | 01/12/10

Awesome Dave. I was going garden variety and common so as to not confuse.

Tom says:

12:01pm | 01/12/10

@ perse. My comprehension is pretty good fella. If wireless security is OK for submarines, it would be adequate for bureaucrats. So your security argument and your defence mate, as with many of your blathering diatribes, is just a spray of blarney.

All so simple is it? $43 billion rolls off the tongue quick enough? Sorry mate, its $36 billion (can say that quickly too, can’t we). $50 billion? Hey what the heck, spend it anyway.

Gee whizz perse, no-one can tell us what applications that are not available at the moment but can only be enabled by the dazzling speeds of NBN. Its just our lack of imagination and “luddite” ways? No, methinks the emperor has no clothes on.

As Kevin Costner said, “build it and they will come”. And gee whizz, Shoeless Joe Jackson is out there perse and he’s calling to you perse. Just throw the ball.

persephone says:

02:25pm | 01/12/10

Tom, petal, your comprehension may be brilliant but your knowledge of Greek mythology is obviously very poor.

Submarines do not ordinarily transmit top secret, highly classified data. And - necessarily - they’re buggers to find, so tapping into their communications would be quite a feat.

Which is why, of course, the intelligence world is awash with highly secretive information gleaned by tapping into the radio transmissions of submarines.

Go back and re read ‘Hunt for Red October’ .

Tom says:

03:19pm | 01/12/10

@ perse, me a petal? I am old and worn and gray. More like a beef jerky than a petal.

Wikileaks? (Hint - no wireless tapping necessary. Shall I keep going?)

MarK says:

04:21pm | 01/12/10

Errrr

“Submarines do not ordinarily transmit top secret, highly classified data. “

What?

“Go back and re read ‘Hunt for Red October’ . “

You realise that this is a work of fiction and not a historical narrative right?

Tom says:

05:16pm | 01/12/10

@ perse, sorry, the greek mythology thing went over my head. Will give you the benefit of the doubt however.

Day to day or even top secret correspondence at ADF does not require 100mbs, just decent cryptography. It is there now. Security in the ADF building is not an argument for NBN.

Let’s get real here. After 100s of blogs begging Labor bloggers to share their wisdom with us the untermenche, we still have not heard a single application that justifies the NBN overkill. I smell a rat.

Broadband was hyped up by Kevin07 and sold as the dealmaker when the independents went to Labor in 2010. Enough people were conned by the grand vision and it got your mates into power. The reality however is like a cold shower. Its time to sober up, perse.

Seriously, NBN is not going to turn anyone’s life around except the lucky conga line of suck-holes that get a gig laying the cables.

Northern Steve says:

10:23pm | 01/12/10

Missed yesterday’s post.  Just so you know that submarines underwater can only communicate at approximately 50bps due to the filtering effect of water (called the skin effect).  At least Conroy’s filter won’t slow down their communication at all.

I suspect that submarines would quite commonly transmit highly sensitive material

persephone says:

09:26am | 01/12/10

Strange then that so many economic, health, education and other experts seem to think it’s a good idea.

And wouldn’t it be of benefit to you if the info you presently get via phone, satellite and broadband - let alone your TV etc - all came through the one cable and with a better level of performance?

Were you able to successfully, even five years ago, anticipate the services which you can now get via your phone, broadband and satellite connections?

Did you even know that you wanted these services?

Just as we couldn’t anticipate the impact of the car in the days of the horse and cart, or even the real potential of the telephone until a century after its invention (come on, who doesn’t remember how miraculous and mysterious faxes seemed? and now they’re old hat…), we simply don’t even begin to understand the possible applications of very very high speed broadband.

Freeman says:

10:09am | 01/12/10

“Strange then that so many economic, health, education and other experts seem to think it’s a good idea”
of course, it would be a better network than we have. but do these experts actually explain why it is required? and do they even have an opinion on whether the costs are justified?

“Were you able to successfully, even five years ago, anticipate the services which you can now get via your phone, broadband and satellite connections”

actually, yes. the services available now to our mobiles were spoken of many years ago. TV from our phone, email, blackberry, internet, and Telco’s around the world began gearing up for it and competing for the rights to be data providers. all the ALP can tell us about the NBN is that there will be programmes and services not yet concieved that will require it.

“we simply don’t even begin to understand the possible applications of very very high speed broadband”

so why don’t we spend these billions on services and infrastructure that we already know we require that have gone to S@#$? and build the NBN when or if it is ever required?

simon says:

10:16am | 01/12/10

Why are we even having this discussion, it’s ridiculous! If we went 4g LTE wireless like the rest of the world then cables is not an issue!! Get back in your box persephone, you are really clutching at straws now!!!

MarK says:

10:21am | 01/12/10

We don’t necessarily have to build a $60 billion system to facilitate this.

That is the argument. You are trying to make this a Rudd argument.

It is not a choice of “you do this or you do nothing”

It is about allocating resources properly, carefully and with due consideration for cost benefit if you arguing for infrastructure from a business sense.

If you cannot prosecute the business case put it on budget and explain why you are taking on the cost and what we have to pay to fund it.

Please get an idea as to what the argument is about.

The OECD thinks it is a dubious proposal. Ergas thinks it is dubious. Turnbull thinks it is dubious. Mcraan thinks so too.

There are a few that are arguing simply from the business side.

We all know there are benefits. There are benefits to having all travel undertaken by a national transport service that picks you up and drops you off. The cost is a bit high though.

If it is so good economically - the opposition is not arguing that no improvement be made to the national network - release the business plan.

if the plan does not stack up put it on budget.

hugh says:

10:26am | 01/12/10

persephone - why economic experts think its a good idea?

All i ever read of monopolies were how much they stifled development.

Noting ‘future developments’ tomorrow as a reasoning for installing infrastructure today is very poor economic arguments

Gregg says:

12:23pm | 01/12/10

@ persey
” Strange then that so many economic, health, education and other experts seem to think it’s a good idea. “
And you’ll be able to find even more just normal people in the vaious fields who are saying just like many here and have been saying WTF!, this is one load of garbage being bandied about.
If you ask even the experts if there are a lot of other spends and/or savings that the government could look at, you might even get a whole heap of other good ideas too.
And then we have idiots like Oakeshott and Windsor as the prime culprits for supporting Gillard as the reason this BS hasn’t been canned and taken away by a night service.

The Badger says:

01:26pm | 01/12/10

simple simon

4g LTE wireless like the rest of the world?
Really the rest of the world is running 4G LTE?
Perhaps you are talking about Hong Kong, one of the densest cities in the world that went on line 2 days ago? Or perhaps Sweden where the service was launched 2 weeks ago
Suggest you do a bit of research before you open your mouth Simon.

4G is useful for the emerging, yes emerging 4G phones and mobile devices. The 4 - 12 Mbps you get from a 4G LTE connection is less than the current speeds I get from ADSL2.

If you had a clue, you woul understand that to install 4G LTE wireless capable of handling the nations broadband needs would involve putting a cell site on just about every corner of every block in every city and regional centre in Australia.

You would then need fibre for the backhaul.
You do understand that you would still need to run fibre to every cell site?

The ignorance of some people amazes me.

Seth Brundle says:

03:35pm | 01/12/10

I DO download heaps of movies all the time, and I am pretty happy with my litle ADSL2-over-copper connection.  In fact, I am about to downgrade my internet plan because I simply don’t use all of it. 
By the way, if I am able to download an entire full-high-def movie between going to bed and waking up (10GB+), why wouldn’t a doctor be able to email a single xray image?
I would prefer the money to go on Hospitals.  I think the one thing we could all agree on is that we like to be healthy.  Faster internet is a luxury, not a need.

The Badger says:

08:35pm | 01/12/10

Seth Brundle
You think this is about sending an x-ray?

Here are some medical applications that were undertaken to demonstrate next generation internet technology (NGI). These were initiated 10 years ago. They will give you some insight into early thoughts about what medical applications might be possible.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK44716/

For something more recent
In California, part of California Telehealth Network, will enable providers to share X-rays and other diagnostic tests instantly, and view treatments and procedures in remote emergency rooms or surgical centres in real-time. Some of these applications require HD quality video to be delivered in real-time.
utilizing high-definition video and audio conferencing technology enables patients in rural or under-served areas to consult with medical specialists and even receive examinations in the comfort of their primary physician’s office, community hospital or clinic.

Here’s an imaginative application someone thought of
Smart Slippers - AT&T Labs researchers are collaborating with hospitals and universities on “smart slippers” that wirelessly monitor a patient’s gait to identify pressure signatures.  Capturing changes in acceleration and pressure measurements, the sensors could alert caregivers to respond quickly to falls, or possibly help prevent them. A clinical trial testing the networked insole is now underway.

check out
http://www1.ecardio.com/
for just one example of another telehealth initiative.

There are many applications that are enabled by the speed available via fibre technology.

Look around for other tele medicine and health applications being developed. I think you’ll be very surprised at home much more this entails than sending a jpeg file.

Northern Steve says:

10:27pm | 01/12/10

Badger, even with running a fibre to each corner of each street in Australia, the cost would still be less that the cost of the NBN by a factor of 10

Northern Steve says:

10:39pm | 01/12/10

Oh, and Badger
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2010/12/01/verizon-4g-lte-hits-greater-boston-today/
4G LTE across the USA in 2 to 3 years.

When will we have that NBN thing again?  2 to 3 years?  Didn’t think so

simon says:

07:49am | 02/12/10

Simple Badger, now you are clutching at straws, of course 4g lte wireless is rolled out in the USA, Europe, Japan, Hong Kong and Chine soon to follow. Don’t worry mate i have done my research, and these countries have concluded that fibre to the home is just a waste of money. I want fast broadband too, just like everyone else, but fibre to the home, really is such a low population desity country like Australia is complete folly and is economically irresponsible. Even someone like you can not disagree with that. Your arguments are now becoming wafer thin so you now resort to baseless comments. You gotta do better than that badger, your stance is crumbling, and you know it, i think for you now it’s about saving face more than anything!!!! You wait mate, as time goes on and technology continues to move along at rapid rates your argument becomes less and less compelling!!!

The Badger says:

08:24am | 02/12/10

Sorry Steve
4G LTE is not the answer.
Unless you want slow speed and a tower on every corner
We already have the slow speed and you may love the ambiance a tower on every corner provides, but your I’m not so sure your neighbors would
4G LTE is great and is a part of the NBN solution for specific regional areas (you do remember not all of Australia will have FTTH don’t you?
The main use of 4G LTE is for emerging mobile device.

If you think the U.S. is going to have 4G everywhere in 2 to 3 years, you’re dreaming. For a start it can take that long to get through the bureaucratic tangle to erect a tower. Go look at the maps identifying blackspots in coverage for some of the cities where this work has already started and understand the problems this would create for getting broadband to everyone in the community that wants it.
Again, 4G LTE is for mobile devices and each cell site would require fibre for the backhaul. If you are going to take fibre to every corner, you might as well take it to every house.

The Badger says:

08:49am | 02/12/10

Northern Steve
Send me some of that Northern lights you’re smoking up there, it must be good.

4G LTE rolled out in the US in 2 - 3 years?

You do understand this technology is for mobile computing?
You do understand that the Service providers expect 4G LTE average data rates to be 5-12 Mbps on the downlink and 2-5 Mbps on the uplink in the real-world?  How does this compare to 100mbps to 1 gbps?

Apples and Oranges mate

The Badger says:

08:53am | 02/12/10

Simon you are just so far behind in the game and your posts are full of outright lies.
Make those comments on a “technical blog” and expose yourself for the fool that you are.

Northern Steve says:

09:39pm | 02/12/10

Badger, nothing like a bit of disinformation, or just straight lies, if you can’t win a debate, is there?

3G LTE can offer speeds of up to 100MBps, and 4G will get up to 1GBps.  Korea has recently invested $60m in developing 5G mobile telecommunications.  All that at a fraction of the cost of FTTH.

But if you can’t win a debate without lying, I guess you can always resort to personal comments.  Oh, I see you did.

The Badger says:

09:48am | 03/12/10

Northern Light

Good to see you backing up your outrageous claims with links to facts
typical conservative crap.

David C says:

08:48am | 01/12/10

and that wouldnt have happened anyway?

TimB says:

08:54am | 01/12/10

We. Can. Do. That. Now.

Gyah.

acotrel says:

09:07am | 01/12/10

TimB.  I live in Benalla.  Show me how I can attend universit y without driving 250Km to attend lectures.  What is the URL for advanced mathematics lectures?

persephone says:

09:31am | 01/12/10

Anyone who has tried video conferencing will agree that yes, we can do that now.

They would also agree that it’s pretty crappy at present, and a techy will tell you that it’s to do with differences in download and upload speeds yadayadayada which I don’t pretend to understand, but am willing to listen to endlessly if it means they’ll get around to fixing my laptop for me.

Anyway, improved download/upload speeds (I think one’s presently faster than the other, and that means you get out of sync or something) which the NBN will provide will also improve the quality of these applications to the point where they become more practical.

TimB says:

10:13am | 01/12/10

This is the telling bit in your post Persephone.

” I don’t pretend to understand”

Good. Because if you did understand you would also know that there’s still going to be a difference in the upload/download speeds on the NBN too. That isn’t going away.

@ Acotrel, if the URL doesn’t exist, it’s because they haven’t put one up. Even if we had the NBN today, you still wouldn’t be able to do what you want…because they haven’t created the service.

Just because they haven’t done something doesn’t mean they can’t do something.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_the_Air

Have a read. Don’t you sit there and tell me that we can’t do long distance education without the NBN.

MarK says:

11:14am | 01/12/10

Sigh ................  acotrel this occurs now

Well live streaming of Uni lectures I don’t know but I have studied by external means. We could download various classes. We could listen to lectures. We also had to attend for weekend trips because they still want face to face action.

Yes yes yes I see the same old pers arguments.

Gosh. I will keep repeating.

The Libs want an improved broadband infrastructure. We all know stuff like videoconferencing improves dramatically with bandwidth increases.

BUT if we are going to spend $60billion plus off the budget on the basis of a report no one has seen yet except the government I would be extremely disappointed if the opposition did not call shenanigans.

If it all stacks up business case wise, if the cost benefit analysis is even there abouts go for it. I want better internetz NOW as well.

Until then the project is dubious.

And that is before we look at the delivery performance of this government.

I defy anyone to say that it is adequate even. Gillard herself admitted as much in knifing Rudd and in giving the “off the rails” excuse.

To think that blindly saying $60 will be awesome is worrying in the extreme. I cannot even seee the ideological case for it. The whole yeh yeh yeh lets do it brigade are just arguing on party political lines with a callous disregard for the checks and balances Labior imposed on itself.

http://www.responsibleinvestment.org/files/WEPPNV8MJE/Kevin Rudd_s speech at DAVOS Octo08.pdf

Read that speech Rudd gave.

Tell me if this project has met those ideals he expressed.

What a shame.

TheRealDave says:

11:19am | 01/12/10

Tim - we are talking about actual Video Conferencing with many people participating with real time video remotely - not one on one Skype conversation with your Grandma in Sydney once a week.

Try doing it in a larger environment and seeing what it costs, you may want to sit down fist and get a defibrillator ready.

MarK says:

11:49am | 01/12/10

http://www.responsibleinvestment.org/files/WEPPNV8MJE/Kevin Rudd_s speech at DAVOS Octo08.pdf

Link fail in my previous post.

It was a good speech. Shame about the lack of adherence to the stated ideals

MarK says:

01:21pm | 01/12/10

Hmmm will not link right - just copy paste and google. The speech was good actually.

Gregg says:

01:44pm | 01/12/10

Acca, now come on old fella @ 69 you’re clutching at straws
No one bothers with advanced mathematics these days and you can just get yourself a program rather than need a modernday Julias Sundermiller preaching for you ” Why is it so ” or asking how many cups of milk go into a Cadbury’s Block

On the other hand if you want to work out how many volumes of a cone will go into cylinder of same diameter and height, just use a 500g Nescafe empty tin and knock yourself up a cone same diameter and height and by pouring a bottle of beer into the cone, decanting it into said Nescafe tin and doing that again and again, you can then decant said beer for drinking and if you kind of conk out half way through or get too pissed to remember it’s 3.

acotrel says:

10:00pm | 01/12/10

Badger, you just had a go at Simon for demonstrating his ignorance.  We’ve currently got two debates going which should involve experts , not upstarts with little knowledge, who have never done anything technical in their lives!  The nuclear debate is as stupid as the debate over the NBN.  We’ve got a heap of pseudo-scientists airing their limitted knowledge!  They should go back to schoiol and get an education! A lot of the comments that are made, are made with the coalitions agenda firmly in mind, not what’ might be good for Australia.  And the arguments are not technically sound!

persephone says:

09:39am | 01/12/10

It means takng away the delivery aspect of telecommunications from Telstra and transferring this to the NBN.

So the government will own the infrastructure and various telecommunications companies will provide the service.

Ultimately, this will mean every home which presently has a copper connection will have a fibre one. What they do with it, if anything, is then up to them.

They can buy a standard phone service off one of the providers, who will then pay the NBN for access to the line. They can also buy a whole range of other services (some of which haven’t even been thought of yet), such as broadband, TV, etc which can be delivered down exactly the same line (but not necessarily by the same provider).

This creates competition, because you no longer have a situation where the infrastructure is owned by one company which is in competition with other companies who want access to their infrastructure to deliver services.

Instead, the infrastructure will be owned by a separate company, who sells access to any provider willing to pay for it.

TheRealDave says:

09:41am | 01/12/10

Far be it from me to point out that the company at the centre of Can Do’s sewerage fibre project have:

a) Never rolled out a projec the size of Brisbane
b) 2 of the companies ‘flagship’ projects they bragged about were infact cancelled
c) their one actual rollout ended up mostly ripping apart streets and front lawns than it did running through sewers like it proposed which lead to b) above when the other two towns found out about c).

But hey, it only took me 5 minutes to Google that info, yet the BCC seemed to have missed it in their haste to sign something.

But its just another price of Liberal FUD aroudn the NBN, which is why news limited runs with it.

hugh says:

10:32am | 01/12/10

persephone

You seem happy for the government to take the infrastructure off of Telstra.
This is a slap in the face to mum and dad shareholders who the float initially targeted.

When is a monopolistic set up a good idea? In one breath, you hate Telstra for being a monopoly. In the next, you love the NBN because its a monopoly.

While there is competition at the retail level (which there already is), there is no competition at the wholesale level

persephone says:

11:00am | 01/12/10

hugh

so was Telstra, and so were their shareholders, who approved the deal. Telstra says it will improve their share price.

As I’ve made clear before, in some situations a monopoly is a good thing - you only need one provider for the road going past your driveway, for example.

The problem with Telstra’s monopoly (and hey, this ain’t me talking, but the telecommunications industry as a whole - and it was something they were saying even before Telstra was privatised) was that the only real way to compete with them was to buy stuff off them, which obviously makes real competition difficult.

Now a telecommunications company can compete with Telstra without having to have any dealings with them at all, which is true competition.

The only way this could happen was for the infrastructure to be owned by somebody else, which creates a level playing field.

MarK says:

11:25am | 01/12/10

Sigh….

The business case for this proposal is to set up exactly what pers says. In time. Since the take up was so low in the Tasmanian trial they decided to go for an “opt out” model meaning you were connected to the NBN network unless you said specifically no.

Victoria under whats his name the Labor guy who tanked last weekend also said they would go for this model.

London to a brick Big Ted says no to that and makes it an opt in system.

So let return to the business case for the NBN.

The stated aim is to create a company that stands on its own and delivers wholesale service to the telecommunications industry only. In making this monopoly the goal is to take on private equity to help build it and to sell it to private business after the risk and start up costs have been absorbed by us the taxpayers.

So sometime in the 2020’s or 2030’s UNDER BEST CASE SCENARIOS the government sells this off to a private investor/company.

So now we have what we have now. A wholesaler that might look to go into retail anyway (love to see them try to stop that and still sell it) that supplies stuff according to business rules, that is, how much can I charge these turkeys for my services and get away with it.

Isn’t that what we have now?

And we are paying the monopoly that exists now one third of its market capitalisation to take on business risk, take on funding risk so we can, in the future, HOPEFULLY sell it all to another monopoly provider in the future. All of this on the proviso that some new delivery is not discovered (not that I care but you got to factor the risk in).

I think I need to take up drinking again.

Have I missed anything here?

TheRealDave says:

11:31am | 01/12/10

I hate Telstra for being a corporate monopoly that has consistently screwed ALL of us over for decades now. I hate Telstra for being a wholesale monopoly that sold its wholesale access to its retail arm for less than it was selling the same wholesale access to independent providers. I hate telstra for it anti-competitive practices they have been convicted for multiple times. I hate telstra for crippling out internet access for years, restricting us to 1.5 mb until they were haemorrhaging too many customers over to the other commercial ISPs. I hate Telstra for rolling out RIMs into brand new housing estates so they could save a few bucks and maximise their profits without giving a damn to future data access needs of the hundreds of thousands of people across the country stuck behind one of these pieces of crap. I hate Telstra for suing overseas Telco’s for the same access they refuse Australian Telcos here on our network.

So yes, I am not a fan and can’t wait to take a giant dump on their still warm corpse once the NBN steamrolls them out.

I prefer a government owned monopoly that gives the SAME access to all, doesn’t limit the speeds that can be achieved to protect profits, doesn’t manipulate access to the network, doesn’t engage in deceptive and anti-competitive practises and above all does not provide retail access to the network.

Important country wide infrastructure needs to be owned and controlled by the government on behalf of ALL of us. Forever. And never be held to ransom against us by private corporations.

Gregg says:

12:03pm | 01/12/10

@ pers/9.39
With
”  It means takng away the delivery aspect of telecommunications from Telstra and transferring this to the NBN.

So the government will own the infrastructure and various telecommunications companies will provide the service.

Ultimately, this will mean every home which presently has a copper connection will have a fibre one. What they do with it, if anything, is then up to them.

They can buy a standard phone service off one of the providers, who will then pay the NBN for access to the line. They can also buy a whole range of other services (some of which haven’t even been thought of yet), such as broadband, TV, etc which can be delivered down exactly the same line (but not necessarily by the same provider).

This creates competition, because you no longer have a situation where the infrastructure is owned by one company which is in competition with other companies who want access to their infrastructure to deliver services.

Instead, the infrastructure will be owned by a separate company, who sells access to any provider willing to pay for it. “

Yes all been said before but it still does not say precisely whether people will still have the option of a standard copper line connected telephone service.
If not, it would seem that we’ll be paying for whatever services can be offered over FO at whatever the cost might be.
And they are the crucial matters that need to be clearly stated and the Conroy/Gillard combo are saying exactly nought on.

And @ Dave
I’m not supporting the shitty concept.

MarK says:

12:07pm | 01/12/10

Pers.

“so was Telstra, and so were their shareholders, who approved the deal. “

This is not correct.

Telstra have not taken the deal to their shareholders in a formal vote as yet.

If you were on top of the subject the real reason for the rush to get the bill through the Senate pre Xmas was to enable Telstra to take the idea of separation to its shareholders.

If it didn’t pass by now the time frame would have made it impossible for Telstra to seek shareholder approval until much later next year.

I beseech you. Please please get a basic understanding of this topic.

You are flailing away with false, erroneous and downright silly assumptions about what, where, how and who this thing works.

Telstra shareholders might still vote this down. Well they won’t actually but the chance is there. Who would not want to cash in one third of their market cap for some depreciated assets the government is forcing people not to use and the removal of a hugely expensive and costing liability in the USO.

Apart from this IF Telstra vote to not separate the government can force it, by the passing of the bill, to functionally separate (different than structural separation) which of course is very draconian but meh. Also the government has said that if Telstra does not structurally separate they will deny Telstra the opportunity to bid on any further releases for wireless spectrum’s and be force to sell Foxtel.

I will keep correcting your error riddled post pers but please do some research. Then we can actually debate the crux of the matter. As it stands you do not have the basics down pat yet.

persephone says:

02:32pm | 01/12/10

MarK

you seem to think I’m here for your entetainment. I am expected to dish out information for you at the drop of a hat, go away and educate myself etc etc, all so that I will have the honour and priviledge of your continued attention.

I don’t care if you debate me or not. I don’t care if you read my posts. I don’t even care if I sometimes get things wrong, and I certainly don’t care if what I’m saying meets your standards or not.

Like everyone else here, I’m expressing my opinions. When I can, I back these up with evidence. I don’t have to. I just do.

And I’m quite happy to say I’m here to learn. If someone counters an argument of mine, or gives me a new piece of information which deepens my understanding of the topic, that’s a good thing.

But if you think I’m here to please you, than you’re being more than usually egotistic.

When I answer you, it’s out of basic politeness - I am absolutely and totally uninterested in you otherwise.

MarK says:

04:32pm | 01/12/10

Hio pers.

Always a joy to talk with you.

If it helps why not say “My Opinion” and start to type.

When you say things like Telstra shareholders have approved a deal which they have not it is necessary for someone to help you get your ducks in a row.

We have even agreed that hooking fibre up to our submarine fleet might present some technical challenges. I must say though with those those Collins class ones we can if we did have fibre hooked up to them on a big spindle thingy we could reel them back in when they broke down.

I do so hope you continue to post regularly.

Basically though if you make an error of fact or include an unverifiable bit of information as though it is gospel then I will point it out.

I am not attacking you. I am attacking the validity of the information presented.

Have a nice day. And get your son to post about the NBN. I would be keen to see his thoughts on it as a teenager (I think I got the age right).

Northern Steve says:

10:37pm | 01/12/10

Pers,
You missed something REALLY big.  Telstra HAD a monopoly on network infrastructure, which was being eroded by private companies (such as Optus and about a dozen others) who had started to install their own backhaul fibre networks across the country.  Therefore, we were starting to get a competitive wholesale market in many places.

Now, the NBN may not even allow all of those companies to connect to the NBN, so they will be left with some very expensive glass fibres in the ground doing nothing.  What will that do for our international reputation as a place to invest in?

End result, we will STILL have a wholesale monopoly, which will have no market pressure to reduce prices charged to the retail companies, and a big political pressure to make a profit for the government, which means artificially high wholesale prices.  Yes, retail will be competitive, but on top of an uncompetitive, overpriced wholesale market.

WHo loses?  Everyone.

TimB says:

09:01am | 01/12/10

“The technology to deliver infrastructure has moved a long way from 1925. “

Yes it has. Please tell the Labor government that, because last time I checked they were digging holes for the NBN all over Tasmania.

The Brisbane plan is completely seperate to the NBN, it’s an entirely different company and network. Plus it will be completed much faster (within 4 years apparently).

All done by private enterprise. Shocking.

Troy says:

09:41am | 01/12/10

JdR- it would appear “comments” need not be backed up by any research, facts or even that much thought.  The author merely offers an ‘opinion’ and it doesn’t need to be worthwhile, helpful or informed in any way.  It’s point is merely to entertain.

This is what our media has become.  Sad, isn’t it.

TheRealDave says:

11:34am | 01/12/10

Yes Tim, very shocking, given that the same mob has been digging up one town in England and was ultimately knocked back on rolling out in two more of its flagship towns that were used as examples as to how a Brisbane rollout would go.

persephone says:

09:43am | 01/12/10

Well, David, fibre optic cable was laid through our property twenty years ago.

They put down over 500 metres of line along our boundary.

There was minimal damage, and what there was was promptly rectified (after they left, our dam mysteriously emptied. I rang them, and within half an hour we had ten blokes in gumboots wading through the mud, trying to find the opening - which they then repaired).

That was laying new cable; won’t be the same problems when you’re replacing existing cable, as you simply pull the new stuff through the same piping.

If it does mess up your lawn, it’ll only be for a couple of weeks, and you’ll have the cable there for the next fifty years or so.

hugh says:

10:35am | 01/12/10

persephone

How can you have minimal damage due to the laying of cable (something you seem to do in a lot of your posts - from your mouth) - yet structural damage to your dam?

Do you think that they are pulling out cables and replacing them as they go along?
Or putting in new cables and poles in the same pits?

persephone says:

11:57am | 01/12/10

Two different situations.

In our case, they were laying cable along an entirely new route, which involved drilling underground beneath our dam, which opened up a pipe underneath the dam and drained it (honestly, why do people want to know all this stuff??)

Now they’re going to be laying new cable where the old cable has been, which in most cases simply involves removing one and feeding in the other.

Keith hammersmith says:

12:26pm | 01/12/10

and that damage to pers’s dam was a result of laying only 500 metres of cable…..

CaptainCrunch says:

12:36pm | 01/12/10

And now a 20 year old example from Pers to go with all the other unicorns you see on a daily basis. Techy unicorns, defense personnel unicorns, my son says the NBN is cool unicorns….

David was talking about the incompetency of the BER and batts delivery (which I think is relevant to the delivery and cost of the NBN) and you argue against this with a 20 year old example of how cable layers damaged your dam. (10 blokes there in half an hour to fix it up - please stop lying).

Hilarious stuff - (honestly, why do people want to know all this stuff??). Because you make no sense in your argument and we are trying to understand why you keep embarrassing yourself.

fairsfair says:

09:41pm | 01/12/10

@Hugh I just have to pay that cable gem - nobody else has mentioned it, but comment of the day in my mind! Cracker!

TimB says:

09:23am | 01/12/10

So you imagine a scenario that bears no resemblence to the current one, make up a cool story about someones grandmother based on what you imagine, and call it a valid argument.

Genius.

What are these different needs that businesses and other people? You know the ones that need speeds far in excess of what we have? I keep asking this question and no-one can come up with an answer.

Either they quote examples of stuff we can already do, or we get a cop-out artist like Badger saying that there might be applications but we have to imagine them…whilst declining to imagine any of his own of course.

Freeman says:

09:41am | 01/12/10

Really? there was similar opposition to the telephone network when it was introduced? I will have to look that up.

So why don’t you tell us all about these business’s and others who require the NBN to be built, or are they imaginary? What Programmes do they run that REQUIRE the dataspeeds that the NBN is promising? or would it just be a luxury to have it built? the ALP are not really doing a good job of explaining the benfits of the NBN or explaining why it is required. maybe that is because neither is clear.

Troy says:

10:21am | 01/12/10

TimB - you ask how can this help business?  I think that everyone should stop and think about their own workplace and imagine how superfast broadband might revolutionise your business.  How it might open up new possibilities. 

For example, I remember as a newby lawyer we used to Fax huge documents back and forth to clients and counsel.  A total pain in the neck but we were grateful because, before this, people had to carbon copy everything and before that, they simply crossed out and/or rewrote work to be delivered by hand.  Communications were slower and more limited and they required a massive amount of physical labor (which costs money, of course). 

And I remember when email came along and it was a bit of a novelty at first.  Then, one day, we were literally forced by our US clients to start emailing large documents instead of faxing.  They had being doing this for years.  It blew our IT system apart as well as our minds.  It was if we were suddenly vaulted into a new reality of working.  I look back and laugh at how simple we were compared to the where US technology was and how that mindset can leave you behind.  And that was only just over 10 years ago. 

Superfast Broadband, across the country, will be a quantum leap in communicative ability.  It is very difficult to imagine the changes because they haven’t happened yet, or in some case, they have not been invented.  But, off the top of my head, I can see real time video conferencing between business, across the globe, as being the “norm”.  I can see huge amounts of data being exchanged between business entities in a fraction of the time it now takes.  This means we will do our jobs better and faster.  We will be more accurate.  We will be more responsive.  We will provide better service.  The list goes on.

The Badger says:

10:23am | 01/12/10

sigh

Tim

Don’t you know how to search the internet?
Don’t you have any imagination?

Unfortunately your posts suggest your imagination only goes as far as that of the former Howard government’s communications minister who dismissed broadband as relevant only to pornography and playing games.

search the internet and find out what high speed broadband is doing for the enlightened countries leading the world forward.

C’mon Tim don’t be lazy, go looking for the potential - open your eyes and see the world.
I can’t hold your hand on this one tim, I can’t force feed you what you don’t want to digest and will only throw up in a comment.

You’ll have to take the first steps your self

sigh

Troy says:

11:07am | 01/12/10

And I just want to add, TimB and all you naysayers out there, it doesn’t take someone with any particular vision to imagine that a quantum leap in communicative ability for our nation will mean that we will be more competitive and we will make more money.  We harp on about loss of productivity - superfast broadband will improve productivity immensely.  I cannot imagine anyone with any serious part to play in modern Australian business would have the slightest doubt as to the benefits of superfast broadband across the nation.  It is, really a no brainer and it blows my mind how many so-called economic conservatives are resisting it.  We should be jumping at the chance to invest in this kind of infrastructure.  It will pay us back tenfold.

TimB says:

11:31am | 01/12/10

Troy your example was using two entirely different types of technology. (Fax and email). It’s a false analogy. More importantly it didn’t cost you billions of dollars to make the tech jump.
The video conferencing you allude to is already being done where it is needed. My company has offices in every major city in the country.  I quite frequently take part in telephone conferences with people in those other branches. If we were to suddenly switch to video conferencing…great, now we can see each other. There might be a few benefits in that, but for the most part its no massive advantage over what we are currently doing. It’s certainly not a 35-40+ billion dollar advantage.
Same with your “Large amounts of data in fractions of the time” argument. Please provide specific examples. Because taking 30 seconds to download a video instead of a few minutes fits your description…but again doesn’t justify the expense.

@ Badger, you’re the one advocationg the spending of billions of dollars. It’s up to you to justify the expenditure. The burden of proof is on you.

Give me something or your argument continues to be worthless.

MarK says:

11:33am | 01/12/10

Hold my hand Badger and tell me please.

Whisper all these sweet nothings into my ear.

Arouse me with tales of the untold benefits ONLY the NBN can bring.

Tell me about the mud and slush that will be everywhere when they dig. I love it dirty.

Enlighten us as only you can.

We need your help. We are luddites after all.

I love youse all - Jeff Fenech

Freeman says:

11:45am | 01/12/10

“TimB - you ask how can this help business?  I think that everyone should stop and think about their own workplace and imagine how superfast broadband might revolutionise your business.  How it might open up new possibilities”

Ok Troy,

as a national distributor, My workplace uses many web based programmes(engineering, inventory, web based marketing programmes and others) that communicate with Japan, France and the U.S. and to our domestic market. our programmes all function fine and we don’t even get the best data packages currently available.

new possibilities with the NBN; Zilch.

Troy says:

12:01pm | 01/12/10

TimB - why do you need to be spoonfed?  Business, all business, is rooted in communication.  it is the key.  Take a step back and think.  We win wars because we can communicate faster and better than our enemies.  We earn money on the stockmarket if we have better, more up to date information on which to base our investments.  We win clients if we can respond faster, know their businesses better and target their needs more precisely than our competitors.  We save money if we can communicate faster and more cheaply.  We can train ourselves more efficiently if we can communicate faster.  We can apply strategy faster and more consistently across a greater space and larger workforce.  We can do more research and have it quicker.  We can have larger business networks.  We can talk to more potential clients faster than before.  We can offer clients and customers more services.  We can broaden our offering into global markets. 

Do you need more?  What do you need to hear that will make you realise how crucial an investment like this is to our future?

Tubesteak says:

12:39pm | 01/12/10

Yes, and we don’t need that newfangled steam engine, either. It will scare the horses and set fire to the fields!

What a backward nation we would be if we were always rules by luddites.

No wonder other countries are continually beating us to the punch.

Justin says:

12:43pm | 01/12/10

How bout this one then Tim, I tried to subscribe to a cost effective offsite back up service. Thought I would go for the 30 day free trial. Good thing that. Backing up raw files, and only raw files (Some 160gb worth) was estimated to take 30 days to complete the initial backup, that is, if the connection was unused by anything but the back up service.

At less than 5gb a day, with the current speeds offered, a dedicated connection would take 24 hours to backup. Considering in a busy week it’s entirely plausible to shoot double that a day, I think you’ll find it’s one task the current infrastructure can not, and never will be able to achieve.

Troy says:

12:59pm | 01/12/10

Freeman, I would have thought a person in the national distribution business, which is after all about exchanging information and goods across large distances, would be the first to want something like a national superfast broadband network.  Look, I am not you.  I do not know anything about your business.  Which is why I say to you, it is up to you to think about how it can improve what you do with better tools.  Do you have competitors?  Do they use the same web-based programmes as you?  If not, are they better than yours?  Can you identify areas where you can improve your performance and speed by the use of a better network of programmes?  Can you identify ways of improving your communication with clients and suppliers via improved broadband that will result in cost savings and better on-time performance?  Would the costs of your current web-based programmes decrease with the NBN?  Really, these are the type of questions you need to answer yourself by the sounds of it.

The Badger says:

01:39pm | 01/12/10

mark,

you don’t have the capacity to understand.

a ten year old can stringing a cable and terminate it when he’s shown how to do it once.

You can point to a myriad of News Ltd. articles ghost written by conservative shills when it suits you, but you can’t find any articles enumerating the benefits of high speed broadband.

Is that because there aren’t any, or is it because you are just looking for examples you can attempt to distort and “shoot down” with your limited technical knowledge and distraction tactics?

I thought you were in favor of an NBN?
Why do you want an NBN? What will it do for you in the future that it doesn’t do now?

Gregg says:

02:02pm | 01/12/10

@ Troy
” For example, I remember as a newby lawyer we used to Fax huge documents back and forth to clients and counsel.  A total pain in the neck but we were grateful because, “
Well now as a not so newby lawyer and you’ve moved on to faxing and then scanning documents or having proformas so you do not need to scan, you might want to open your mind a little further so as you consider
. Does NBN actually increase the speed of the scanning?
And then with receipt at the other end, especially with the US client or whomever, with the international time difference:
. Is someone actually there at whatever time of normal non business hours to wade through a document of whatever size?
And when you wade through a document yourself, how long does it take compared to transmission time!

Is it not in most if not all cases what the process by a human is more so than how long it takes to send between two?
If you think NBN is going to increase the speed with which a human has to deal with info, either in being prepared for transmission or on being received, it is in deed quite some of your mind that has been blown away.

MarK says:

02:31pm | 01/12/10

Oh Badger my love.

I cannot find 1 article anywhere that gives me the benefits that will come if we build THIS NBN and none other.

I truly can’t.

Badwidth is bandwidth.

Let us all leave the fallacious argument behind that we who oppose the NBN are Luddites.

It is not about the need for a system it is about is this system wise given we have nothing to compare it against and we are yet to see the oh so secret business case.

Luddites are those that oppose new technology. We are merely ensuring we get value for our dollar spent.

Is that too much too ask?

Open the curtains and let the sunshine in.

Please point me to the articles that clearly show if we do not build THIS NBN we will miss out on “xyz”

Thank you so much my love.

Freeman says:

02:50pm | 01/12/10

Troy,

thanks for the lesson on competitive business behaviour. so your argument in favour of the NBN is basically “Imagine the possibilities”
i see,  this slogan works for Fischer-Price i guess.
You only help me make my point. although we have new programmes and features on existing programmes proposed to us all the time, I can’t think of one that wouldn’t function fine on the current network. and as others here point out, simply upgrading the network will not speed up the internet. to get the proposed speeds much equipment must updated also, and even then this may not improve internet speeds when communicating outside the network such as other countries. having said all that, the broadband network does need to be updated, but the proposed NBN is a whole other argument.

Troy says:

02:51pm | 01/12/10

Hi Gregg, yes, you’re right, a fast NBN won’t help me scan documents faster or read them any quicker.  But what if, for example, my system became so fast and cheap that I could brief and supervise Indian-based paralegals in real time as they do the work for me?  Or imagine if due diligences were conducted via virtual document rooms, where everyone is linked via video-conference and secure intranet systems and no one needs to hop on a plane and be put up in a hotel?  Or imagine vastly improved legal research programmes that can provide almost instant on-point caselaw in seconds without having to troll through endless irrelevant junk all from the comfort of your office? 
I say again, it’s up to you to think about how it can help you.

TimB says:

02:54pm | 01/12/10

@ Troy, we already have practically instantaneous world wide communication.

Unless the NBN is going to enable some sort of time travel effect whereby information is actually recieved before it is even sent, then I fail to see the “benefits”.

And no, as I said taking a few minutes off the time needed to send a massive file is not a benefit (and I’m talking movie length stuff here- something the majority of buisinesses would have no need to send).

Not at the cost of however many billions of dollars the government will end up spending.

@ Justin, it’s a back up. A precaution against potential data loss.
I know my company backs up its data daily each night with no issues. And we’re talking data quantities far in excess of yours. I’m going to assume that many other large companies have similar practices.

Now explain to me the competitive advantage that comes with doing this paticular chore “faster”.  If the worst happens it might mean you only lose an hours data instead of an entire working day. A (rare) inconvenience to the business but again one that I’m sure does not justify the cost of the NBN.

Troy says:

04:00pm | 01/12/10

@Freeman, ultimately I can’t advise you on how the NBN will make you more competitive or change the way you do business.  You are obviously far more qualified than me to do that.  But I can certainly see how it would change mine and i would imagine it would effect others as well.  Let us agree to disagree, then.

@TimB - so we’ve reached the limit, then.  Any more would be a waste of time.  That is a recurring argument here and it seems to be very hard to counter.  Except, of course, to point out that such a view has been proven time and time again over history to be totally and utterly the wrong approach.  We have to resist the urge to simply extrapolate the present when imagining the future.

Gregg says:

07:25pm | 01/12/10

@Troy2:51pm.
Hi there too and I must say some approaches or thoughts are a little scary such as:
” But what if, for example, my system became so fast and cheap that I could brief and supervise Indian-based paralegals in real time as they do the work for me? “
So you really are of a mindset that $43B + of public money to be paid for one way or another by all Australiansought to have some of its justification based on solicitors being able to outsource their work to offshore! and ultimately for the benefit of who?
No doubt very few Australians and people employed offshore!
I have to say Troy that I do not see that as very Australian.
And
” Or imagine if due diligences were conducted via virtual document rooms, where everyone is linked via video-conference and secure intranet systems and no one needs to hop on a plane and be put up in a hotel?  “
Is that really what you want to see for the future re business deals?
A somewhat rushed affair and no doubt the type of scenario where bad decisions can be made - examples, the NAB and their loss of a billion or so in that US Home Loans deal even before the GFC, Telstra and something of similar ammount with HK, Ansett demise!, Storm Financial just to name a few
And not that they are all necessarily related to diligence checks but is the problem not usually owned eventually by the small people, the bigwigs and service providers usually getting their fees despite shonky decision making.
So anything that makes all of this happen quicker is not at all anything to aspire to for as much as we have a Dog eat Dog world out there, I’d rather a solider slower pace and if that means there has to be an exchange of documents, queries made and further documents provided, all of that can I expect take time and yet could still be done mostly without travel etc.
The move towards the NBN has been all of that, just a rushed poorly considered program with a few priviliged benificaries, their benefit contibuted to by all.
And for research tasks, is it not the speed of the search engine and what it is capable of and again that’ll be happening offline after you have connected with the program.
Yep, with
” I say again, it’s up to you to think about how it can help you. “
I’ll just keep doing my own bush lawyer deals!

MrJD says:

04:41pm | 03/12/10

@TimB I was talking to some of the guys who are going to be trialling the telehealth project in Armidale next year. Although we have “Skype” quality video conferencing that is being used by community health practitioners at the moment, health professionals are pretty well in agreement that high quality video will make a huge difference in diagnosis. Especially when doing cognitive diagnostics and assessing wounds in aged patients. Also, something I haven’t thought about until I spoke with these practitioners was the fact that older patients may have ailments (sight/hearing issues) which would be somewhat negated if a higher quality communication system was available.
Also, the trial will roll out a medical box that will enable health professionals to monitor basic health signs from blood pressure to lung capacity in real time and accurately without the patient needing any training. Already developers such as Eriksson are developing connected medical boxes which provide more diverse medical data from house bound patients including sensors which alert health professionals if the patient needs acute care (if they have not got out of bed, if they are displaying vital signs which are concerning).
Also check out what ResMed is doing as far as patient monitoring hardware is concerned.
It’s well established that an ageing population will be one of the greatest costs the country will have to bear in the near future - so keeping patients at home for just a few years (say 4 years) longer than at present will save billions of dollars.
That’s just medicine.
If you look at other studies - say a UK study on fibre to home there would save the average British family more than 4000km in driving (that petrol saving goes into discretionary spending which in turn goes into GST revenue).
And in S. Korea since the government there rolled out an NBN there has been a company created every year that is now turning over $1bn a year. Again, think of the tax benefit.
And then there is the security benefits.
There are very few data centres in Australia. If we don’t build a substantial network then data centres will be less likely to set up shot here. So, in the light of Amazon caving in to the US Government in recent days over Wikileaks we have to ask ourselves which government should have jurisdiction over our data?
Too bad if your blog ends up being hosted in Singapore or the US and you end up being arrested because their state law says you have committed some crime in publishing what you consider free speech in this country.
And then there is business…
And…
And…

The Badger says:

05:23pm | 03/12/10

Thanks MrJD

All it takes is some initiative and an open mind to find examples of how the NBN can transform Australia.

In the United States, more than 10 years ago, committees were set up to look at the impact of high speed broadband and how it would affect the delivery of tele-medicine. The amount of companies with products completed and under development is staggering. All it takes is an open mind and a search engine to find them.

Closed mindedness and political blindness are afflictions that have held Australia back for far too long.

An opposition bankrupt of any ideas that insists on spewing forth misinformation and outright technical lies puts the future of Australia at risk.

It was interesting to see over time the opposition change their position from we don’t need fast broadband to we don’t need fibre to the home when they realized most people want an NBN. It was at this point the technically illiterate started repeating the mantra wireless, wireless, wireless as if this was the solution.

bored says:

09:21am | 01/12/10

Stop being so bloomin obvious, there is at least 8 hours of comments needed yet. Now start complaining about your driveway and ignore all the pipe diggers that dig under roads, driveways and the rest. Turnbull will give you a tenner if you start to make up stories of how your house will need to be rewired.

TheRealDave says:

10:22am | 01/12/10

He will give you a Lobster if you say that Wireless is better or Fiber is outdated technology

*snort*

MarK says:

06:20am | 02/12/10

What about all those streets that have copper delivered by poles and not ducts etc?

That is the point. It is not optimal to simply string fibre optic cable like you do copper. Not all delivery is in ground already.

acotrel says:

08:54am | 01/12/10

If we end up with a much better educated population won’t the ‘benefit everyone’?  Our Shadow Minister for Innovation (Sophie Mirabella) will tell you how much improved creativity will benefit the nation!

nosthow says:

09:12am | 01/12/10

@acotrel - you mean Sophie “the blocker” Mirabella ? Come the next Federal Election Australia will see that ALL the Opposition ever do is “block” and “wreck” - no ideas or vision for Australias future - none at all !

Gregg says:

02:28pm | 01/12/10

Well losty,
What is the value and what are all those sorts of things?
Many that cannot even be thought of now!
What about some things that can be thought of right now like ageing power stations/eastern states grid, water, hospitals and transportation etc.
That’s real infrastructure but you would just really love to see $43B or whatever blown just so:
” The NBN wont benefit everyone but it will be there for anyone to use “
Just beautiful!
And Australia will be the laughing stock of the world because we blew so much money on something desirable for a few rather than building/maintaining so many other essential services.
You can call Tones whatever you like but we know who is really fukking this fine country over and over again.

TimB says:

10:19am | 01/12/10

Dave, I’d give your comments far more weight if they contained anything more concrete beyond “I’m an IT expert and I say you’re all wrong”.

You even managed to throw in the classic “News Ltd is biased”. Wow your credibility levels must be going gangbusters.

MarK says:

10:40am | 01/12/10

All I get from this is RealDave

1. Does not like Apple products and has never touched an iPad

2. He has never wired his house with CAT5 cables. I have. Cost me $3k odd - close enough anyway, was a bit under that

3. He can’t see past the Rudd argument that you do it one way or you do nothing

4. He doesn’t read widely enough

5. He is racist against Pommies

Now number 5 is perfectly understandable and I am with him all the way.

1-4 need serious attention form him before he can really add anything to this debate

Frugal says:

11:03am | 01/12/10

How the fruitcake did you spend so much on wiring your house with CAT5?

A box of 300m Cat 6 (why bother with old technology), is about $120, an average 3 to 4 bedroom with study and couple living areas will need 2 to 3 boxes to wire every room in the house. Then you have the face plates with female connectors at 5 to 10 bucks a pop - roughly 10 plates (unless you want to wire the dunny too). That is a maximum of about $500, including a couple slabs for your sparky mate to wire up the ends.

You spent 5 times the cost of materials above and don’t even mention the average joe is just going to use a $120 wrieless router once it is inside the house. Maybe they will get industious and lay a single cable to each bedroom, the study and the main living area. Costing them a maximum of $250.

Shaking Head says:

11:04am | 01/12/10

@MarK
I had to sit through a compulsory corporate presentation for a day on ‘Racism in the work place’ where I was told of its evil origins and how bad it is, that we are civilised and such behaviour is a sackable offense.  The presenter finished by adding, “but when it comes to Poms, ignore what I’ve said”.

TheRealDave says:

11:10am | 01/12/10

@Mark If you paid 3k for Cat5 you got hosed. Its $200 for a 300m box from iDeal Electrical and crimps, wallplates etc are a few bucks each.

@TimB thats OK, I’ve repeatedly pointed out in numerous anti-NBN rants their technical errors and repeatedly outright FUD when it comes to the NBN and I’m guessing you’ve never bothered to read them or look up any technical specs for yourself and just go along with the flow and let others do your thinking for you. And yes, if you read the News Limited press, especially the Australian, you’d see that the organisation has an ongoing Jihad against he NBN. Try posting a comment to one of their FUD articles and see how far you get. I know plenty of other IT professionals who cannot get comments approved and published to their plethora of crap they publish about the NBN. I gave up after getting less than 1 in 6 posts approved.

Even here on the Punch I have had a few pro-NBN posts not approved, and that was even without swearing at peoples abject stupidity. I have noticed that of late we have had a plethora of Liberal advertisement, I mean ‘articles’, on here and the level of anti-NBN rhetoric is starting to rise here as well. Now its cables. Tomorrow it will be about something else equally as inane and we will still get crap about fiber being obsolete and wireless being superior etc How many times do you have to point it out before it sinks in? There is a difference between unknowing and stupid, its s shame we have far too many of the latter around.

You can read it for yourself if you can be bothered. Their are plenty of IT sites around the place catering to more technical discussion from people actually in the industry and know what they are talking about or you can relying on Journo’s with iPads and Politicians who invested in IT to give you Technical opinions on a $45 billion dollar project. your call.

@Mark, no not a fan of Apple. Over priced pieces of crap that do their best to screw over my networks and policies and provide half or less functionality. But they look purdy.

And I have already address the technical aspects of the NBN many times before, since before the election. Its jut getting boring beating your head against a brick wall of obstinacy now.  If I don’t know something, or am unsure, I have the temerity to at least look it up and have a read…and no, not just on Wikipedia either. Thats the great thing about the net, you can find out just about anything - IF you really want to….unfortunately it seems to be the disease of this age that despite all this information at our fingertips we are inheritly (sp??) lazy and prefer someone else to give us their opinion and we will go along with the one packaged right for us.

Sorry, which ‘Rudd Opinion’ am I backing now? I must have missed that part….

MarK says:

12:31pm | 01/12/10

To answer frugal and dave.

My house is three stories. While I could wire it myself it is against the lasw toi do the internals. I wired all 6 bedrooms the living rooms and the granny flat.

I also got a 16 or 20 (cant remembr off the top of the head) switch.

Including labor it was a good deal.

Now frugal is I wanted to get a sparky form the local and do it on the cheap sure could have been much cheaper but horses for courses. I abhor mates rates and jobs. Nothing but trouble. I have a professional job with a 15 year guarantee on the internals. I am happy as larry

Also I do realise that not everyone has a three story house. not everyone wants what I wanted.

But you came into the conversation later frugal.

You see pers has been carping on about the secutity of cable vs the insecurity of wireless. Apparently this is a huge selling pint as to why we need to spend $60 billion.

She has not really answered the problematic question about all the wireless delivery form router to PC in everyone’s home since security is such a big issue for her.

Also if I was to get 100mb from the NBN not every router will deliver that natively. Some state it but in actually they will not. It all depends on the wireless standard they use as you probably know and of course that is when the cost differential of the routers start to hurt too.

Check your hardware at home people if you think it will deliver whatever bandwidth comes out of the pipe.

So to summarise.

1. I got a professional and legal job done so my insurance is intact and I have suitable hardware for MY needs.

2. I do not suggest you wore up your own house it is illegal.

3. Your router if wireless may not be sufficient to transmit the bandwidth you might want to recieve under the NBN.

4. People live in different size houses. Have different size families and are prepared to pay for service and guarantees from reputable vendors

I think I captured everything.

Hope this helps.

Again people be careful of people saying you can internally wore your own home cheap. Running one cable along the floor from a router to a PC is not the same as having it professionally done with sufficient hardware to support differing uses.

@Dave - not a Rudd opinion a Rudd argument.

All I have seen form you is we must have the NBN. This one. As proposed. The do it this way or not at all was Rudds argument style.

It failed.

Just saying

Stephen Putnam says:

12:52pm | 01/12/10

Question for MarK—Why in your postings, does a single sentence require a new paragraph all the time? Is that the way they teach you to post comments at Liberal trolling school?
Doing this makes you appear as illiterate as you are ignorant.

MarK says:

01:19pm | 01/12/10

Answer to Stephen.

I get paid by the line.

I

try

to

get

lots

of

dollars

when

I

can.

A FYI. Thank you for your concern and your opinion. It has been duly ignored. Feel free to engage me on the issue to hand in this thread or any other issue in the appropriate thread as you see fit.

Have a nice day.

The Badger says:

01:57pm | 01/12/10

TheRealDave

I have two pieces of advice for you about trying to get non-technical political junkies to understand complex concepts like the NBN workings and the difference between wireless and FTTH.

Never argue with a fool. Someone watching may not be able to tell the difference.
and
I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.
George Bernard Shaw

Chester says:

02:03pm | 01/12/10

@MarK - don’t know which state you are in.  Electrical work is required to be certified under state building codes, network cabling and termination requires a manufacturers certified installer to get a manufacturers guarantee but it is not a building code requirement.  At the price you paid hope you received the full documented port tests and design layout diagrams.
Watch out for rats you’re not covered for them.

The Badger says:

02:06pm | 01/12/10

Again mark bases “his” preferred broadband solution on what he can buy at Harvey Norman this afternoon

What an informed contributor.

MarK says:

03:32pm | 01/12/10

Yes Chester it was all included. I have this awesome picture and stuff. I have a cat. Rats are covered. The guys that did it do not normally do homes. They do large networks but we use them at work so they were happy to help in this instance.

Interesting Badger I have looked back through this thread and cannot see a mention of Harvey Norman at all.

I fail to see the significance of your post. Or maybe you fail to see the relevance of the fact that the majority of Australians don’t have hardware that could not utilise the headline 100mb speed anyway.

I guess it is only a small matter. Spend $60 billion on a system that joe public cannot utilise with the hardware they have.

Awesome.

Frugal says:

04:03pm | 01/12/10

Mark
“I abhor mates rates and jobs. Nothing but trouble.” -

Fair enough, each to their own, your comment reminded me of this (is quite funny)

http://www.27bslash6.com/p2p2.html

Northern Steve says:

11:00pm | 01/12/10

Frugal,
Not everyone knows a lecky, and can get mates rates.
Not many people would have the technical skills to do it themselves.
Significant numbers of people rent - I don’t suppose many landlords are going to want to have tenants wiring the house up themselves, nor are they likely to pay to have their houses cabled without raising rents for their tenants

So really, your solution is valid only for house-owners who know a leccy well enough to pay them in beer to do a shoddy job wiring up their home for them.

The Badger says:

08:35am | 02/12/10

Mark thinks we should base our NBN on what Harvey Norman has in stock.

“MarK says: 09:27am | 30/11/10
No private home will EVER need a gigabit.
The hardware alone to handle that bandwidth is not readily available in Harvey Norman you know?”

MarK says:

10:08am | 02/12/10

oic badger.

I was referring to this thread by realdave. Sure I mentioned it before - you said again see -

”  *

      The Badger says:

      02:06pm | 01/12/10

      Again mark bases “his” preferred broadband solution on what he can buy at Harvey Norman this afternoon

      What an informed contributor.”

But whatever.

Still waiting for answer on whether you think it is wise to sign up to an internet plan that has a greater speed than your hardware can handle.

The Badger says:

11:27am | 02/12/10

Mark
“Still waiting for answer on whether you think it is wise to sign up to an internet plan that has a greater speed than your hardware can handle. “

You’ll have to explain what you mean by this. I’m not familiar with your current personal hardware inventory. 
or
you could just pop down to Harvey Norman for some new hardware mark.  seems you like to shop there.
ps while you’re there, see if they have any NTU’s on sale

or whatever

The Badger says:

05:33pm | 03/12/10

One last thing mark
When you said
“I was referring to this thread by realdave. Sure I mentioned it before”

I take this to mean that you can change your mind and your opinion on a topic from thread to thread as it suits you.

Great strategy - could never pin you down, because we never know what you actually believe.
Are you mark or the real mark?
Perhaps you should post as “therealmark” when you are sure your comment will stand the test of the next thread on the subject.

NicoleG says:

10:40am | 01/12/10

Clearly manners were not high on the agenda in your home when you were growing up. Yet another person who could use a course in social skills.

Tony Del says:

11:35am | 01/12/10

Yes, the rollout needs much more zing in its acronym, how about “Fiber Up Conduits Knowledge Open For Fast Flows”

TheRealDave says:

11:37am | 01/12/10

Here we go - the magic faster than light wireless again, kudos.

MarK says:

12:10pm | 01/12/10

At no time did Simon mention faster than light.

Making things up is so passé don’t you know.

MarK says:

12:11pm | 01/12/10

At no time did Simon mention faster than light.

Making things up is so passé don’t you know.

TimB says:

12:12pm | 01/12/10

Point out where he said “Faster than light” Dave.

Is this the sort of thing you mean when you’ve been pointing out technical errors? Because I’m not impressed.

Troy says:

01:11pm | 01/12/10

I read “faster than…light wireless”.  But faster than light would be cool.  Although I think it would mean we’d be saying things before we actually thought them.  Actually, I think we already do that.

The Badger says:

02:12pm | 01/12/10

Where are these wireless solutions with NBN speeds simple simon?

MarK says:

04:36pm | 01/12/10

Gosh Badger do you expect us to spoon-feed you.

Use google mate.

The information is there if you look

simon says:

06:15pm | 01/12/10

Thanks TimB and MarK, you two are the truly intelligent people that comment on this topic. The problem with therealdave, persephone and the badger is that they are so brainwashed by Gillard and Conroy’s spin and propoganda that they don’t know the difference between fantasy and reality.

If Julia Gillard or Stephen Conroy suggested to one of these clowns that it would be a good idea to jump in the lake, i reckon they would. Dont worry, one day they might wake up and see things as they truly are, however at the moment it’s like talking to a really thick brick wall!!!

The Badger says:

09:24am | 02/12/10

Simon
I thought you’d be falling all over yourself to post your link to “good wireless technologies now with NBN speeds”

You don’t have a link because they don’t exist.

simple really.

acotrel says:

04:55am | 02/12/10

Does ‘faster than light ’ mean we’ll all be getting heavy email messages?

The Badger says:

02:31pm | 01/12/10

nope
don’t get it
please explain

TheRealDave says:

11:44am | 01/12/10

Stop speaking sense Harry. Whatever you do, don’t tell them that the same fibre will also carry 1000mb, 10GB and onwards, as we are already using in business and government networks today.

Their magic wireless is going to save them….

And when it doesn’t it, in a decades time when we will NEED fibre into every premises in the country it will cost us triple the price or more and it will be the visionary Liberals and supporters who will once again apparently forget this period in history when they could have got it far cheaper, as they usually do.

N says:

02:14pm | 01/12/10

TheRealDave; I love reading your inane posts on the NBN which just reinforces the fact that you are so far out of your depth when it comes to technology its borderline embarrassing.

Please show me in history, from the creation of the first super computers, to today, where technology has gotten more expensive over time. In your case insinuating 3x more expensive! If you worked in the industry you would know that the cost of 1Gbps networking infrastructure is significantly more expensive from 100Mpbs, similarly the cost of 10Gbps to 1Gbps.

The Badger says:

02:35pm | 01/12/10

N
I’m pretty sure that therealdave is referring to the manpower and related expenses involved in building the infrastructure.

Do you work in the industry or just having a lucky dip?

N says:

03:43pm | 01/12/10

TheBadger; Even if that is the case, guys with fibre qualifications are not thick on the ground at present, and hence the current pay for them is considerably high. Give it 10 years, and like now with copper Alcatel licenses, every Tom, Dick and Harry will have a license to terminate fibre, therefore making it cheaper down the line if anything.

Working in the industry for 15 years or so.

NicoleG says:

12:18pm | 01/12/10

Agreed! And I desperately want and Ipad. Now watch em all come and bag the living crap out of me.

me do math says:

03:36pm | 01/12/10

it costs 35 billion and there are roughly 10 million residential properties. Ignoring hooking up business premises (like you are doing), that comes out to $3500 per household, half your quote.

There is nothing more ‘advanced’ either now or on the horizon. Maintenance is built in to the business model, just like Telstra does.

MarK says:

04:35pm | 01/12/10

Me do math.

You forgot the $14 billion they are paying Telstra to junk a whole lot of perfectly good assets.

You are also not including any of the interest costs that this will incur.

It is easily $60 billion. On the best case scenario.

I love maths it is fun.

I love this though “Maintenance is built in to the business model”

Can you tell us what else is in it since no one has seen it yet?

Northern Steve says:

11:06pm | 01/12/10

‘Better’ technology might not mean faster, it might mean more useful Betamax was better than VHS, yet for whatever reason, people went with VHS.  The Iridium satellite phone system is ‘better’ than 3G, yet almost no one used it (Google it).

fibre may be faster than wireless, but for the average Joe, wireless is what they want.  Fibre is great for some applications, but not necessary for every house.

MarK says:

06:25am | 02/12/10

True story this.

One of the reasons VHS became the standard and beta died out was that the major porn studios only did their releases on VHS.

No porn on beta meant it had limited appeal.

I am being deadly serious.

The Badger says:

12:32pm | 03/12/10

Steve,

You are right, people do want wireless - for mobile applications. Without wireless, guess what? mobile applications aren’t mobile.

Northern Steve says:

02:08am | 05/12/10

Glad you’ve finally caught up Badger!
Well done.

fairsfair says:

11:37am | 02/12/10

this article is about the infrastructure - not the premise. FFS we all believe (to an extent) that in a perfect world it would be great. But when the fibre is being integrated into existing overhead powerline infrastructure within the trial suburb in Townsville (that my employer has the contract on and I was involved in constructing) WTF is going to happen in a cyclone? Because you know - that area has them. That is the issue! It is not thought out, it is mashed together it is praying on the simplistic wants of the masses who don’t have the desire or (maybe even the ability) to understand the consequences of this. If you saw the scope and the risk accepted by the government you would cry.

Forethought would be to start in non metropolitan areas and place all services underground in one go. Overhead lines should be a thing of the past. However, that will cost phenominal dollars and is not an entirely practical solution in itself - which is why this should probably not be viewed as a national infrastructure with a one means suits all. It doesn’t.

We are kidding ourselves. Oh and if this is all about equal access to services - why aren’t they starting in the bush that has no current service and are beginning in areas of this country that already have current suitable speeds? I reckon this is all a rouse at the project will never be completed and we will have super speeds within the cities and the bush still on dial up.

Abbot’s solution was a far better as it sought to get eveyone on equal footing prior to developing a system for the future.