http://tinyurl.com/mpo6vft While I don't think much of the way the NBN has been designed, the Liberal party has an even worse plan that will give little benefit over the current situation and most of the costs of the NBN. The above URL has a change.org petition for them to reconsider this. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
On 09/10/2013 12:34 AM, Russell Coker wrote:
While I don't think much of the way the NBN has been designed, the Liberal party has an even worse plan that will give little benefit over the current situation and most of the costs of the NBN. The above URL has a change.org petition for them to reconsider this.
On this subject, The corroded copper in seaside fore shore areas was unable to cope with demand 10 years ago and still struggles . LNP do not consider corroded infrastructure in their To the Node concept. Telstra, of course, denies corrosion. Technicians work around the problem and are told to keep quiet. Roger
Roger wrote:
On 09/10/2013 12:34 AM, Russell Coker wrote:
................snip, the Liberal party has an even worse plan that will give little benefit over the current situation ..............snip
On this subject, The corroded copper in seaside fore shore areas was unable to cope with demand 10 years ago and still struggles . LNP do not consider corroded infrastructure in their To the Node concept. ...........snip
As a user of the fibre- to-the-home when I lived in Brunswick, I would have to say the way it was and still is sold, as ' super-speed broadband', is simultaneously: 1/ oversell: because data transfer rates were only 100Mb/s down , 20 Mb/s up; which was only about 5 x the ADSL 2+, which I had had previously. 2/ undersell: because the real advantages of fibre over copper are not specifically mentioned - corrosion resistance, water resistance, spike-voltage elimination, security........ just plain robustness ! - 'future proofed' unlimited data transfer rates; the numbers are quite mind-boggling ! see for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber-optic_communication#cite_note-11 "2012 NEC, Corning[11] 1.05 Petabit/s 12 core fiber 52.4 km"; Fibre will still be chugging along when all our CMOS micro-processors are just a distant memory and RAM and mass storage are feeding data via a fibre-bus to the Quantum Topological Processor; so fast that all programs execute virtually instantaneously, except for the IO delays. Certainly wireless bandwidth will increase as higher carrier frequency technologies iterate up; but I just can't see the 1 x 10^15 times current rates, which the above figures imply; ps shouldn't this thread be on luv-talk ? regards Rohan McLeod
Roger wrote:
On 09/10/2013 12:34 AM, Russell Coker wrote:
................snip, the Liberal party has an even worse plan that will give little benefit over the current situation ..............snip
On this subject, The corroded copper in seaside fore shore areas was unable to cope with demand 10 years ago and still struggles . LNP do not consider corroded infrastructure in their To the Node concept. ...........snip
As a user of the fibre- to-the-home when I lived in Brunswick, I would have to say the way it was and still is sold, as ' super-speed broadband', is simultaneously: 1/ oversell: because data transfer rates were only 100Mb/s down , 20 Mb/s up; which was only about 5 x the ADSL 2+, which I had had previously. 2/ undersell: because the real advantages of fibre over copper are not specifically mentioned - corrosion resistance, water resistance, spike-voltage elimination, security........ just plain robustness ! - 'future proofed' unlimited data transfer rates; the numbers are quite mind-boggling ! see for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber-optic_communication#cite_note-11 "2012 NEC, Corning[11] 1.05 Petabit/s 12 core fiber 52.4 km"; Fibre will still be chugging along when all our CMOS micro-processors are just a distant memory and RAM and mass storage are feeding data via a fibre-bus to the Quantum Topological Processor; so fast that all programs execute virtually instantaneously, except for the IO delays. Certainly wireless bandwidth will increase as higher carrier frequency technologies iterate up; but I just can't see the ....oops make that 1 x 10^7 times current rates, which the above figures imply; ps shouldn't this thread be on luv-talk ? regards Rohan McLeod _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list luv-main@luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
On 10 September 2013 09:35, Roger <arelem@bigpond.com> wrote:
On this subject, The corroded copper in seaside fore shore areas was unable to cope with demand 10 years ago and still struggles . LNP do not consider corroded infrastructure in their To the Node concept. Telstra, of course, denies corrosion. Technicians work around the problem and are told to keep quiet.
We have had repeated issues with our (and neighbours) telephone lines not working properly over the last several years. Last time was several weeks ago, couldn't get a dial tone. Due to my use of Freeswitch as a PBX, any problems don't get noticed straight away, so people trying to contact us can't. Unfortunately a lot of people don't get FTTH. There were letters in the Herald Sun on Sunday saying silly things like NBN is obsolete already, everyone uses 4G, I don't have a phone connection, why should I pay for NBN, etc. No letters promoting the NBN. -- Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>
So if I only use 4G wireless, why should I pay for your fiber-to-whereever connection? Regards Slav Unfortunately a lot of people don't get FTTH. There were letters in the Herald Sun on Sunday saying silly things like NBN is obsolete already, everyone uses 4G, I don't have a phone connection, why should I pay for NBN, etc. No letters promoting the NBN. "This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication."
Slav, On 10 September 2013 17:22, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) <slav.pidgorny@anz.com>wrote:
So if I only use 4G wireless, why should I pay for your fiber-to-whereever connection?
Yes, sure. As long as you don't take out a contract with a NBN Retail ISP, you won't pay anything. The NBN is being paid for by NBN users, not Australian Taxpayers. John
G'day -
From: John Mann [mailto:john.mann@monash.edu]
The NBN is being paid for by NBN users, not Australian Taxpayers.
If only that was true. I think NBN marketing alone costed more than its revenue thus far. A quick search results in some figures: "The government has already pumped around $2.6 billion into the fibre-to-the-premise (FTTP) NBN down from original forecast of $4.7 billion for the year because of delays. It is being principally funded by the sale of government bonds but deployment remains in its infancy with only around 1 per cent of premises passed." (http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/government-it/tough-nbn-spending-decisi ons-await-20130708-2jl56.html) How much did the government spend on wireless 4G? DSL networks? Zero. That's how it should be. Regards Slav "This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication."
On 10/09/13 18:23, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
If only that was true. I think NBN marketing alone costed more than its revenue thus far.
"Thus far". So what? It's a capital investment. The bonds were issued at an interest rate of 4%, and the NBN is expected to provide a return of 7%, so all those costs will be paid off by 2034. And then it starts making money.
How much did the government spend on wireless 4G?
Your 4G is all very nice until every child and their dog in your neighbourhood start using it for youtube. Then it's useless. -- Paul Dwerryhouse
G'day -
-----Original Message----- "Thus far". So what? It's a capital investment. The bonds were issued at an interest rate of 4%, and the NBN is expected to provide a return of 7%, so all those costs will be paid off by 2034. And then it starts making money.
You're making a lot of assumptions about technology, pricing etc. The reality is this: government is spending money now, money it doesn't have; and 20 years ROI in the field where everything is changing every 5 years isn't safe bet.
Your 4G is all very nice until every child and their dog in your neighbourhood start using it for youtube. Then it's useless.
Which is why we need NBN: HD YouTube in every room. No wonder NBN is universally popular - it's the biggest entertainment project in history. Regards Slav "This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication."
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 07:36:11PM +1000, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
Your 4G is all very nice until every child and their dog in your neighbourhood start using it for youtube. Then it's useless.
Which is why we need NBN: HD YouTube in every room. No wonder NBN is universally popular
it's popular because it's one of the first real useful infrastructure projects that any state or fedeeral government has attempted in decades. tollways and other PPP ripoffs don't count because they're tax-payer funded but end up privately owned so we get to pay to build them and then pay again to use them. public-private partnerships are a scam to defraud the public.
- it's the biggest entertainment project in history.
perhaps that is what most people will (would have) used it for. however, unlike *any* wireless technology, the bandwidth isn't shared with hundreds or thousands of other users so other, more worthwhile, uses won't become impossible on a FTTH network. telecommuting, for instance, and small and/or home business services, and the much touted tele-medicine and distance education benefits. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> wrote:
however, unlike any wireless technology, the bandwidth isn't shared with hundreds or thousands of other users so other, more worthwhile, uses won't become impossible on a FTTH network.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=education It's not as if you can't find a "more worthwile use" without leaving youtube.com. There is a lot of great content on Youtube, the above URL is only one example of many. Another example that springs to mind is the way that Linux conferences (including LCA) often upload their videos to Youtube first. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
On 10/09/13 19:36, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
Which is why we need NBN: HD YouTube in every room. No wonder NBN is universally popular - it's the biggest entertainment project in history.
I didn't say anything about the NBN being for entertainment. I was implying that wireless is useless when lots of people are using it. All you have to do is go visit a regional area that doesn't have wired broadband and watch how their mobile internet becomes unusable from 6pm onwards. -- Paul Dwerryhouse | PGP Key ID: 0x6B91B584 http://weblog.leapster.org/
G'day -
-----Original Message-----
All you have to do is go visit a regional area that doesn't have wired broadband and watch how their mobile internet becomes unusable from 6pm onwards.
Not that NBN offers FTTx in those areas... Problems with wireless NBN already arrived: http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/524909/iinet_withdraws_top-tier_ nbn_satellite_plan_cites_strain_service/ regards Slav "This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication."
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, "Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS)" <slav.pidgorny@anz.com> wrote:
G'day -
From: John Mann [mailto:john.mann@monash.edu]
The NBN is being paid for by NBN users, not Australian Taxpayers.
If only that was true. I think NBN marketing alone costed more than its revenue thus far.
A quick search results in some figures: "The government has already pumped around $2.6 billion into the fibre-to-the-premise (FTTP) NBN down from original forecast of $4.7 billion for the year because of delays. It is being principally funded by the sale of government bonds but deployment remains in its infancy with only around 1 per cent of premises passed." (http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/government-it/tough-nbn-spending-decisi ons-await-20130708-2jl56.html)
How much did the government spend on wireless 4G? DSL networks? Zero. That's how it should be.
The government sold bandwidth to telcos for 3G and 4G service. Anything that requires physical connection to the premises (ADSL, Cable, fiber, etc) will have significantly less efficiency if there are excessive options. Having the government maintain a monopoly over basic services such as electricity, water, sewage, and phone lines provides efficiency without unreasonably burdening the home owners. If private companies are allowed full competition in this space then they need the right to put trenches or cables across property borders, this reduces the property rights of home-owners and is something that anyone with any libertarian tendencies should disagree with. If an organisation is to be given the right to mess with my property then I'd like the option of voting them out if they do the wrong thing. http://www.liberal.org.au/fast-affordable-sooner-coalitions-plan-better-nbn The Liberal plan for an NBN aims to only cost a mere $29,500,000,000 of taxpayer money. So it seems that the only thing we can be certain of is that a significant amount of taxpayer money is going to be spent on faster Internet no matter who gets their way. Also we shouldn't assume that the Liberal party will be able to get their project done within budget either... While I have some significant objections to the way the NBN is being done, I think that as such a significant amount of money has been spent we should just stay the course. Dithering on significant projects only adds to the cost. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
So if I only use 4G wireless, why should I pay for your fiber-to-whereever connection?
You should pay for it because if you looked beyond the end of your own nose you would see that your 4G works well as long as you are the only one using it. If you want it to continue to work well you need to pay to keep other people off of 4G. James
Touché? I'm surprised to find out that I'm still the only one using 4G, but I do have contingency plan in case others join: I have reasonable-speed DSL connection that is sufficient for what I do plus HD TV streaming. This service has improved over past few years - became faster and cheaper - and taxpayer didn't pay for it. So once again, why should I pay for your ability to have HD YouTube in every room? Regards Slav
-----Original Message-----
So if I only use 4G wireless, why should I pay for your fiber-to-whereever connection?
You should pay for it because if you looked beyond the end of your own nose you would see that your 4G works well as long as you are the only one using it. If you want it to continue to work well you need to pay to keep other people off of 4G.
"This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication."
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 07:50:00PM +1000, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
So once again, why should I pay for your ability to have HD YouTube in every room?
for the same reason that i pay for your roads, your education, your access to hospitals, your police to protect your property and the million other things that are a shared, community expense. because it's the right thing to do. because living in a country that was 100% user-pays would be hell on earth. america's a great example if you're poor, and with the shrinking of the middle-classes pretty nearly everyone is poor or will be soon - all it takes is losing your job, or someone in your family getting sick and then you're fucked. somalia's an example of the end result for selfish turd Libertarian paradise, guns and money are the only things that matter, and private police/armies do whatever the fuck they want - rape, murder, torture, extortion, theft and more - because they've got the fucking guns. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
G'day -
-----Original Message----- From: luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au [mailto:luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au] On Behalf Of Craig Sanders
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 07:50:00PM +1000, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
So once again, why should I pay for your ability to have HD YouTube in every room?
for the same reason that i pay for your roads, your education, your access to hospitals, your police to protect your property and the million other things that are a shared, community expense.
I am of belief that we have more than sufficient set of community services, and delivery of content at higher speeds shouldn't become a taxpayer burden.
somalia's an example of the end result for selfish <content filter avoidance> Libertarian paradise
A better example would be the place where I from, the Ukrainian Free Territory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Territory). We have fond memories of the short time it existed; my street was largely built and my university was founded then. Sometimes smaller government works quite well. Of course the left cannot fathom the idea; the Terrytory was mercilessly taken over. Regards Slav "This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication."
On 09/10/2013 09:03 PM, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
I am of belief that we have more than sufficient set of community services, and delivery of content at higher speeds shouldn't become a taxpayer burden. S-o!, It's ok with you that I pay for 1500 k/sec but get between 1 and 80k/sec. I'm of the opinion that everyone should be able to get the services they pay for but so many do not. The infrastructure, as in all infrastructure, anywhere out side the suburbs is total crap. Roger
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 09:03:34PM +1000, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
I am of belief that we have more than sufficient set of community services, and delivery of content at higher speeds shouldn't become a taxpayer burden.
good for you. feel free to emigrate to your chosen paradise - chronic stage in america or terminal end-stage in somalia. actually, no need. just wait and see how much damage abbott does in the next few years implementing the IPA's policies.
A better example would be the place where I from, the Ukrainian Free Territory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Territory). We have fond memories of the short time it existed; my street was largely built and my university was founded then.
and, as is predictable, your so-called free state was taken over by a more powerful force. a power vacuum will always be filled. it was undermined for the same reason that the anarchists in the spanish civil war were betrayed by the communists - neither the fascists nor the communists could tolerate anything even resembling anarchism or socialism. BTW, given that you're talking about the period 1918-1921, immediately post-WWI, it's unlikely that you any memories of it at all, fond or otherwise. you have fond mythologies of a brief few years of respite in the middle of a sandwich of shit. in any case, they were socialist anarchists, collectivists not individualists, and certainly not american style Libertarians. the americans hadn't even co-opted the term Libertarian then (it still meant pretty much the same thing as socialist everywhere in the world, rather than just everywhere but the US as it does now), and the american propaganda-myth of the Self-Made Man (on which american Libertarian theology is based) hadn't infected the ukraine or even europe by then.
Sometimes smaller government works quite well. Of course the left cannot fathom the idea; the Terrytory was mercilessly taken over.
no, the right are ideologically blind ("the mythical magical free market fixes all") but the left can see that corporations would immediately fill the inevitable power vacuum left if anyone actually implemented the mythical "small government" on anything larger than a tribal scale (100-300 people max) for any longer than a few months or a few years. if the choice is between elected government (at least notionally answerable to the people) and corporate power (answerable in theory to the shareholders, but in recent years the management class rule as they see fit for their own benefit), then the choice is easy. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
On 10/09/13 7:50 PM, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
Touché?
I'm surprised to find out that I'm still the only one using 4G, but I do have contingency plan in case others join: I have reasonable-speed DSL connection that is sufficient for what I do plus HD TV streaming. This service has improved over past few years - became faster and cheaper - and taxpayer didn't pay for it.
So once again, why should I pay for your ability to have HD YouTube in every room? You won't be the only one on 4G for long. 4G is radio, radio is a shared medium, so it gets bogged down as the number of users increases. Fancy techniques limit this to some extent, but you eventually run up against this limit. NBN helps in a lot of ways...
Firstly, decent speeds for everyone. I get only 3.5M on ADSL here, and I have to be selective about which modem I use (some will give me 1Mbps... and that's assuming it can maintain sync! Secondly, all those other benefits of fibre - electrical isolation, future upgradeability, etc. Thirdly, clever use of the NBN could help YOU, the wireless user. If femtocells can be installed where there is a NBN connection, then those phones on that premises don't need to use the main local cell to get their service. That means more bandwidth for you to do whatever. Whether this can happen will be up to the telcos (and possibly the regulators). Femtocells increase mobile network capacity by massively increasing frequency reuse, which means greater total bandwidth for mobile users. -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On 10/09/2013 5:22 PM, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
So if I only use 4G wireless, why should I pay for your fiber-to-whereever connection?
There's been lots of good reasons already. 4G is nowhere in sight around my home, can't use it if I wanted to. If I could, then I would need static IP address and unlimited data as I have with a couple of business connections I use (DSL) ... those connections also include most phone calls as well (all fixed line calls in AU and all Optus network mobiles). Get me a 4G plan that competes and I'll use it too as my DSL connections are a great distance from the exchange [read slow] and I'm lucky to even get DSL at all!!!! I will benefit, short term, from FTTN, but I still consider that solution to be almost 100% wasted monies, because the solution is not up to scratch and the running cost of FTTN are very, very high (as too are the costs of running wireless networks), but there are many more reasons. The power efficiency of wireless is about 5%, that is 95% of the power used is wasted -- more waste. FTTN is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what it was projected -- but it won't, that's just another LNP furphy [read big fat lie] that they got away with, helped along the way by Murdoch and Co. Cheers A.
On 10/09/2013 5:22 PM, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
So if I only use 4G wireless, why should I pay for your fiber-to-whereever connection?
*FTTP* is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what it was projected -- but it won't, that's just another LNP furphy [read big fat lie] that they got away with, helped along the way by Murdoch and Co. Cheers A.
G'day -
-----Original Message----- From: luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au [mailto:luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au] On Behalf Of Andrew McGlashan
*FTTP* is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what it was projected
Why? FTTN is thought to be cheaper. You have to bend definitions quite a bit to end up with a system where price is not a part of economics. Personal note: I'm okay with copper gigabit to endpoint at work, same at home. Regards Slav "This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication."
*FTTP* is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what
it was
projected
Why? FTTN is thought to be cheaper. You have to bend definitions quite a bit to end up with a system where price is not a part of economics. Personal note: I'm okay with copper gigabit to endpoint at work, same at home.
Has the 'node' been properly defined here? Will there be a node per street? Per block? Per exchange? James
+1 Cannot agree more. Jobst On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 12:16:30PM +0000, James Harper (james.harper@bendigoit.com.au) wrote:
*FTTP* is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what
it was
projected
Why? FTTN is thought to be cheaper. You have to bend definitions quite a bit to end up with a system where price is not a part of economics. Personal note: I'm okay with copper gigabit to endpoint at work, same at home.
Has the 'node' been properly defined here? Will there be a node per street? Per block? Per exchange?
James _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list luv-main@luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
-- "Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man." - Mohandas K. Gandhi | |0| | Jobst Schmalenbach, jobst@barrett.com.au, General Manager | | |0| Barrett Consulting Group P/L & The Meditation Room P/L |0|0|0| +61 3 9532 7677, POBox 277, Caulfield South, 3162, Australia
On 10/09/2013 8:52 PM, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
From: luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au [mailto:luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au] On Behalf Of Andrew McGlashan
*FTTP* is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what it was projected
Why? FTTN is thought to be cheaper. You have to bend definitions quite a bit to end up with a system where price is not a part of economics. Personal note: I'm okay with copper gigabit to endpoint at work, same at home.
The initial cost is only part of the economic equation. There is a far greater cost in NOT going ahead with the FTTP solution. For starters, how soon before the /slight/ initial savings of FTTN are swallowed up, just due to the cost of operating the network (electrically) ? There are many more economic arguments, just one other would be lost productivity using the slower network. Cheers A.
What planet are you living on? I look after a bunch of ADSL/SHDSL connections at different premises/exchanges - when they fail they fail (90%) on the LAST 300m - which is what the FTTN will use. **WE** will pay for the FTTN, it is shortsided. Jobst On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 08:52:16PM +1000, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) (slav.pidgorny@anz.com) wrote:
G'day -
-----Original Message----- From: luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au [mailto:luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au] On Behalf Of Andrew McGlashan
*FTTP* is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what it was projected
Why? FTTN is thought to be cheaper. You have to bend definitions quite a bit to end up with a system where price is not a part of economics. Personal note: I'm okay with copper gigabit to endpoint at work, same at home.
Regards
Slav "This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication." _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list luv-main@luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
-- Fortune: No such file or directory. | |0| | Jobst Schmalenbach, jobst@barrett.com.au, General Manager | | |0| Barrett Consulting Group P/L & The Meditation Room P/L |0|0|0| +61 3 9532 7677, POBox 277, Caulfield South, 3162, Australia
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 09:24:36 AM Jobst Schmalenbach wrote:
*FTTP* is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what projected
Why? FTTN is thought to be cheaper. You have to bend definitions quite a bit to end up with a system where price is not a part of economics. Personal note: I'm okay with copper gigabit to endpoint at work, same at home.
If NBN will cost 44 billion and there will be some 11 million taxpayers [1] to pay for it each will have to provide $4,000. It does not look cheap to me - and no state funded enterprise ever ended without costing significantly more. [1] http://www.taxreview.treasury.gov.au/content/Paper.aspx?doc=html/publication... Petr Baum -- <pb-luv@baum.com.au> Petr Baum, P.O.Box 2364, Rowville 3178 fax +61-3-97643342 This message was created in naturally virus-free operating system: Linux
On Wed, September 11, 2013 9:46 am, Petr Baum wrote:
- and no state funded enterprise ever ended without costing significantly more.
PLEASE TAKE THIS TO LUV-TALK OR LUV-TECH. LUV-MAIN IS FOR LINUX RELATED DISCUSSION ONLY. Thank you. -- Lev Lafayette, BA (Hons), GCertPM, MBA mobile: 0432 255 208 RFC 1855 Netiquette Guidelines http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
On 09/11/2013 09:24 AM, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote:
What planet are you living on?
I look after a bunch of ADSL/SHDSL connections at different premises/exchanges - when they fail they fail (90%) on the LAST 300m - which is what the FTTN will use. **WE** will pay for the FTTN, it is shortsided.
Jobst
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 08:52:16PM +1000, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) (slav.pidgorny@anz.com) wrote:
G'day -
-----Original Message----- From: luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au [mailto:luv-main-bounces@luv.asn.au] On Behalf Of Andrew McGlashan
*FTTP* is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what it was projected Why? FTTN is thought to be cheaper. You have to bend definitions quite a bit to end up with a system where price is not a part of economics. Personal note: I'm okay with copper gigabit to endpoint at work, same at home.
Regards
Slav FTTN is nothing but personal opinion held only by Turnbull and a few politicians who truly have not got a clue, but touted it as an election issue. There are 100,000 signatures on the petition according to ABC Radio National this morning. This discussion between like minds on a small list like this is good but let's take it to millions of signatures. Roger
On 09/10/2013 08:28 PM, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
On 10/09/2013 5:22 PM, Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) wrote:
So if I only use 4G wireless, why should I pay for your fiber-to-whereever connection? *FTTP* is the only economic solution, even if it did cost triple what it was projected -- but it won't, that's just another LNP furphy [read big fat lie] that they got away with, helped along the way by Murdoch and Co.
Cheers A.
Actually while this topic is w-a-y off topic, it is now on the "world wide" web for everyone to see how Australia is about to be screwed.
"Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS)" writes:
So if I only use 4G wireless, why should I pay for your fiber-to-whereever connection?
Perhaps for the same reason that you pay for other public goods -- roads, hospitals, police, &c -- even if you don't use them. (I believe this was discussed at length either here or in -talk a couple of weeks ago.)
On 09/10/2013 04:34 PM, Brian May wrote:
On 10 September 2013 09:35, Roger <arelem@bigpond.com <mailto:arelem@bigpond.com>> wrote:
On this subject, The corroded copper in seaside fore shore areas was unable to cope with demand 10 years ago and still struggles . LNP do not consider corroded infrastructure in their To the Node concept. Telstra, of course, denies corrosion. Technicians work around the problem and are told to keep quiet.
We have had repeated issues with our (and neighbours) telephone lines not working properly over the last several years.
Last time was several weeks ago, couldn't get a dial tone.
Due to my use of Freeswitch as a PBX, any problems don't get noticed straight away, so people trying to contact us can't.
Unfortunately a lot of people don't get FTTH. There were letters in the Herald Sun on Sunday saying silly things like NBN is obsolete already, everyone uses 4G, I don't have a phone connection, why should I pay for NBN, etc. No letters promoting the NBN. -- Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au <mailto:brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>> Herald Sun - owned by people who do not want competition to wireless and telstra copper! Go figure! You are paying for a service, complain loud and long to Telstra and get then to change twisted pairs. They won't admit it but the copper will be almost dysfunctional. If you phone, you will get some no-hoper from another country so demand to speak to a level 2 or level 3 technician. It's increasingly difficult because Telstra is well insulated from life, but eventually you will get an Australian in the GoldCoast or Perth office and they will help, they are great people and very helpful but very difficult to get to.
Roger
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 04:34:17PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
[...] Herald Sun [...] No letters promoting the NBN.
Murdoch doesn't approve of the NBN. it has the potential to interfere with his near monopoly. this is why the NBN will be scrapped by Abbott - if construction in your area has already commenced, you might be lucky, but their promised "feasibility study" will "prove" that *any* version of the NBN is way too expensive. any construction contracts they can get out of, they *will* get out of - even if they end up having to pay the full value of the contract as a termination fee...because their objection has nothing to do with cost, it's all about - and has always been about - keeping Rupert Murdoch happy. the NBN is dead, and no petition will revive it. shit, 85+% of the australian population being dead-set against it didn't keep us out of the iraq invasion. compared to taking us to war against our wishes, the NBN is a trivial matter. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
participants (15)
-
Andrew McGlashan -
Brian May -
Craig Sanders -
James Harper -
Jobst Schmalenbach -
John Mann -
Lev Lafayette -
Paul Dwerryhouse -
Petr Baum -
Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS) -
Roger -
Rohan McLeod -
Russell Coker -
Tony Langdon -
trentbuck＠gmail.com