Jump to content


 

Photo

Why are people so quiet on the NBN?


  • Please log in to reply
300 replies to this topic

#16 OldBogey

OldBogey

    Defining and analysing humour is a pastime of humourless people

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22536 posts
  • LocationRegional Victoria

Posted 21 August 2013 - 04:30 PM

I agree that we don't yet know how beneficial it will be because all the possible uses haven't been implemented.  All we can do is guess and compare movie download speeds.

 

I also agree that there is little point in constructing something now for use in 30 years time, because technological advances in the interim will surely make it obsolete long before then.  That would be like building 15 lane freeways to handle 2050 traffic only for us all to be flying to & fro before then and the freeways being unused.

 

It would be nice to have fibre optic speeds now, but it's not in the street.  In the town I'm living in, there are a couple of pockets of NBN planned, covering about 1% of the township.  It needs to be pervasive if it's to drive new functionality.



#17 winniereds77

winniereds77

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 518 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 05:00 PM

 

I also agree that there is little point in constructing something now for use in 30 years time, because technological advances in the interim will surely make it obsolete long before then.  That would be like building 15 lane freeways to handle 2050 traffic only for us all to be flying to & fro before then and the freeways being unused.

 

M5 sydney anyone, or M4 built to handle the traffic of the day , now chockers from 5:45AM(yes that is when peak starts )

 

sometimes it pays to plan ahead


  • Manikato likes this

The Trouble with life is there’s no background music


#18 OldBogey

OldBogey

    Defining and analysing humour is a pastime of humourless people

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22536 posts
  • LocationRegional Victoria

Posted 21 August 2013 - 05:42 PM

M5 sydney anyone, or M4 built to handle the traffic of the day , now chockers from 5:45AM(yes that is when peak starts )

 

sometimes it pays to plan ahead

Planning ahead is fine.  There are numerous examples of where our pollies and public servants have failed abysmally to plan sufficiently ahead on road projects.  Melb is the same as Sydney as far as 50Km car parks go.

 

There needs to be a balance between current needs and the reasonable future.  Technology is racing as such a speed, though, that anything beyond the immediate future is indeterminable.



#19 Mekat

Mekat

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3377 posts
  • LocationHere

Posted 21 August 2013 - 07:28 PM

I also agree that there is little point in constructing something now for use in 30 years time, because technological advances in the interim will surely make it obsolete long before then.  That would be like building 15 lane freeways to handle 2050 traffic only for us all to be flying to & fro before then and the freeways being unused.

 

It would be nice to have fibre optic speeds now, but it's not in the street.  In the town I'm living in, there are a couple of pockets of NBN planned, covering about 1% of the township.  It needs to be pervasive if it's to drive new functionality.

You are missing my point OB. I feel it is right and correct that the fttp NBN is constructed now, completed at the beginning of the next decade. That is the hardware, the infrastructure, the medium upon which future tech and future work will be built... This infrastructure is needed, the full benefit for that built infrastructure will come in the years AFTER it is completed... for some, benefit will come immediately as it is rolled out - but for the wider community the benefit will follow after completion.



#20 Weetbix

Weetbix

    Par in my sight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39860 posts
  • LocationBrisbane, Queensland

Posted 21 August 2013 - 07:42 PM

Agree 100% Mekat. The reason there is no discussion is that those of us who see the benefit of the FTH solution have said our piece and we are tired of it. Those with their head in the sand a still remain firmly entrenched and no amount of reason will change their view.
 
Turnbull is selling us the cut price solution with a tail light warranty. We will all pay for it in the end.


Well here's a good reason to be quiet. Because if you don't agree with Mr Golfer you have your head in the sand and will not listen to reason.

Not atypical of the sort of argument put forward for this project. It goes something along the lines of "It's a good idea because faster is better and it doesn't matter whatit costs or whether it can even be realistically achieved or whether other technologies are likely to replace it. I'm right and everyone who has a different opinion is wrong.

Oh, and yeah, the IT people agree with me so I must be right."
  • Tolmij likes this

Handicap

Best result: 2 over 74 at Hills International on 13 Feb 2016

Eagles: 21/10/16 17th Keysborough, 24/10/16 18th Woodlands

Goal: A round at par or better!

Brisbane Fairways 2015 Club Champion

Brisbane Fairways 2015 Clubman of the Year

Winner: 2015 Nationals day 5 round at Links Hope Island

Winner: 2016 Nationals day 5 round at Woodlands

South East Queensland Golf Group - Treasurer

http://www.brisbanef...ssocialgolf.com - Treasurer


#21 Weetbix

Weetbix

    Par in my sight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39860 posts
  • LocationBrisbane, Queensland

Posted 21 August 2013 - 07:52 PM

However the question of whether the government should pay for it is a legitimate question. The Labour government has dodged up the figures for this program, and that is a legitimate concern for taxpayers.

Another legitimate concern is what proportion of users will benefit. It's fine to look into the future and assume we'll need much much much faster speeds but if you can stream HD video with onky double the present speed then what are we likely to be using the 10x faster speed to do?

FTTN provides a lot of the bandwidth benefit to move the large amounts of data required collectively, which is a factor in current speed issues. When it's not clogged up existing broadband can provide me content faster than I can open new pages to ask for more. Perhaps there will be whole new types of information requirements that will demand much much much higher bandwidth, but maybe not. A lot of technological innovation goes in to making data transfer more efficient.

I don't know whether FTTH is necessary or not. But I do know that I'd like my government to decide to spend $40 billion plus based on more than a brainstorming session on an flight. And I'd like a quality economic assessment by the government department that exists specifically for that purpose. $40b is too much to just bypass good process.

But I have my head in the sand and am irrational about this issue. Sorry.
  • Tolmij likes this

Handicap

Best result: 2 over 74 at Hills International on 13 Feb 2016

Eagles: 21/10/16 17th Keysborough, 24/10/16 18th Woodlands

Goal: A round at par or better!

Brisbane Fairways 2015 Club Champion

Brisbane Fairways 2015 Clubman of the Year

Winner: 2015 Nationals day 5 round at Links Hope Island

Winner: 2016 Nationals day 5 round at Woodlands

South East Queensland Golf Group - Treasurer

http://www.brisbanef...ssocialgolf.com - Treasurer


#22 Jack_Golfer

Jack_Golfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2200 posts
  • LocationPerth

Posted 21 August 2013 - 08:24 PM

However the question of whether the government should pay for it is a legitimate question. The Labour government has dodged up the figures for this program, and that is a legitimate concern for taxpayers.

Another legitimate concern is what proportion of users will benefit. It's fine to look into the future and assume we'll need much much much faster speeds but if you can stream HD video with onky double the present speed then what are we likely to be using the 10x faster speed to do?

FTTN provides a lot of the bandwidth benefit to move the large amounts of data required collectively, which is a factor in current speed issues. When it's not clogged up existing broadband can provide me content faster than I can open new pages to ask for more. Perhaps there will be whole new types of information requirements that will demand much much much higher bandwidth, but maybe not. A lot of technological innovation goes in to making data transfer more efficient.

I don't know whether FTTH is necessary or not. But I do know that I'd like my government to decide to spend $40 billion plus based on more than a brainstorming session on an flight. And I'd like a quality economic assessment by the government department that exists specifically for that purpose. $40b is too much to just bypass good process.

But I have my head in the sand and am irrational about this issue. Sorry.

 

So Weeti, are you ready to listen to reason or not?

 

Firstly, in terms of future proofing of technology and the investment, fibre has a heap of long term evolution ahead of it. Certainly gigabit speeds can be achieved by just upgrading headend equipment now. Not so with copper. Ten years is probably the time frame for replacement. Then you will have to pay twice as much to do the work.

 

Secondly, the funding of the project is a capital investment, its not being funded by the tax payer. The money will be borrowed, the NBN will be built and it can then be sold. Its the same as if you build a house.

 

The other important point is that this is an investment in our kids. We build schools because we think that its worth investing in our kids future. The NBN will be the same sort of investment. Are we so selfish that we only consider our own current needs?

 

Is this not reason enough Weeti?



#23 Mekat

Mekat

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3377 posts
  • LocationHere

Posted 21 August 2013 - 08:37 PM

Most people seem to agree that the copper system is approaching, or has arrived at that medium's capacity now. As far as I understand the fact that FTTN utilises the existing copper infrastructure, which must therefore act as a limiting influence on the technology, and inhibit its capacity to deliver high speed when user traffic is high - in the home or anywhere.

 

To again equate the NBN to roads... FTTH is like having sealed roads or streets all the way to your address, while FTTN is like having only major roads and highways sealed, and the minor streets to your house are gravel... both systems are provided by the government... but with FTTN, if you want your street sealed, you pay for it yourself.

 

And Weeti, you mention the price tag... $40 billion compared to the coalition's $38 billion.... the price difference to build is $2 billion... but I have heard that it will cost up to $1 billion a year to maintain the copper.. Once the Abbott Government pays Telstra for the copper (that won't be cheap)... then there is the cost of providing electrical power to all the nodes (transfering the light signals from the fibre into electrical signals for the copper takes power) ... maintainence is the big hidden cost of the FTTN side.



#24 BumpunRun

BumpunRun

    Year of the Day

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11831 posts
  • LocationThirteen point twenty-four warning points

Posted 21 August 2013 - 08:51 PM

 you mention the price tag... $40 billion compared to the coalition's $38 billion.... the price difference to build is $2 billion... but I have heard that it will cost up to $1 billion a year to maintain the copper.. Once the Abbott Government pays Telstra for the copper (that won't be cheap)... then there is the cost of providing electrical power to all the nodes (transfering the light signals from the fibre into electrical signals for the copper takes power) ... maintainence is the big hidden cost of the FTTN side.

so if both teams are doing the "highway" the same and the only difference is getting it "sealed" to your front door, yeah?

so all the work in getting fibre to the house, each and every house in our great brown land is only $2B?

that's a 2.5% difference?

Tones is mad not to spend another 2.5% and get it to every single home....


"But sometimes there are more important things in life than being pedantic about the rules of golf, or spelling and grammar on golf forums"

#25 Weetbix

Weetbix

    Par in my sight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39860 posts
  • LocationBrisbane, Queensland

Posted 21 August 2013 - 08:54 PM

So Weeti, are you ready to listen to reason or not?
 
Firstly, in terms of future proofing of technology and the investment, fibre has a heap of long term evolution ahead of it. Certainly gigabit speeds can be achieved by just upgrading headend equipment now. Not so with copper. Ten years is probably the time frame for replacement. Then you will have to pay twice as much to do the work.
 
Secondly, the funding of the project is a capital investment, its not being funded by the tax payer. The money will be borrowed, the NBN will be built and it can then be sold. Its the same as if you build a house.
 
The other important point is that this is an investment in our kids. We build schools because we think that its worth investing in our kids future. The NBN will be the same sort of investment. Are we so selfish that we only consider our own current needs?
 
Is this not reason enough Weeti?



Well doing it for the kids is a nice emotive arguments but I thought you wanted me to listen to reason?

Certainly the government is pushing this as an off budget investment but that is based on an untested business case. I predict that we will see enormous write off's in the coming decade as the business case fails to stack up to the valuation.

And as the costs continue to blow out.

As for copper being redundant within a decade I've yet to see that demonstrated. It's like the argument that the world will run out of food in ... well the 70's and then every decade since. It's been made before - back in the 90's. But technology has improved the speed of cable well beyond what was imagined then. I remember a few years back that people predicted the net would run out of IP addresses.

One of the biggest issues with the government making a bet of this size that this technological solution is the best one for the next 30 years is that technological change in this area is so rapid and so difficult to predict. Few saw just how pervading wifi would be today a decade ago, never mind 20 years ago.

My issue with your argument Jack is that it is wholly based on an assumption that the market will inevitably go to FTTH in a way that is more expensive and slower than the government is doing it. It's probably going to end up a $70-100 billion bet. I'm not going to put you down because you think it's a reasonable bet - that's your prerogative. But I'm not going to jump on board because you throw some sarcasm and some half arsed arguments at me. I've kept an eye on this issue since it came up. I'm not an expert but I'm not ignorant either.

If the proposal is as good as you say then why did the government push it through without due diligence? I can't get a $1m project approved at work without doing the business case that demonstrates that I've considered all options, done my homework on costings and benefits and have a reasonable case that stacks up to analysis. For the government to approve $30 billion of our cash without a similar process is a disgrace in my opinion. Especially given we all know that it is going to end up costing way way way more than that.

Handicap

Best result: 2 over 74 at Hills International on 13 Feb 2016

Eagles: 21/10/16 17th Keysborough, 24/10/16 18th Woodlands

Goal: A round at par or better!

Brisbane Fairways 2015 Club Champion

Brisbane Fairways 2015 Clubman of the Year

Winner: 2015 Nationals day 5 round at Links Hope Island

Winner: 2016 Nationals day 5 round at Woodlands

South East Queensland Golf Group - Treasurer

http://www.brisbanef...ssocialgolf.com - Treasurer


#26 Weetbix

Weetbix

    Par in my sight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39860 posts
  • LocationBrisbane, Queensland

Posted 21 August 2013 - 08:57 PM

so if both teams are doing the "highway" the same and the only difference is getting it "sealed" to your front door, yeah?
so all the work in getting fibre to the house, each and every house in our great brown land is only $2B?
that's a 2.5% difference?
Tones is mad not to spend another 2.5% and get it to every single home....


Indeed


Oh - flying pigs! Cool!
  • BumpunRun and Groove_Snob like this

Handicap

Best result: 2 over 74 at Hills International on 13 Feb 2016

Eagles: 21/10/16 17th Keysborough, 24/10/16 18th Woodlands

Goal: A round at par or better!

Brisbane Fairways 2015 Club Champion

Brisbane Fairways 2015 Clubman of the Year

Winner: 2015 Nationals day 5 round at Links Hope Island

Winner: 2016 Nationals day 5 round at Woodlands

South East Queensland Golf Group - Treasurer

http://www.brisbanef...ssocialgolf.com - Treasurer


#27 Manikato

Manikato

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 250 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 09:37 PM

If the argument against is it just costs too much that is a valid argument of course.I understand the debate around cost and whether or not it will return the benefits to justify the cost. But honestly some of the nonsense being peddled about wifi and FTTN.


http://delimiter.com...-say-academics/

#28 Mekat

Mekat

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3377 posts
  • LocationHere

Posted 21 August 2013 - 10:29 PM

Manikato, an interesting comment on the article in your link suggests that the coalition's FTTN policy is just a ruse, that once in government they will work to shut the NBN down... One does not need to remember too far back (the last election) when Abbott tasked Turnbull to kill the NBN... suddenly the libs have their own NBN...??

Just an observation!



#29 OldBogey

OldBogey

    Defining and analysing humour is a pastime of humourless people

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22536 posts
  • LocationRegional Victoria

Posted 21 August 2013 - 10:55 PM

You are missing my point OB. I feel it is right and correct that the fttp NBN is constructed now, completed at the beginning of the next decade. That is the hardware, the infrastructure, the medium upon which future tech and future work will be built... This infrastructure is needed, the full benefit for that built infrastructure will come in the years AFTER it is completed... for some, benefit will come immediately as it is rolled out - but for the wider community the benefit will follow after completion.

Hmmm, 7 years and we still won't all have access to it.  I can't imagine that much of today's technology will still be in use in 7 years.



#30 Manikato

Manikato

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 250 posts

Posted 21 August 2013 - 11:03 PM

I am not convinced the liberals will kill the NBN. I remember the fear mongering labor carried on with about the GST. I don't hear any of them saying they will do away with it now. The political point scoring and views that have to be opposite just for the sake of being opposite sh*ts me to tears.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users