Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 12:06:47 AM1/30/12

to

You really are totally innumerate. Did you even bother to estimate cost
per head of the Israel proposal compared with the NBN? MA is right again
- stick to hammer & nails.

--
"If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop
for about a thousand years. "
-- Tim (it ain't a gonna rain no more) Flannery
- Australian Climate Commissar

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 2:05:06 AM1/30/12

to

Wow. You actually believe you can read minds as well as being able to
hit things with a hammer?
Amazing.

> Or are you still arguing that FTTH is an extravagance that we don't need?

FTTH is an extravagance we do not need as a blanket coverage in this
country. FTTN is adequate. People who require FTTP for the last km
can order it. Instead of paying to destroy infrastructure, as is the
ridiculous
plan of the lunatic left, we should make use of existing
infrastructure.
Last km copper can use VDSL. FTTN can make use of LTE technologies.
R&D taxation breaks for the implementation of micro and femptocell,
picocell and microcell antenna deployment.

> If it's the latter how come Israel needs it, or anyone else for that
> matter, and we don't?

Israel is a densely populated small country.
It is roughly 33% the size of Tasmania, and flat.

> Or are you suggesting that we build a FTTH network but only in densely
> populated urban areas?

I suggest a better plan might be served by bringing broadband
connectivity
to
1. Those that can not get it, and,
2. Those that can show a NEED, and,
3. Those that WANT it.

No business case has been done for the NBNCo proposed topology.
The last figures from the ABS show that some 38% of Australians
are not connected to broadband. Of that 38%, ~50% have no interest
in the internet, and of the 50% left, 80% ofr those can not afford a
connection
at current prices.

So the lunatic left wants to spend 40% of its spend running fiber out
to people who don't want it, or can't afford it. Good fucking plan.
.

> With regards population density, no doubt bitumen roads cost more per
> capita in Australia than Israel, so we shouldn't build any?

We seem to have enough.

> Sorry about all the questions but I'm not sure what your current
> position is,

That's maily because you are a stupid cunt. Bear in mind,
I build networks, you build letterboxes.

Mark Addinall.

> a bit like Turnbull and Abbott really.

Thank you.

Addinall

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 2:21:46 AM1/30/12

to

It goes against lefty philosophy, but money does not grow on trees,
nor does just printing more make the world a happier place.

> Either FTTH is future proof, state of the art technology or it isn't.

It isn't.

> All we've been hearing from you lot is how we'll be no better off with
> the NBN than if we kept the copper and migrated people to wireless, how
> we've already got perfectly good broadband.

Correct.

> But now you're changing tack and saying that FTTH would be better but
> that it's too expensive.

Huh?

> If cost is all you're concerned about and your interested in comparisons
> why not compare GDP per capita in Australia and Israel,

Why? What possible relevance has GDP got to do with the cost of
communications infrastructure?

> factor in the
> enormous cost of the IDF,

You may also want to factor in how much the USA pays for the IDF and
equipment if you are going to throw about meaningless figures.

"This report provides an overview of U.S. foreign assistance to
Israel. It includes a review of past
aid programs, data on annual assistance, and an analysis of current
issues. For general
information on Israel, see CRS Report RL33476, Israel: Background and
Relations with the
United States, by Carol Migdalovitz. For information on overall U.S.
assistance to the Middle
East, see CRS Report RL32260, U.S. Foreign Assistance to the Middle
East: Historical
Background, Recent Trends, and the FY2011 Request, by Jeremy M. Sharp.
Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance
since World War II. From
1976-2004, Israel was the largest annual recipient of U.S. foreign
assistance, having since been
supplanted by Iraq. Since 1985, the United States has provided nearly
$3 billion in grants
annually to Israel."

[...]

"For FY2011, the Obama Administration requested $3 billion in FMF to
Israel. According to the
State Department’s FY2011 budget justification for Foreign Operations,
“U.S. assistance will help
ensure that Israel maintains its qualitative military edge over
potential threats, and prevent a shift
in the security balance of the region. U.S. assistance is also aimed
at ensuring for Israel the
security it requires to make concessions necessary for comprehensive
regional peace.”
After years of negotiation, the United States and Israel announced in
August 2010 that Israel will
purchase 20 F-35s at a cost of $2.75 billion, which will be paid for
entirely with FMF grants. The
first planes are scheduled to be delivered in 2015, though the deal is
still pending final approval
by the Israeli cabinet.

Almost all U.S. bilateral aid to Israel is in the form of military
assistance. In the past, Israel also
had received significant economic assistance. Strong congressional
support for Israel has resulted
in Israel’s receiving benefits not available to other countries. For
example, Israel can use some
U.S. military assistance both for research and development in the
United States and for military
purchases from Israeli manufacturers."

We have to pay for OUR F-35 toy planes. With cash gum-nuts.

> then tell me whether we can afford it or not.

We can't afford the waste building an idiotic network that serves no
purpose.

> Stick to calculus and C++, you're hopeless at anything else.

Stick to banging things with a hammer.

Fucking retard.
Mark Addinall.

Addinall

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 2:23:04 AM1/30/12

to

On Jan 30, 1:32 pm, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Addinall" <addin...@addinall.net> wrote in message

Cost/benefit.

Something you dole bludgers are not quite comfortable with I suppose.

Moron.
Mark Addinall.

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 3:24:50 AM1/30/12

to

I can vouch that he has worked in the ABS as a statistician. Do you have
evidence to the contrary, or is this just (yet) another unsubstantiated
claim?

I once saw probability described as what could happen and statistics as
what has happened. Looking at what *has* happened with Labor's history
of cost blow-outs and underestimates, MA has likely attached a
reasonably significant probability that the blow-out *could* be as high
as $80M. Being more conservative, I'd put a 90% confidence level on $50M.

>> Did you even bother to estimate cost
>> per head of the Israel proposal compared with the NBN? MA is right again
>> - stick to hammer & nails.
>
> What's cost got to do with it?
> Either FTTH is future proof, state of the art technology or it isn't.

To make such predictions about the future of technology is fraught with
danger, and inappropriate for even the wisest and most experienced
heads. Labor has neither wisdom nor experience and would be the worst
group to charge with predicting the future.

> All we've been hearing from you lot is how we'll be no better off with
> the NBN than if we kept the copper and migrated people to wireless, how
> we've already got perfectly good broadband.

Not "me lot". I've hardly passed a comment on it and am largely
undecided, despite the gargantuan cost which will be a legacy of my kids
& grandkids.

> But now you're changing tack and saying that FTTH would be better but
> that it's too expensive.

Talk to "that lot". I'm yet to make a decision.

> If cost is all you're concerned about and your interested in comparisons
> why not compare GDP per capita in Australia and Israel, factor in the
> enormous cost of the IDF, then tell me whether we can afford it or not.

You have again failed to address the fact that the Israeli project is
for an incomparably higher population density and over a miniscule area
by comparison - factors you clearly gave no thought to before opening
your mouth. MA appears to have sat you on your arse nicely on that blunder.

> Stick to calculus and C++, you're hopeless at anything else.

Really? I sorted you out pretty easily on this one.

Addinall

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 2:59:04 AM1/30/12

to

On Jan 30, 1:57 pm, Swampfox <noi...@whocares.com> wrote:
> On 30/01/2012 2:32 PM, dechucka wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > "Addinall" <addin...@addinall.net> wrote in message

That's because I have been an ITC Project Manager since about 1987,
whereas you have specialised in glueing wood bits together.

The initial quote for NBN MkII was $48 BILLION. Of that, the
Government
was going to pony up $36 BILLION and private investment was going
to find the extra $12 BILLION. Much laughter was heard around board
rooms,
and the private finance capital was never ever mentioned again...

Conjob and Squigly are hoping that everyone in the country is as
stupid as you
are. You having the attention span of a gnat also helps their case.

So, it brings the government stake to $48 BILLION.

Add to that, some $13 BILLION going to payments to Telstra
(great for my shares, thank you Australia) and a lazy BILLION
to OPTUS, and the project, if "On time, on budget..." is
running at $61 BILLION. Given the decade duration 0f the
proposed build, it is certain that the equipment and architectures
put in place 2011-2014 will be at end of life in 2020-2021.
The estimate for life cycle replacements at that stage is at around
$8 BILLION before the network can be considered 'live' and
complete. That's $69 BILLION if everything goes well, and
this is the very first government ITC project in the history of
mankind
that comes in on budget.

Given the track record of any governments, with special consideration
to the dimwits running this show, a cost blow-out of 50% is LIKELY.

That produces a cost of over $100 BILLION over the duration of the
project build.

Looking at the blow-out of eHealth in Australia over the last decade
one would consider that ONLY a 50% blow-out might be good news.

Anyway, the NBN in its current form is doomed. Why worry?
The lunatic left will waste another few BILLION before being kicked
into the wilderness.

Mark Addinall.

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 4:14:04 AM1/30/12

to

See probability & statistics referred to in previous post. And if Labor
want to refute it, they can always show us their business plan and cost
analysis. Now, if it's a joke you're after, ask the ALP to see that.
Interesting too that you scoff at "crystal ball" predictions. That's
what the whole of AGW policy is based on - IPCC projections from
multi-million dollar crystal balls they call computer models. And
they're always wrong too. ROTFL!

>
>> And the results can be achieved
>> by arguably better and certainly cheaper means. It's really a matter of
>> choosing between a carefully measured and ongoing approach and leaping
>> in and building the biggest bronze statue we can't afford.
>
> Or opposing it because Labor thought of it, and Abbott's opposed to it,
> and you can't think for yourself.

As stated, I haven't formed a strong opinion yet. Unlike the leftards
who praised it from the rooftops, even before it had a price tag. Oh!
That's right... Labor *still* haven't been able to show how much it will
cost. :-)

Swampfox

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 7:26:09 AM1/30/12

to

So is it $50 or $80 billion Mark?
And what will it be this time next week?

>>
>>> Did you even bother to estimate cost
>>> per head of the Israel proposal compared with the NBN? MA is right again

>>> - stick to hammer& nails.

>>
>> What's cost got to do with it?
>
> It goes against lefty philosophy, but money does not grow on trees,
> nor does just printing more make the world a happier place.
>
>> Either FTTH is future proof, state of the art technology or it isn't.
>
> It isn't.

So what is?

>
>> All we've been hearing from you lot is how we'll be no better off with
>> the NBN than if we kept the copper and migrated people to wireless, how
>> we've already got perfectly good broadband.
>
> Correct.

So Israel's got it wrong as well?

>
>> But now you're changing tack and saying that FTTH would be better but
>> that it's too expensive.
>
> Huh?
>
>> If cost is all you're concerned about and your interested in comparisons
>> why not compare GDP per capita in Australia and Israel,
>
> Why? What possible relevance has GDP got to do with the cost of
> communications infrastructure?

GDP per capita measures a country's relative wealth, compare Australia
to Israel.
We're a wealthy country, we don't need to have K Mart broadband.
You remind me of a silly old pensioner who keeps getting a 20 year old
TV repaired.

Only two of them now I hear, so there's plenty left over for the NBN.

Swampfox

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 7:27:48 AM1/30/12

to

Ya reckon?

Swampfox

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 7:33:02 AM1/30/12

to

So what?
If what you say is true then they're just pissing money up against the
wall when they could run FTTN then let whoever wants FTTP pay for it.
Are they stupid or something?

Swampfox

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 7:41:07 AM1/30/12

to

And you still pluck figures out of thin air, after all these years.
You're lucky you're in a geeky industry where you can bluff your way
through, you wouldn't cut it in the real world.

Now it's $100 billion!!!!
Any advance on 100?
Oy Rool?
Webb?

> Looking at the blow-out of eHealth in Australia over the last decade
> one would consider that ONLY a 50% blow-out might be good news.
>
> Anyway, the NBN in its current form is doomed.

Wrong.

Swampfox

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 7:43:06 AM1/30/12

to

$35.9 Billion, unless you take the Addinall figures from cuckoo land.

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 8:44:27 AM1/30/12

to

That's assuming that the now well-established Labor blow-out factor has
suddenly miraculously disappeared. No, I'm afraid on Labor's track
record of appallingly bad money management, $50 Billion is about the
ballpark. Pity they won't show us their business plan and cost analysis,
for the biggest gamble ever undertaken with Australian people's money.
Then we might be able to give a better estimate. Any idea why they're
hiding this information?

dechucka

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 3:19:04 PM1/30/12

to

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
message news:jg66rs$3el$1...@dont-email.me...

So Labor has given a figure and your statement "That's right... Labor
*still* haven't been able to show how much it will cost" was incorrect

dechucka

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 3:48:27 PM1/30/12

to

"Addinall" <addi...@addinall.net> wrote in message

news:3ff4e667-fd59-405f...@nu6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...

===============================
If it puts us at the "forefront of the next generation of Internet
technology." it will be great

Something you dole bludgers are not quite comfortable with I suppose.

=====================================================

Not sure what dole bludgers think but your theory of "I've got my fast
interenet fuck the rest of the country" is disgusting. Yes we're a big
country so getting decent services like roads, hospitals, education to all
is expensive but we are all Australians and all deserve the benifits of this
great country

Swampfox

unread,

Jan 30, 2012, 5:09:50 PM1/30/12

to

The figure is provided by NBN Co, not the government, NBN CO was
established as a publicly owned corporation under legislation enacted by
the Howard government, it is subject to similar regulatory framework as
any publicly listed company, and is obliged to provide accurate
financial information to it's shareholders, which in this case is the
Commonwealth government.

Here is a list of directors:

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/our-people/board.html

Their CV's are impressive, and only a fool or rank opportunist would
suggest that they have fudged the figures.
The NBN corporate plan is available on their website, along with an
independent report on the plan, parts of which have been selectively
dissembled by the Murdoch press and others, but read it for yourself and
make your own judgement.
$35.9 billion is the most accurate figure we have, and NBN Co have
stated publicly that they expect to make considerable savings on that
figure as a result of the agreement signed with Telstra, an agreement
that Abbott will apparently tear up.

>No, I'm afraid on Labor's track
> record of appallingly bad money management, $50 Billion is about the
> ballpark. Pity they won't show us their business plan and cost analysis,
> for the biggest gamble ever undertaken with Australian people's money.
> Then we might be able to give a better estimate. Any idea why they're
> hiding this information?

There is reams of information available on NBN Co and the NBN itself,
the process could hardly have been more transparent.
You are a victim of the FUD campaign waged by opportunists and the ill
informed.

Addinall

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 1:22:22 AM1/31/12

to

Given no specification has been made public, just the bacl of a beer
coaster design, IF this stupid idea ever got close to being finished
you will not have got change from $80 billion. Probably more given
the idiotic structure of the project.

>
>
>
> >>> Did you even bother to estimate cost
> >>> per head of the Israel proposal compared with the NBN? MA is right again
> >>> - stick to hammer& nails.
>
> >> What's cost got to do with it?
>
> > It goes against lefty philosophy, but money does not grow on trees,
> > nor does just printing more make the world a happier place.
>
> >> Either FTTH is future proof, state of the art technology or it isn't.
>
> > It isn't.
>
> So what is?

Femptocell and Picocell MIMO incorporated into normal building and
transport materials.

Running a bit of plastic pipe into your kitchen might have been 'state
of the art'
in 1986.

>
>
>
> >> All we've been hearing from you lot is how we'll be no better off with
> >> the NBN than if we kept the copper and migrated people to wireless, how
> >> we've already got perfectly good broadband.
>
> > Correct.
>
> So Israel's got it wrong as well?

Israel is a different country. 33% the size of Tasmania and densely
populated. What is right for one country is not right for all
countries.
You dim-witted lefty goons who lack the capacity of thought have
a hard time with that concept I know.

Stick to glueing bits of wood together.

>
>
>
> >> But now you're changing tack and saying that FTTH would be better but
> >> that it's too expensive.
>
> > Huh?
>
> >> If cost is all you're concerned about and your interested in comparisons
> >> why not compare GDP per capita in Australia and Israel,
>
> > Why? What possible relevance has GDP got to do with the cost of
> > communications infrastructure?
>
> GDP per capita measures a country's relative wealth, compare Australia
> to Israel.

It does not. You need to read (and understand) SNA93.

> We're a wealthy country, we don't need to have K Mart broadband.
> You remind me of a silly old pensioner who keeps getting a 20 year old
> TV repaired.
>

You remind me of a high school drop-out that glues bits of wood
together.
Your analogy is apt, directed at the wrong entity. My team pretty
much
pioneered OFT and OFT/Wireless mix in the 80s for Ford, Rolls-Royce,
Jaguar, DuPont et al., then of course I carried on with all forms of
communication architectures through the 80s, 90s, the Oughts and
Tweens. The fact that some thirty years after the event, some
ridiculous luddites are describing fixed OFT as 'future' is amazing.

It is you hanging onto the 18" Hitachi Telly circa 1988 (it was good
enough then, and it was the future then, so it must still be true...)
whilst those of us that read more widely than the footy results
have moved on.

And why are we buying two?
Are you suggesting we dismantle the ADF so we can save money
so that ill-educated twonks like yourself can watch more telly?

>
> >> then tell me whether we can afford it or not.
>
> > We can't afford the waste building an idiotic network that serves no
> > purpose.
>
> >> Stick to calculus and C++, you're hopeless at anything else.
>
> > Stick to banging things with a hammer.
>
> > Fucking retard.
> > Mark Addinall.

Fucking retard.

Mark Addinall.

Addinall

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 1:34:20 AM1/31/12

to

Nope. All of my projects have come in on budget and time.
Estimation is a key part of project management. Something quite
lost on you peasants. There are a number of formal methods
to aid in the total life cycle of a project, some have clever names.
But they all boild down to careful and methodical planning.

> You're lucky you're in a geeky industry where you can bluff your way
> through, you wouldn't cut it in the real world.
>

What? The 'real world' making letterboxes for people?
In the 'real world' you get to wash my windows.

If left alone. Yes. That amount of money is easily bled.
Juliar Gillard is spending $1,000,000 per DAY at the moment
on a trivial part of eHealth. Trying to get one computer to pass
a HL7 transaction to another computer. Only spent a decade
and a BILLION dollars trying to do that feat of magic. Still,
Labor has earmarked ANOTHER half a BILLION dollars for
this year. The development stopped last week as they discovered
that each team had a different version of the specifications,
and out of the 24 specifications that make up the system, after a
decade,
only four had been completed. So, ten years on, and a cost blow-out
of around 2000% to implement a trivial transaction is indicative
of what we can expect. I'd say NBNCo would have to be kissed
by the Lucky Fairy (not Bob Brown) to make it in at $100 BILLION.

More likely, as usually happens, when the $100 BILLION is used up,
the people involved slowly retire and the project becomes yet another
government SEP.

> Any advance on 100?
> Oy Rool?
> Webb?
>
> > Looking at the blow-out of eHealth in Australia over the last decade
> > one would consider that ONLY a 50% blow-out might be good news.
>
> > Anyway, the NBN in its current form is doomed.
>
> Wrong.
>
>

Wanna bet?

Stupid cunt.

Mark Addinall.

Tomasso

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 2:26:04 AM1/31/12

to

Only when the price goes down...

> Running a bit of plastic pipe into your kitchen might have been 'state
> of the art' in 1986.

Challenge for some.

T.

Swampfox

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 2:35:35 AM1/31/12

to

Why on earth haven't you been able to convince anyone in the know about
this?
I mean if you're on the money here, and I've got no reason to think
otherwise, then I assume that there are plenty of other network
engineers who feel the same way, so why and how has the government
received the advice that it has?
If it's as dopey as you say and you're as switched on as you say surely
it would have been shouted down from day one.
Rudd didn't dream it up on his own, and there's no one else in politics
smart enough to design it, so it must have been designed and built on
the advice of experts.
I've cast around all over the place and I can only find a handful of
people with your attitude, I discount politicians here.
Why are you pissing in the wind?

I don't use glue very often, 500ml of PVA lasts me years.

I've got a nice wide screen LCD thanks, but my car's an '88 model.

Because we're contracted to buy them.

> Are you suggesting we dismantle the ADF so we can save money
> so that ill-educated twonks like yourself can watch more telly?

Not dismantle it, but it surely needs a broom through it.
I know a bloke who's making $150k per year cleaning out gutters on an
ADF contract, if they're clean when he gets to the job he gets paid $250
for taking a photo and emailing it on his phone, the waste is astronomical.
They're untouchable, immune from scrutiny.

Addinall

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 2:44:48 AM1/31/12

to

On Jan 31, 8:09 am, Swampfox <noi...@whocares.com> wrote:
> On 31/01/2012 12:44 AM, Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 30/01/2012 11:43 PM, Swampfox wrote:
> >> On 30/01/2012 8:14 PM, Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax wrote:
> >>> On 30/01/2012 4:41 PM, Swampfox wrote:
> >>>> On 30/01/2012 4:11 PM, Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax wrote:
> >>>>> On 30/01/2012 2:32 PM, dechucka wrote:
>

> >>>>>> "Addinall" <addin...@addinall.net> wrote in message

Huh? The boss only holds an undergraduate degree. Spent 26
six years with the same company in ITC! And hightailed it
with his CFO when the cops started to hand out warrants for
bribery and corruption around his department! Sounds liuke
an IDEAL Labor candidate to fling $50 BILLION at!

And who got the prime supplier contract for the NBN?
Oh lookee! Squigly's old company! Not a tender in sight either!

> and only a fool or rank opportunist would
> suggest that they have fudged the figures.

They haven't published any.

> The NBN corporate plan is available on their website, along with an
> independent report on the plan, parts of which have been selectively
> dissembled by the Murdoch press and others, but read it for yourself and
> make your own judgement.

I have. It's crap.

Let's look at the info on the website.

"NBN Co is committed to delivering the leading edge broadband service
to all Australians by leveraging the three types of technology
available - fibre, fixed wireless and satellite, depending on
location."

Putting high speed broadband into areas where it already exists, and
providing leading-edge technology at vasly slower speeds to thos who
have vastly slower speeds now. The are committed to providing OFT
broadband to the 40% of Australians who either don't want ti, or can't
afford it.

"Our fibre network

As new devices and applications continue to rapidly drive bandwidth
demand and usage growth, "

Which is plain to everyone except Conjob and the dimwits like MarshGas
here, is plainly MOBILE devices.

" NBN Co is developing the future-proof solution that will enable
access to superfast broadband regardless of where you live."

But not where you are.

"Our network will also enable Australia to catch up with the rest of
the world and prepare itself for future technological advances.

More and more people are using the Internet as a part of their daily
lives."

That is not true at all.

"The average per user monthly volume of traffic downloaded on a fixed
broadband connection increased 21% to 9.2GB in the six months to June
2010*. This continues the long-term trend of circa 50% annual growth
in internet traffic, a trend consistent with international online
behaviour.
*(According to the ABS’ Internet Activity Study)"

Which ABS study? It is usual when quoting the work of the ABS a link
to the data or report is customary. Not just "The ABS sez so". This
fluff would fail high school projects. That is why it looks so
polished to the ill-educated I suppose.

"The technology we utilised 5 years ago, that delivered speeds of
around 256kbps, is no longer viable today".

Hey? In 2000 Telstra offered xDSL at 256/64, 512/128 and 1500/256
kbps. That is twelve years ago. Not five. And 256 kbps was the
slowest product on sale. Have these dimwits done ANY networking in
the past?
Late 2000/early 2001 ISPs started rolling out thier own DSLAMs into
exchanges. BY 2002 many ISPs offered 8 Mbps. In the last half of
2006 and start of 2007 iiNet had DSLAMs in hundreds of exchanges and
offered the first 'Naked' ADSL2+ product shortly after I left the
company. THAT was five years ago. Naked ADSL2+ at up to 24 Mbps.
Where the fuck is the information on the web page coming from? It's
WRONG.

"Consequently, we cannot assume that what we use today will be
adequate in the next few years. We expect that fibre will allow for
growth and development in the future. 93% of Australian premises will
be connected by fibre and will receive a high-speed broadband network
that will provide superfast speeds."

Well, 12 Mbps in the affordable slot. Which isn't much of an
improvement. In fact a retrograde step for many. I could get 17 Mbps
on my copper a month ago at FAR cheaper rates than the entry level
NBNCo OFT.

> $35.9 billion is the most accurate figure we have, and NBN Co have
> stated publicly that they expect to make considerable savings on that
> figure

Yeah. Join the line on the left for Flying Pigs.

> as a result of the agreement signed with Telstra, an agreement
> that Abbott will apparently tear up.

After paying compensation to my shares.
Labor have locked in "can't release" contracts.
Fucking idiots. Bit like the supporters.

"Satellite

People in homes, small businesses and indigenous communities in some
of the most remote areas of Australia will be among the first users of
a new broadband satellite service provided over the NBN."

Too late. I stuck satellite services out there in 1999, and Telstra
have just rolled fiber all the way through Arnhem Land. The 'future
proof' left wing luddites are exactly twelve years behind the rest of
the industry. Ha!

"NBN Co's Interim Satellite Service will be available to eligible
individuals and small businesses on the mainland and across Tasmania
from July 2011, with the first priority being given to those who
currently have no alternate access to broadband services. Eligible
households, small businesses and communities will then need to order
their service via a participating retail service provider."

This means, that those of you stuck on Pan-Am-Sat2 or Pan-Am-Sat8 on
Ku band, get to stay exactly where you are. But we'll call it
"improved". Dunno why, it just is....

According to the "Company Plan", just released, as of now the NBN is
supposed to have 35,000 active subscribers.
They have 4,000 if you count the 2,000 poor sods on the aforementioned
'improved' (but exactly the same) satellite service! So from day one
they have managed 2000 ish subscribers. They have managed just over
5.7% of the VERY FIRST GOAL in the plan! That suggest the rest of it
is toilet paper. In twent one weeks time the 'plan' states they will
have 116,000 active subscribers. Any takers as to the actual number?
Hmmmm????

>
> >No, I'm afraid on Labor's track
> > record of appallingly bad money management, $50 Billion is about the
> > ballpark. Pity they won't show us their business plan and cost analysis,
> > for the biggest gamble ever undertaken with Australian people's money.
> > Then we might be able to give a better estimate. Any idea why they're
> > hiding this information?
>
> There is reams of information available on NBN Co and the NBN itself,
> the process could hardly have been more transparent.

Why is none of it published?

> You are a victim of the FUD campaign waged by opportunists and the ill
> informed.

No. I am an ITC manager that can spot a doomed project.

Mark Addinall.

Swampfox

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 2:56:09 AM1/31/12

to

Timber letterboxes went the way of lace up boots, you need to catch up.

> In the 'real world' you get to wash my windows.

Give me the address and for $80 an hour they'll be squeaky clean.

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 4:16:16 AM1/31/12

to

I have no interest in money other than what I can buy with it, based on
my limited dealings the finance industry is made up almost entirely of
spivs, incompetents and hucksters.
I find it all excruciatingly boring but from time to time I get sick of
4% interest and move some cash around, a bloke I played cricket with
years ago explained franked dividends and CGT concessions to me one day
when we were rained off, if it's good enough for the big end of town
it's good enough for me.
I selected my shares based on companies that didn't outsource jobs or
force their employees onto AWA's, I was doing OK last time I checked, at
least I think it was.

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 6:32:19 AM1/31/12

to

"Given a figure" and "show how much it will cost" can result in very
different values, especially where "yes, we have no business plan" Labor
are concerned. HTH

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 6:38:41 AM1/31/12

to

Equally disgusting is your theory of "I've chosen to live out in the
sticks and I want my fast internet and I want the rest of you to pay for
it."

keithr

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 6:50:28 AM1/31/12

to

On 31/01/2012 6:44 PM, Addinall wrote:

> No. I am an ITC manager that can spot a doomed project.

Nah you are a $35/hour web rat. A trade considered in the industry as
being only marginally above Java coders.

> Mark Addinall.
>

Swampfox

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 7:33:08 AM1/31/12

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 9:10:25 AM1/31/12

to

I won't bother shooting down all this clearly fabricated waffle. But
I'll just puncture your blown out balloon with a simple point - where in
the documentation you cite is the cost of buying out Telstra and Optus
taken into account? I didn't spot that. And how much is that going to be
(this week)? Oh, and I didn't spot a business case either. Where exactly
might that be hiding?

dechucka

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 5:07:42 PM1/31/12

to

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jg8jrs$kia$1...@dont-email.me...

really if you didn't have people "out in the sticks" you'd be living in a
very poor and hungry country

dechucka

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 5:10:15 PM1/31/12

to

"Tomasso" <t...@sso.com.au> wrote in message
news:08qdnXN5yuArb7rS...@westnet.com.au...

I thought you are a bludging Public Servant.

dechucka

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 5:16:58 PM1/31/12

to

snip

And why are we buying two?
Are you suggesting we dismantle the ADF so we can save money
so that ill-educated twonks like yourself can watch more telly?

====================================

If you want the ADF you pay for it :-)

dechucka

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 5:20:51 PM1/31/12

to

"Swampfox" <noi...@whocares.com> wrote in message
news:jg86qs$p12$1...@dont-email.me...

Letterboxes? Sheer luxury, no mail delivery here

BTW Lace up boots are still very much in and very useful

Tomasso

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 5:55:37 PM1/31/12

to

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:bLGdnRMNHuRA-7XS...@westnet.com.au...

Far from it.

dechucka

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 6:05:54 PM1/31/12

to

"Tomasso" <t...@sso.com.au> wrote in message

news:EtOdnXoMFpL57LXS...@westnet.com.au...

Sorry aren't you an Academic at one of our Public Universities. AND there
should have been a :-) on my last post

keithr

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 6:14:03 PM1/31/12

to

On 31/01/2012 11:44 PM, Addinall wrote:
> On Jan 31, 9:50 pm, keithr<kei...@nowhere.com.au> wrote:
>> On 31/01/2012 6:44 PM, Addinall wrote:
>>
>>> No. I am an ITC manager that can spot a doomed project.
>>
>> Nah you are a $35/hour web rat. A trade considered in the industry as
>> being only marginally above Java coders.
>>
>>
> Snigger.

https://www.elance.com/s/addinall/

Quote

Overview
Minimum Hourly Rate $35

Senior software engineer. Twenty seven years of experience. Master of
Science IT (Sheffield 90). Based in Australia. Micro, mini and mainframe
experience. Based in Brisbane, Australia. I have been a contractor most
of my life and am used to working autonomously. Worked on projects
ranging from a few thousand dollars upwards to a billion dollars. Served
in the regular Army prior to joining IT.

I'll see your snigger and raise you a ROFL

dechucka

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 6:37:28 PM1/31/12

to

"keithr" <kei...@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message
news:4f28...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

My daughter charges more than that for tutoring

Addinall

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 6:57:39 PM1/31/12

to

That's a new way of describing prostitution.

Mark Addinall.

Addinall

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 6:56:38 PM1/31/12

to

So, in between gigs I will fill in doing bit work. Better than
joining you on the dole.

And what wonderous things do you do with your spare time?

Mark Addinall.

Addinall

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 7:12:32 PM1/31/12

to

On Jan 31, 11:06 pm, Gordon Levi <gor...@address.invalid> wrote:

> Addinall <addin...@addinall.net> wrote:
> >On Jan 30, 1:32 pm, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> Seems Israel has the same plans as Aus " it aims to put Israel at the
> >> forefront of the next generation of Internet technology." OK ours is more
> >> expensive but so what
>
> >Cost/benefit.
>
> Suppose that the estimates from every, admittedly biased, source so
> far are accurate. The NBN will not cost us anything from general
> revenue and will return about 2% over the cost of borrowing the money
> to pay for it.

This is Labornomics in action I suppose.
Where is the money going to come from if not
general revenue? The magical money tree?

The money you Labor idiots are pissing against the wall will never be
recovered. The best we can do is sack the government as
quickly as possible before they can do to much more damage.

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Jan 31, 2012, 8:36:33 PM1/31/12

to

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 2:35:54 AM2/1/12

to

Why should I have to pay for a service to country people, which I
neither want nor need? And many or them don't want it; even fewer need
it. I'm quite happy for them to build a CBN and raise the funds
themselves to do so.

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 2:43:49 AM2/1/12

to

If you get a farming subsidy for your farming productivity which flows
into the economy, then so you should.

keithr

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 5:00:47 AM2/1/12

to

I did get the dole once for 3 weeks back in 1964, I didn't ask for it
but they gave it to me anyway. Since then,I haven't had a day out of
work. My current gig has lasted 15 years.

> And what wonderous things do you do with your spare time?

I help rescue people in distress at sea.

keithr

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 6:49:42 AM2/1/12

to

On 1/02/2012 11:26 AM, Addinall wrote:

> Perhaps the government would have been better off hiring a marketing
> Guru
> to consider if this fucking network was wanted by anyone?
>
> Mark Addinall.

Marky doesn't want it, therefore nobody wants it. Arrogance at it's finest.

Addinall

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 3:27:49 PM2/1/12

to

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 6:17:03 PM2/1/12

to

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 6:48:54 PM2/1/12

to

You do have access to infrastructure. You even have quite adequate
internet access and you could get even faster for a price.

dechucka

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 7:21:05 PM2/1/12

to

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgcj0q$n6v$2...@dont-email.me...

Adequate? Oh that's OK for the country is it

> and you could get even faster for a price.

. I'm going to I believe it is a $38 billion cost for 97% of the country to
have access

Addinall

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 8:01:43 PM2/1/12

to

On Feb 2, 10:21 am, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillard_l...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
> messagenews:jgcj0q$n6v$2...@dont-email.me...

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 2/02/2012 10:32 AM, dechucka wrote:
>

> >> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillard_l...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
> >> messagenews:jgch53$dre$3...@dont-email.me...

> >>> On 2/02/2012 9:31 AM, dechucka wrote:
>

> >>>> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillard_l...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
> >>>> messagenews:jgaqfc$k6s$2...@dont-email.me...

> >>>>> On 1/02/2012 4:16 PM, dechucka wrote:
>

> >>>>>> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillard_l...@promises.are.invalid>
> >>>>>> wrote in
> >>>>>> messagenews:jga4ur$uep$1...@dont-email.me...

FTTH.? Nah.

Mark Addinall.

dechucka

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 8:34:59 PM2/1/12

to

"Addinall" <addi...@addinall.net> wrote in message

news:8b738a45-0531-4544...@pk8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...

==============================

For higher speed interenet than they have now. iirc app 90% to have FTTH 8%
wireless rest satalite ( poor buggers) , I could well be wrong with those
figures

Mark Addinall.

Addinall

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 9:15:20 PM2/1/12

to

Not really. I had 17Mbps on my copper until FTTH was installed in
December.
I don't want to spend a lot of money on my connectivity account as I
do not
use a lot of bandwidth. This last month (January) has been unusual
for me
at a download of just under 15GB. New machines. Downloaded UBUNTU
11.10 (fucking rubbish), Fedora 16 (good distro apart from the MMI)
and
Solaris 10 for my VMs (great as always).

Normally I hover around 5-6 GB per month down, and perhaps 300 MB up.
So if given NO choice but to accept the NBN idiocy, I'd take the 12
Mbps
package. That package from iiNet gives me 20GB + 20GB 12/1 for
$49.95 per month (no telephone). A lot more expensive than my $29
per month ADSL2+ @ 20GB 17/1. So I would probably consider going
totally mobile if for some bizarre reason Telstra turned off this FTTH
(which aint going to happen).

> iirc app 90% to have FTTH 8%
> wireless rest satalite ( poor buggers) , I could well be wrong with those
> figures

I think the NBN quotes 93% - 4% - 3%

But those numbers are just made up.

The fictional 7% aren't going to see any increase in speed. And those
that do get FTTH will not see any increase in speed unless they only
surf and stream Australian content.

My FTTH runs at 30/1.5 Mbps with a ping of 4-10ms within Australia
(and New Zealand).

Download Speed: 30589kbps (3823.6 KB/sec transfer rate)

Upload Speed: 1370kbps (171.3 KB/sec transfer rate)

Ping: 6ms

But this slows WAAAAAAYYYYYY down when crossing the pond. So streaming
South Park from California - No difference at all. About 4 Mbps.

So, is it worth $50 BILLION to keep those in the country on SLOW
internet, and offer yet another fast choice to those of us that are
already serviced by Fiber, HFC and decent copper?

Mark Addinall.

>
> Mark Addinall.

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 10:49:31 PM2/1/12

to

That's OK. Everybody covering the costs of the services required to meet
the needs. But you don't have a need for the Rolls Royce end of
highspeed broadband. If you do *want* it however, you can easily get it
as a personal expenditure. Why not ask MA for a price estimate? He might
go one better than the NBN and even produce a properly costed business
plan for you! You could probably arrange for something hybrid for a few
grand, which will end up delivering as good or better speeds than the NBN.

dechucka

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 11:18:00 PM2/1/12

to

"Addinall" <addi...@addinall.net> wrote in message

news:6f6a2a4c-d0fe-44d2...@ir9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

=============================================

lucky you, pity the rest of us

> iirc app 90% to have FTTH 8%
> wireless rest satalite ( poor buggers) , I could well be wrong with those
> figures

I think the NBN quotes 93% - 4% - 3%

But those numbers are just made up.

The fictional 7% aren't going to see any increase in speed. And those
that do get FTTH will not see any increase in speed unless they only
surf and stream Australian content.

My FTTH runs at 30/1.5 Mbps with a ping of 4-10ms within Australia
(and New Zealand).

Download Speed: 30589kbps (3823.6 KB/sec transfer rate)

Upload Speed: 1370kbps (171.3 KB/sec transfer rate)

Ping: 6ms

But this slows WAAAAAAYYYYYY down when crossing the pond. So streaming
South Park from California - No difference at all. About 4 Mbps.

So, is it worth $50 BILLION to keep those in the country on SLOW
internet, and offer yet another fast choice to those of us that are
already serviced by Fiber, HFC and decent copper?

======================================

Yes

dechucka

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 11:23:15 PM2/1/12

to

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgd15c$qts$1...@dont-email.me...

The NBN is infrastructure for the country so we everybody covering the costs
of the services required to meet the needs. If you are going to do something
you do it properly not muck around with hobbling together 2nd rate systems.
My XT was great probably for most things my 386 could do the job but for
speed and efficiency my current system is better.

Love to see what hybrid system could deliver me NBN speeds for a few grand.
I'd be in it now

Addinall

unread,

Feb 1, 2012, 11:48:37 PM2/1/12

to

On Feb 2, 1:49 pm, Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

<gillard_l...@promises.are.invalid> wrote:
> On 2/02/2012 10:35 AM, dechucka wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillard_l...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
> > messagenews:jgcha7$dre$4...@dont-email.me...

> >> On 2/02/2012 9:33 AM, dechucka wrote:
>

> >>> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillard_l...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
> >>> messagenews:jgaq0j$itg$1...@dont-email.me...

> >>>> On 1/02/2012 4:08 PM, dechucka wrote:
>

> >>>>> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillard_l...@promises.are.invalid>
> >>>>> wrote in
> >>>>> messagenews:jga83j$d2j$1...@dont-email.me...

> >>>>>> On 1/02/2012 9:07 AM, dechucka wrote:
>

> >>>>>>> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillard_l...@promises.are.invalid>
> >>>>>>> wrote in
> >>>>>>> messagenews:jg8jrs$kia$1...@dont-email.me...

unread,

Feb 2, 2012, 1:05:37 AM2/2/12

to

By saying "yes", you realize that you have just said that it would be a
good idea to spend $50 billion to maintain the status quo. I know the
lefties like to spend unwisely, but this is taking it to the absolute
extreme.

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Feb 2, 2012, 1:16:27 AM2/2/12

to

But your connectivity to the broader net will end up being "second rate"
even after the "first rate" $50 billion spend-up. The Porsche analogy
fits well here. BTW, the reason more people in Germany buy Ferraris and
Lamborghinis than Italy (or any other European country) is because it's
the only country where you can realize their full performance. You're on
the speed-limited motorway no matter what sort of sports car internet
connection you get.

> My XT was great probably for most things my 386 could do
> the job but for speed and efficiency my current system is better.

Your 386 wouldn't be up to the internet in (near) any form regardless,
so the mention of it is irrelevant.

> Love to see what hybrid system could deliver me NBN speeds for a few
> grand. I'd be in it now

Best ask MA. He might be able to do a rough costing for you.*

* Bearing in mind that you will never realize anything like to 100 mbps
"advertised" for the NBN.

Swampfox

unread,

Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax

unread,

Feb 2, 2012, 2:42:18 AM2/2/12

to

But timber letterboxes are the envy of the neighbours if you do them
right. I made mine big enough to take A4 without bending, and with a
perspex door flap to see if "you have mail", without leaving the comfort
of a beer on the balcony chair. All but invisible from the outside,
since it uses the picket fence gap as the mail slot and the whole things
(except flap) is encapsulated in jasmine.

Swampfox

unread,

Feb 2, 2012, 2:53:13 AM2/2/12

to

You've got too much time on your hands. ;-)

Addinall

unread,

Feb 2, 2012, 3:17:54 AM2/2/12

to

On Feb 2, 4:39 pm, Swampfox <noi...@whocares.com> wrote:
> On 1/02/2012 12:05 AM, Addinall wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 31, 10:38 pm, "Peter Webb"<r.peter.webb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> "Swampfox"<noi...@whocares.com> wrote in message
>

> >>news:jg8mlc$2ob$2...@dont-email.me...

>
> >>> On 31/01/2012 10:29 PM, Peter Webb wrote:
>
> >>>> "Swampfox"<noi...@whocares.com> wrote in message

> >>>>news:jg8e9k$qqs$1...@dont-email.me...

> >>>>> On 31/01/2012 8:51 PM, Peter Webb wrote:
>
> >>>>>> "Swampfox"<noi...@whocares.com> wrote in message

> >>>>>>news:jg8bpl$f2v$1...@dont-email.me...
> >>>>>>> On 31/01/2012 8:06 PM, Peter Webb wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> <snip>
>
> >>>>>>>> Why this obsession with speed?
>
> >>>>>>> So what's wrong with a 1200 baud modem then?
>
> >>>>>> Too slow for web surfing.
>
> >>>>> OK, a 14400 modem then, that was my first internet connection, I
> >>>>> thought it was the bee's knees.
>
> >>>> Well if it worked OK for you, that's fine.
>
> >>>>>>> <snip>
>
> >>>>>> Do you have any other questions, or do you understand everything in my
> >>>>>> original post?
>
> >>>> You seem to think the only two alternatives are 14400 bps and the NBN.
> >>>> They are not. Whether you think 14,400 bps is OK for internet or not has
> >>>> no bearing on whether we should be building the NBN. It is like trying
> >>>> to justify that the government should buy us all Porsches by asking what
> >>>> is wrong with riding a horse.
>
> >>> That analogy is plain dumb, and completely irrelevant.
>
> >> As was yours.
>
> >>> A better one would be do we need a two lane or a four lane freeway.
>
> >> In some places 2 lanes, in some 4 lanes.
>
> >> So, why are we turning every street into a 4 lane freeway?
>
> >>>> This isn't the choice we have to make.
>
> >> Again, you continue to pretend that we have only two choices. We don't.
>
> >> Here is the actual question. The house I am living in has a 12 Mbps internet
> >> connection. Why did the government pay Telstra $9b to rip out this perfectly
> >> good service, so that the NBN can pay an average of $4000 per house, to
> >> provide me with an identical 12 Mbps service.
>
> > Because it is "future proofed" whatever the fuck that means.
>
> > Ten years ago people where still running Wyse 30 terminals hanging
> > from a STALLION EasyTerm II Terminal server. About the same time
> > I put my last UCSD P-System to bed forever. A decade later, we don't
> > see too many EasyIO boards or computers talking RS-232.
>
> > 30/1.5 Mbps tonight from here in South Bank (to a local Sydney
> > server).
>
> > Mark.
>
> I envy you.
> My Optus cable is alive again today, it's been dead 6 times so far this
> year for a total of 36 hours, following a three day hiatus last
> November, and these clowns won't even maintain a pissy news server.
> Government owned bad, private industry good, bullshit I say.

Which government department hosts free NNTP servers?

The answer to that is NONE.

Can't blame Optus for losing the NNTP server. No fucker uses it,
no-one wants to pay for it. And they have to support dead-heads like
you,
who can't manage to actually use a news client properly, but
doesn't mind sharing expertise with all and sundry.

Mark Addinall

Swampfox

unread,

Feb 2, 2012, 4:36:20 AM2/2/12

to

You're one crazy fucker.

Gordon Levi

unread,

Feb 2, 2012, 6:39:21 AM2/2/12

to

Addinall <addi...@addinall.net> wrote:

>On Jan 31, 11:06 pm, Gordon Levi <gor...@address.invalid> wrote:

>> Addinall <addin...@addinall.net> wrote:
>> >On Jan 30, 1:32 pm, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> >> Seems Israel has the same plans as Aus " it aims to put Israel at the
>> >> forefront of the next generation of Internet technology." OK ours is more
>> >> expensive but so what
>>

>> >Cost/benefit.
>>
>> Suppose that the estimates from every, admittedly biased, source so
>> far are accurate. The NBN will not cost us anything from general
>> revenue and will return about 2% over the cost of borrowing the money
>> to pay for it.
>
>This is Labornomics in action I suppose.
>Where is the money going to come from if not
>general revenue? The magical money tree?

It's not complicated. The money comes from sources similar to those
that are used to finance every new venture that requires capital. The
capitalists expect a share in an asset and they expect to be able to
finance the venture by borrowing money at a lower rate than the
expected returns. The Commonwealth is in a unique position to build
the NBN Co network because it can borrow money at around 3.5%, is
satisfied with a low rate of return on capital, can coerce customers
into using the network and can prevent competition.
>
>The money you Labor idiots are pissing against the wall will never be
>recovered. The best we can do is sack the government as
>quickly as possible before they can do to much more damage.
>
>
>
>
>> In other words, the cost to the tax payer is
>> approximately zero. Do you think, unlike the South Koreans and the
>> Israelis, that there is no benefit in being "at the forefront of the
>> next generation of Internet technology"?
>
>Christ you lefties are stupid cunts. In Korea, FTTH happens in Seol.
>Tasmania is 33% the size of Tasmania, they are going to run
>the fiber (all of it) overhead as the state power company is
>the prime contractor and will be using existing power poles.
>Israel is costing the rool-out at $2-3 BILLION.

If "stupid" is defined as not understanding this paragraph, I'm
stupid. Do you understand it?
>
>>
>> There is no doubt that the Australian government could achieve a
>> better return on capital for us by, say, starting a new bank or
>> insurance company. I would prefer it if they invested in areas that
>> benefit us and that private enterprise won't risk. Why don't you?
>
>What are the cost/benefits?

Let's leave the benefits until you understand the cost.