[LINK] how we got Aussat [was: Re: Link Digest, Vol 175, Issue 41

[David Lochrin]

On Thursday 21 June 2007 15:37, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> But back to my point - the current situation involves a lot of people
> spinning out tales of "plans" who don't have a real understanding of
> what they're saying or else have such a tangential agenda that the
> whole thing is going to be another fiasco. And as David I think
> pointed out, the "vision", what little there is, is so near-sighted
> that it's worthless. Either that or the vision is so mixed as to what
> is intended that it's useless. What is it about this country and its
> 'supposed' leaders? Is it something in the water?

   To be fair the situation is much the same in any "developed" nation.

   I think the problem is that most people naturally think in terms of end results.  So for example, Joe Blow wants TV but really doesn't give two hoots whether it comes via the ether, cable, or fibre, or is digitally encoded or not; the members of this list care because we're professionally involved in one way or another.  And why should Joe Blow worry about the costs of duplication when the costs never affect him in any direct way?

   The political leaders are too busy trying to be media personalities to improve their chances of election, and there's no way rival businesses are going to get together to rationally & selflessly plan a sensible path forward.

     This syndrome is pretty typical of first-world countries.

   The only things which will focus elector's minds on a big scale are things which affect them directly.  I suspect this is why people are now so focussed on global warming, water, and so on.  It's also why LJH pushes the idea that his government is a good economic manager - people know what would happen ~to them~ if there were economic difficulties.

David