[LINK] Peter Martin Economist (?) blames Labor for NBN!

Frank O'Connor francisoconnor3 at bigpond.com
Thu Aug 17 16:32:38 AEST 2017

But, an interesting and very-much-to-the-point rant.

For the record, the same thing happens to me every time I comment on the LNP's farcical (and tragic for the country) NBN.

A waste of money, time, and effort and a compromise of the country's future for the next 20 to thirty years ... all sheeted home to people who glory in their own technological ignorance like Abbott, or seek power without purpose like his 'Mr Broadband', or who are uninspired ignorant flunkies like Fifield, Ergas, Switkowski and Morrow.

The network designed for yesterday that Australia's building for tomorrow ...

Just my 2 cents worth ...
Give me a coffee, and no-one gets hurt

> On 17 Aug 2017, at 3:46 pm, Craig Sanders <cas at taz.net.au> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:38:42AM +1000, David Lochrin wrote:
>> And neither HFC nor the copper network were engineered to be part of a
>> broadband network in the first place
> HFC is basically cable TV repurposed for internet use.  Which might have made
> sense in the US where cable tv is almost ubiquitous.  It never made much sense
> in Australia.
> It certainly doesn't make any sense at all as part of the NBN, which is
> (was?) an infrastructure project with the purpose of replacing old analog
> communications infrastructure with modern digital infrastructure suitable for
> the next 50-100 years.
> FFS! Optical fibre has almost no attentuation (effectively zero compared to
> copper or any other cable carrying electrical rather than light signals)
> so supports extremely long cable lengths with little or no signal loss or
> distortion, and can carry numerous multiplexed laser signals - allowing for
> in-place upgrades without having to dig up the fucking cable and replace it.
> What's so fucking difficult to understand about that being inherently superior
> to electrical cables?
> Putting copper cable in at any part of the infrastructure side of the link
> (i.e. outside the customer premises) is either fatuously stupid and ignorant
> or criminally corrupt. or both.
> Copper cables served us well in their day. that day has long past. and
> the cables in the ground have NOT been maintained at all well, especially
> not since the corporatisation of Telecom and later the privatisation of
> Telstra...T's managemement have known for many years that copper cable was
> dead or dying and had no desire to waste money on maintaining a dead-end
> technology.  They must have laughed their fucking heads off when they
> forced the government to make the NBN buy their shitty copper network from
> them, along with all their un-remediated asbestos-lined pits (thus delaying
> the NBN's rollout until Abbott could come in and give it a new, exciting,
> kamikaze-oriented mission)
> So what makes actual sense (financial sense or any other kind of sense)?
> 1. Spending many tens of billions of dollars replacing the nation's
> communication network with something modern and usuable for many decades to
> come?
> or
> 2. spending roughly the same amount (or more) just doing a crappy patch job on
> it, knowing that it will have to be done properly anyway within a decade?
> Fuck the Liberals and their bullshit about "Cost-Benefit Analysis" and their
> bogus financial figures.  That's just a stupid slogan they troll out whenever
> they object to something. They never want it applied to anything THEY want
> to do, like cutting taxes for the rich and multinationals, or legalising
> currently illegal forms of tax evasion, or marriage equality plebiscites or
> enormous adani coal mines or cashless welfare cards or drug-testing benefit
> recipients.
> craig
> ps: sorry. this grew from the original two-paragraph comment I intended to an
> extended rant.
> --
> craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

More information about the Link mailing list