Building a Fibre NBN on a Copper budget

[Don McKenzie]

http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/

Watch the 20 minute video on that page.

On 17th July 2013 I delivered a talk at the CommsDay Wholesale and Data Centre Summit in Sydney about the NBN called
“The Ideal Wholesale NBN Market”. Simon Hackett, Internode founder

This talk proposes just a few of the many ways in which the build cost, build time, and operating cost of the FTTH NBN
could be lowered (perhaps dramatically lowered) by auditing the entire existing design and by applying the fruits of
some lateral thinking about what is really needed to make the network work – and what the network can do without.

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


--
Don McKenzie

$30 for an Olinuxino Linux PC:
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/olinuxino.html

The World's Cheapest Computer:
DuinoMite the PIC32 $25 Basic Computer-MicroController
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/the-maximite-computer.html
Add VGA Monitor/TV, and PS2 Keyboard, or use USB Terminal
Arduino Shield, Programmed in Basic, or C.

 

[Frank Slootweg]

http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/

Watch the 20 minute video on that page.

On 17th July 2013 I delivered a talk at the CommsDay Wholesale and
Data Centre Summit in Sydney about the NBN called
?The Ideal Wholesale NBN Market?. Simon Hackett, Internode founder

This talk proposes just a few of the many ways in which the build
cost, build time, and operating cost of the FTTH NBN could be lowered
(perhaps dramatically lowered) by auditing the entire existing design
and by applying the fruits of some lateral thinking about what is
really needed to make the network work ? and what the network can do
without.

Great presentation! Must-'watch' (listen/read) material for NBN
proponents and opponents alike!

Very refreshing to see such a common-sense presentation about the
financial, business, usage, technical, etc.. aspects, without a
political agenda.

Be sure to also read the comments, especially the further comments
from Simon Hackett.

 

[Rod Speed]

http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/

Watch the 20 minute video on that page.

Trouble with that line is that Turdbull has decided to go for FTTN instead.

Some should take him out the back and put a bullet in the back of the neck.

 

[Damian]

Trouble with that line is that Turdbull has decided to go for FTTN
instead.

For obvious reasons. Turnball's not in the business of dragging projects
forever on top of budget blow outs.
He's capable of creative thinking and come up with better solutions. And
FTTN is nothing new. Turnball didn't invent it, he's promoting it.
His idea is cost effective and doesn't hinder the future full fibre network
layout.

On the other hand, you don't believe in FTTN, FTTC, FTTH etc etc.
You believe in leaving the PSTN, POTS as it is, the same way you believe in
leaving the climate change as it is.

The problem is you ain't gonna be around to get your arse kicked if you
happen to be dead wrong, 'cos you will be already dead dead.

NBN FTTH has been a real white elephant giant tortoise so far, and I'm bit
sceptical about the catch phrase of 'fibre on a copper budget'.
Sounds way too optimistic and unrealistic, but can lead to real solutions on
a much lower budget than the current white elephant.

Turnball's solutions aint' that bad, considering out current budget issues.

Some should take him out the back and put a bullet in the back of the
neck.

Oh, you violent violent man!!! )
I'm hoping to find a way to introduce you to Carl William's cell mate.

 

[keithr]

For obvious reasons. Turnball's not in the business of dragging projects
forever on top of budget blow outs.
He's capable of creative thinking and come up with better solutions. And
FTTN is nothing new. Turnball didn't invent it, he's promoting it.
His idea is cost effective and doesn't hinder the future full fibre network
layout.

On the other hand, you don't believe in FTTN, FTTC, FTTH etc etc.
You believe in leaving the PSTN, POTS as it is, the same way you believe in
leaving the climate change as it is.

The problem is you ain't gonna be around to get your arse kicked if you
happen to be dead wrong, 'cos you will be already dead dead.

NBN FTTH has been a real white elephant giant tortoise so far, and I'm bit
sceptical about the catch phrase of 'fibre on a copper budget'.
Sounds way too optimistic and unrealistic, but can lead to real solutions on
a much lower budget than the current white elephant.

Turnball's solutions aint' that bad, considering out current budget issues.

Turnbull is a money man not a techie which explains his priorities.

 

[Rod Speed]

For obvious reasons.

Yeah, someone eventually got it thru his thick skull that wireless
was never gunna be able to do anything like what FTTP can do.

Turnball's not in the business of dragging projects forever on top of
budget blow outs.

But his approach will cost even more than FTTP will.

He's capable of creative thinking and come up with better solutions.

He didn’t with that stupid FTTN approach.

And he didn’t come up with a damned thing either,
let alone any creative thinking. FTTN was what was
proposed by the Dud long before he even got to
be PM and when he discovered that no one was
actually stupid enough to tender to build it, he
went for FTTP regardless of the cost in a desperate
attempt to preserve whatever vestige of credibility he
could manage out of that complete and utter fiasco.

And FTTN is nothing new. Turnball didn't invent it, he's promoting it.

He's not promoting a damned thing, he's stupidly saying
that that is what the coalition will now do instead of flogging
off what had been built of the NBN and going for wireless instead.

His idea is cost effective

Pigs arse it is given that it will have to be replaced by FTTP eventually.

and doesn't hinder the future full fibre network layout.

But dramatically increases the cost of the FTTP we will have eventually.

On the other hand, you don't believe in FTTN, FTTC, FTTH etc etc.

That is a bare faced like. I just don’t see any reason to be
spending anything like $50B NOW when most of us have
a very viable broadband service if we want it.

It makes a lot more sense to be delivering a decent broadband
service to those who can't currently have one using whatever
makes the most sense with those who can't currently have
a decent broadband service.

You believe in leaving the PSTN, POTS as it is,

No I don’t. I know that most are already using
voip and mobiles for most of their phone calls
and that it makes absolutely no sense whatever
to be spending anything like $50B providing
a phone service over the NBN when so few
actually use the PSTN for most of their phone
calls anymore. It makes a lot more sense to
leave the PSTN in place than it ever does to
rip it all out and replace it with FTTP.

the same way you believe in leaving the climate change as it is.

I have enough of a clue to realise that even if Australia
shut down all its power stations overnight, and banned
all cars overnight and everyone either walked or rode
a bike everywhere they wanted to go, that that would
have absolutely no effect what so ever on the world climate.

The problem is you ain't gonna be around to get your arse kicked if you
happen to be dead wrong, 'cos you will be already dead dead.

I won't be wrong on what effect whatever Australia does has on world
climate.

NBN FTTH has been a real white elephant giant tortoise so far, and I'm bit
sceptical about the catch phrase of 'fibre on a copper budget'.

Yeah, its just another mindlessly glib line.

Sounds way too optimistic and unrealistic,

What he proposes with regard to doing FTTP significantly
cheaper isnt. The very fundamental problem with what he
proposes tho is that the cost of whats in each home or
premises is only a tiny part of the total cost of the NBN.

The real reason the cost to the consumer keeps rising
over time in that graph from the NBN is because it has
to be done like that otherwise no one would ever be
stupid enough to sign up for an NBN service when
they can keep using the broadband they already
have for a MUCH lower cost.

That’s also why the NBN has gotten Telstra to rip
out all the copper and cable, so the consumer has
no choice but to use the NBN if they want a
broadband service other than wireless.

but can lead to real solutions on a much lower budget than the current
white elephant.

No, not that much lower, essentially because the
much simpler approach to the boxes in the house
is only a tiny part of the cost of the NBN.

Turnball's solutions aint' that bad,

Completely fucking useless in fact.

considering out current budget issues.

There are no current budget issues when the plug is pulled
on stupiditys like the NBN and Gonski and all the other
spending like a drunken sailor that Labor has done ever
since the voters were actually stupid enough to make
the Dud PM.

Oh, you violent violent man!!! )

I didn’t say I'd to that myself.

I'm hoping to find a way to introduce you to Carl William's cell mate.

Taint gunna happen, he's never gunna get out now.

 

[Rod Speed]

Turnbull is a money man

He's a lot more than just a money man.

He's also a terminal fuckwit on climate change alone.

not a techie which explains his priorities.

Nope. His priority in this case is to produce some marginally
plausible way to bullshit the coalition's way out of their
predicament now that someone has managed to get it thru
his thick skull that his original claim that wireless can do
anything that the NBN can do is complete and utter bullshit.

 

[Damian]

Yeah, someone eventually got it thru his thick skull that wireless
was never gunna be able to do anything like what FTTP can do.

Are you telling me Turnball previously believed in wireless'ing the whole
country without fibre??!!
I find it hard to believe!!!

But his approach will cost even more than FTTP will.

Not correct in terms of what he promises in terms of speed and rollout
completion.
It may or may not cost more to switch the remainder of the PSTN/POTS that
he leaves as it is from the local node onwards, into full fibre network,
eventually.
But, that's still debatable.

He didn’t with that stupid FTTN approach.

That's probably the best he can do. He ain't got no chance stopping the NBN
and leaving the things as it is.

And he didn’t come up with a damned thing either,
let alone any creative thinking. FTTN was what was
proposed by the Dud long before he even got to
be PM and when he discovered that no one was
actually stupid enough to tender to build it, he
went for FTTP regardless of the cost in a desperate
attempt to preserve whatever vestige of credibility he
could manage out of that complete and utter fiasco.

Show me where he proposed FTTN initially!!
Can't find such record and can't remember him making an FTTN proposal.
I only remember Turnball going on and on about it long before he made it
into a coalition broadband policy announcement recently.

He's not promoting a damned thing, he's stupidly saying
that that is what the coalition will now do instead of flogging
off what had been built of the NBN and going for wireless instead.

Coalition won't be able to shut the NBN, even if they come into power by a
landslide majority.
It's already begun and legally they can't stop it.
Sensible approach for them to cut the cost of the project and the drag, is
to implement Turnball's FTTN plan.
That is doable, but not possible to shut the whole fibre NBN project. It's
gone too far politically, economically and legally for that.

Pigs arse it is given that it will have to be replaced by FTTP eventually.

Yes, the keyword is 'eventually'.

But dramatically increases the cost of the FTTP we will have eventually.

Possibly,...... but you are in no place to predict the outcomes of the
future economic circumstances and new technologies that may reduce the cost
of FTTP implementation. It's better approach than the silly drag & the
budget inflation that they've created with the current version of the NBN.
When future spending cuts will kick in for all the spending on NBN, we may
be fighting with our teeth and claws to stay on reasonably good living
conditions.

That is a bare faced like. I just don’t see any reason to be
spending anything like $50B NOW when most of us have
a very viable broadband service if we want it.

It makes a lot more sense to be delivering a decent broadband
service to those who can't currently have one using whatever
makes the most sense with those who can't currently have
a decent broadband service.

And what is that method that makes most sense according to you?!!
Do you have a version of fast broadband for the country or your solution is
'do something'?!

No I don’t. I know that most are already using
voip and mobiles for most of their phone calls
and that it makes absolutely no sense whatever
to be spending anything like $50B providing
a phone service over the NBN when so few
actually use the PSTN for most of their phone
calls anymore. It makes a lot more sense to
leave the PSTN in place than it ever does to
rip it all out and replace it with FTTP.

Turnball's approach still leaves some parts of PSTN, won't it?!
Besides the outcomes of an NBN is much much more than just providing a
phone service.
It's primary outcome is the far wider bandwidth via fibreoptics, which open
up the path to super fast internet, which may open up opportunities for many
many applications that we don't even haven't got a clue right now.

I have enough of a clue to realise that even if Australia
shut down all its power stations overnight, and banned
all cars overnight and everyone either walked or rode
a bike everywhere they wanted to go, that that would
have absolutely no effect what so ever on the world climate.

I haven't met anybody who claims that, given the time frame is 'overnight'.

I won't be wrong on what effect whatever Australia does has on world
climate.

Yep, there won't be any noticeable effect what we do for climate change in
global scale, in your life time for sure.

Yeah, its just another mindlessly glib line.


What he proposes with regard to doing FTTP significantly
cheaper isnt. The very fundamental problem with what he
proposes tho is that the cost of whats in each home or
premises is only a tiny part of the total cost of the NBN.

I presumed he knows his shit enough to know that.

The real reason the cost to the consumer keeps rising
over time in that graph from the NBN is because it has
to be done like that otherwise no one would ever be
stupid enough to sign up for an NBN service when
they can keep using the broadband they already
have for a MUCH lower cost.

NBN has been boasting about super fast and low cost internet.
But, that's not gonna happen as far as lower cost part concerns, right?!

That’s also why the NBN has gotten Telstra to rip
out all the copper and cable, so the consumer has
no choice but to use the NBN if they want a
broadband service other than wireless.


No, not that much lower, essentially because the
much simpler approach to the boxes in the house
is only a tiny part of the cost of the NBN.


Completely fucking useless in fact.


There are no current budget issues when the plug is pulled
on stupiditys like the NBN and Gonski and all the other

I bet my arse it ain't gonna happen. Besides, the way Gonski reforms are
being tweaked, it can hardly be called Gonski now.
NBN will go ahead regardless of who's coming to power, coalition can only
tweak it the way Turnball wants it or they can only slow it down.
Not to mention it's slow enough as it is though.

spending like a drunken sailor that Labor has done ever
since the voters were actually stupid enough to make
the Dud PM.



I didn’t say I'd to that myself.

Carl Williams didn't do most of his killings by himself either.
I'm sure you've got enough saving to hire a hit man.
Problem is that, I don't think you got balls to do the things you would
like to do, right?!!! )

 

[Damian]

He's a lot more than just a money man.

He's also a terminal fuckwit on climate change alone.


Nope. His priority in this case is to produce some marginally
plausible way to bullshit the coalition's way out of their
predicament now that someone has managed to get it thru
his thick skull that his original claim that wireless can do
anything that the NBN can do is complete and utter bullshit.

With the existing technologies, wireless won't get anywhere near a fibre
NBN.
But, where did he say "wireless can do anything fibre NBN can do:"?!!
Sounds bit too futuristic to me.

 

[Gordon Levi]

http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/

Watch the 20 minute video on that page.

On 17th July 2013 I delivered a talk at the CommsDay Wholesale and Data Centre Summit in Sydney about the NBN called
“The Ideal Wholesale NBN Market”. Simon Hackett, Internode founder

This talk proposes just a few of the many ways in which the build cost, build time, and operating cost of the FTTH NBN
could be lowered (perhaps dramatically lowered) by auditing the entire existing design and by applying the fruits of
some lateral thinking about what is really needed to make the network work – and what the network can do without.

The author presents a good case based on his position as a major
Retail Service Provider. He is advocating handing over a larger share
of the cost, and therefore the profit, to RSPs. The current NBN Co
Network Terminating Unit has four ports and can offer a choice of RSPs
but Hackett wants to alter the system so that there is only a single
RSP and even proposes that the RSP should supply the NTU. While
Hackett is probably right and the extra ports will be largely unused
they provide a unique opportunity for imaginative extra services. The
provision of a free government (and other) services port seems an
excellent idea. Eliminating the POTS ports would also channel the
supply of telephone services via an RSP whereas the NBN Co design
allows a telephone-only connection using the customers existing
telephones.

His proposal to revert to the original 7 points of interconnect also
limits competition. I believe the additional points of interconnect
were added at the instigation of the ACCC because they would allow
more localised service providers and to avoid making existing telco's
fibre useless. They do increase the costs for a national RSP.

The costings that Hackett presents are alarming but he does not
provide an estimate of any savings to NBN Co of his changes let alone
an estimate of the added costs to the consumer. I agree that the cost
of the NBN should be tax payer subsidised. I don't see that
transferring a small fraction of those costs to the consumer via the
RSP is a benefit especially if it limits access to the NBN.

 

[Frank Slootweg]

The author presents a good case based on his position as a major
Retail Service Provider. He is advocating handing over a larger share
of the cost, and therefore the profit, to RSPs.

Huh!? I don't think he's advocating any such thing. Yes, he advocates
to lower the costs (of *all* the steps/parts), but not by handing a part
of the cost to the RSPs. *hich share of which cost(s) do you think he is
handing over to the RSPs?

The current NBN Co
Network Terminating Unit has four ports and can offer a choice of RSPs
but Hackett wants to alter the system so that there is only a single
RSP and even proposes that the RSP should supply the NTU. While
Hackett is probably right and the extra ports will be largely unused
they provide a unique opportunity for imaginative extra services. The
provision of a free government (and other) services port seems an
excellent idea.

I think he gives excellent arguments why implementing an *additional*,
*very* costly, network, is a stupid idea. All current networks, happily
carry non-RSP services. There is no reason to do it in another way for
the NBN. As he says (have you read his further comments?), any service
which does not go the [TCP/]IP route is brain-dead from the start.

Eliminating the POTS ports would also channel the
supply of telephone services via an RSP whereas the NBN Co design
allows a telephone-only connection using the customers existing
telephones.

Like any current network, the NBN can do "a telephone-only connection
using the customers existing telephones". And yes, there will be a SP
for that connection, but that that SP may or may not be called an "RSP",
is just semantics.

His proposal to revert to the original 7 points of interconnect also
limits competition. I believe the additional points of interconnect
were added at the instigation of the ACCC because they would allow
more localised service providers and to avoid making existing telco's
fibre useless. They do increase the costs for a national RSP.

The costings that Hackett presents are alarming but he does not
provide an estimate of any savings to NBN Co of his changes let alone
an estimate of the added costs to the consumer.

He *said* that he could not give such an estimate, because the needed
(NBNCo) information is not availale.

I agree that the cost
of the NBN should be tax payer subsidised. I don't see that
transferring a small fraction of those costs to the consumer via the
RSP is a benefit especially if it limits access to the NBN.

Again, he is *not* propopsing to "transfer[ring] a small fraction of
those costs to the consumer RSP". The whole point of his proposal is to
*lower* *all* cost parts.

I think you should 'watch' (listen and read) the presentation again.

And notice the vendor (i.e. Alcatel) lock-in issue! Absurd!

 

[Rod Speed]

The author presents a good case based on his position as a
major Retail Service Provider. He is advocating handing over
a larger share of the cost, and therefore the profit, to RSPs.

Not that large a share, actually. And he is actually talking
about the very real problem that the cost to the RSP is
supposed to dramatically increase over time too.

The current NBN Co Network Terminating Unit has four
ports and can offer a choice of RSPs but Hackett wants
to alter the system so that there is only a single RSP and
even proposes that the RSP should supply the NTU.
Yes.

While Hackett is probably right and
the extra ports will be largely unused

I doubt it with PayTV and the net alone.

While operations like his and now iinet that he sold
out to are certainly interested in providing that along
with the net service, that isn't what Foxtel wants to see.

they provide a unique opportunity for imaginative extra services.

Yes, but with a significant cost in what ends
up in the consumer's place as he points out.

The provision of a free government (and other)
services port seems an excellent idea.

Makes more sense to have that included in
the PayTV side of things, but at no cost for
those who just want the free to air channels.

Eliminating the POTS ports would also channel
the supply of telephone services via an RSP

Not necessarily with so many doing that
stuff with the mobile phone system now.

whereas the NBN Co design allows a telephone-only
connection using the customers existing telephones.

Yes, but as he points out, at a very significant cost for
those phone only connections, for what is as he points out
something that is seen with fewer and fewer customers now.

Does it actually make any real sense to be ripping out all that
POTS copper and replacing it with a much more expensive
way of providing POTS services for those customers ?

The reason the NBN wants to do that is because you then
have no choice but to use the NBN because the copper is
gone and they then can claim that most use the NBN service.

But in reality most would just use a mobile phone if the copper
is ripped out, most of them wouldn't bother with the NBN unless
they are too stupid to work out how to use a mobile phone and
just want someone to do everything for free and carry on regardless
and in effect by grossly subsidised by everyone else for that approach.

His proposal to revert to the original 7 points of interconnect
also limits competition. I believe the additional points of
interconnect were added at the instigation of the ACCC
because they would allow more localised service providers

But there are in fact **** all of those left anymore for various reasons.

Does it really make any sense to be forcing everyone who
wants to operate nationally to be spending a hell of a lot more
just so almost no one can do a local service more cheaply ?

and to avoid making existing telco's fibre useless.
They do increase the costs for a national RSP.

And dramatically so too.

The costings that Hackett presents are alarming but he does not
provide an estimate of any savings to NBN Co of his changes

And its clear its only a small part of the total cost
of the NBN even if he doesn't spell that out himself.

let alone an estimate of the added costs to the consumer.

He did claim it wouldn't cost much more at and is
likely right about that with the RSP provided NTU.

I agree that the cost of the NBN should be tax payer subsidised.

I don't when most of us already have a decent broadband service.

I don't see that transferring a small fraction of those
costs to the consumer via the RSP is a benefit

And it can only be a small fraction.

especially if it limits access to the NBN.

It doesn't.

 

[Rod Speed]

With the existing technologies, wireless won't get anywhere near a fibre
NBN.

Its only fools like Turdbull that didn’t realise that.

But, where did he say "wireless can do anything fibre NBN can do:"?!!

Back in the days when the coalition were saying they would pull the
plug on the NBN once they got elected, in the election after the Dud
had been assassinated and even before that, just after the Dud had
proclaimed that we would have a FTTP NBN when no one was actually
stupid enough to tender for his stupid FTTN NBN. Even before the
Dud had become PM the first time, in that election campaign too.

Sounds bit too futuristic to me.

Just terminally pig ignorant on shared bandwidth alone.

 

[Rod Speed]

Are you telling me Turnball previously believed in wireless'ing the whole
country without fibre??!!

Yep, back when he was the coalition leader.

I find it hard to believe!!!

Its true anyway.

Not correct in terms of what he promises in terms of speed and rollout
completion.
Wrong.

It may or may not cost more to switch the remainder of the PSTN/POTS that
he leaves as it is from the local node onwards, into full fibre network,
eventually.

It is absolutely guaranteed to cost a lot more.

But, that's still debatable.
Nope.

That's probably the best he can do.

None of that is his. Its what the Dud proposed
in the election that binned Howard, with the coalition
and Turdbull proclaiming that it made absolutely no
sense at all and that wireless was the way to go.

He ain't got no chance stopping the NBN and leaving the things as it is.

Wrong, as always.

Show me where he proposed FTTN initially!!

In the election that binned Howard and made him PM.

Can't find such record

You can't have looked very hard.

and can't remember him making an FTTN proposal.

Have a look at what he proposed in the
election campaign that binned Howard.

I only remember Turnball going on and on about it long before he made it
into a coalition broadband policy announcement recently.

That’s the problem with being a limp wristed
vegy, what matters that’s between your ears
drips out of your ears and you don’t have anything
left to remember the basics with anymore.

Coalition won't be able to shut the NBN, even if they come into power by a
landslide majority.

Corse they can. It’s a govt operation,
they can pull the plug any time they like.

It's already begun and legally they can't stop it.

That is a bare faced pig ignorant lie.

It’s a govt operation and they can
pull the plug any time they like.

Sensible approach for them to cut the cost of the project

That’s an entirely separate question to what they can do legally.

and the drag, is to implement Turnball's FTTN plan.

That would be completely stupid.

They should either continue with it or pull the plug on it.

That is doable, but not possible to shut the whole fibre NBN project.
Wrong.

It's gone too far politically,

Wrong, **** all of its been built and **** all are using it
and they can just flog whats been built already anyway.

economically

Even sillier. **** all of the $50B has been spent already.

and legally for that.

You don’t have a fucking clue on that. It’s a govt operation,
they can pull the plug on it any time they like.

Yes, the keyword is 'eventually'.

Makes not sense to be doing it now when almost all of those
that want a decent broadband service already have one.

Possibly,......

Absolutely certainly.

but you are in no place to predict the outcomes of the future economic
circumstances and new technologies that may reduce the cost of FTTP
implementation.

Nothing is going to do that with the absolute vast bulk
of the cost, fiber down the streets and how that’s done.

It's better approach than the silly drag & the budget inflation that
they've created with the current version of the NBN.

Its an off budget cost.

When future spending cuts will kick in for all the spending on NBN, we may
be fighting with our teeth and claws to stay on reasonably good living
conditions.

Even sillier. The govt budget has got sweet
**** all to do with anyone's living conditions.

And what is that method that makes most sense according to you?!!

Varys with the place we are talking about.

Do you have a version of fast broadband for the country

We already have. What's best in a particular
area depends on the detail of that area.

Clearly for new subdivisions, FTTP makes the most sense.

For areas outside the major towns where there is already
a decent broadband service, but not for the areas outside
those towns, it makes no sense to be doing FTTP.

In some areas what the NBN is doing with wireless makes sense.

or your solution is 'do something'?!
Nope.

Turnball's approach still leaves some parts of PSTN, won't it?!

All of it in fact.

Besides the outcomes of an NBN is much much more than just providing a
phone service.

Sure, that was just a comment on your comment about the PSTN.

It's primary outcome is the far wider bandwidth via fibreoptics, which
open up the path to super fast internet, which may open up opportunities
for many many applications that we don't even haven't got a clue right
now.

That last is just plain silly. There are plenty of
places that have FTTP right now world wide.

Nothing special has shown up with any of those.

I haven't met anybody who claims that, given the time frame is
'overnight'.

The point is that that is the most dramatic approach that
could be taken and when that would have absolutely NO
effect what so ever on world climate, anything else will
have even less effect on world climate if it wasn’t for the
fact that even less than nothing is still nothing.

Yep, there won't be any noticeable effect what we do for climate change in
global scale, in your life time for sure.

Wont have any effect in anyone's lifetime, or their kids lifetime
or their grand kids lifetime either. None, zero, nada, not a razoo.

I presumed he knows his shit enough to know that.

Yes, its clearly just an attempt to do things better for RSPs
with the usual fudging the issue claiming lower costs.

NBN has been boasting about super fast and low cost internet.

Just like all spivs and con men do. The real cost is at
least $50B that someone is going to have to pay for.

Three guesses who that is going to be ?

But, that's not gonna happen as far as lower cost part concerns, right?!

And even their own 'business plan' admits that.

I bet my arse it ain't gonna happen.

Yes, the coalition is too stupid to do that with the NBN.

They arent with Gonski tho.

Besides, the way Gonski reforms are being tweaked, it can hardly be called
Gonski now.

Bullshit. If anything its even more stupid than Gonski proposed.

NBN will go ahead regardless of who's coming to power, coalition can only
tweak it the way Turnball wants it

It remains to be seen if that’s even possible.

And what they will do when they find that it isnt.

or they can only slow it down.

They can pull the plug on it completely if they want to.

Not to mention it's slow enough as it is though.

And that might well be a good excuse to pull the plug
on it when they discover that FTTN just isnt feasible.

Carl Williams didn't do most of his killings by himself either.
I'm sure you've got enough saving to hire a hit man.

You don’t need to pay loonys anything much.

The trick is to run barefoot thru the dog shit between their ears.

Problem is that, I don't think you got balls to do the things you would
like to do, right?!!! )

You have absolutely no idea how many I have done that to already.

Have a look at what happened to a sysop in fidonet sometime.

Hint: He's dead.

 

[keithr]

You have absolutely no idea how many I have done that to already.

Have a look at what happened to a sysop in fidonet sometime.

Hint: He's dead.

Which sysop would that be?

BTW I came across this the other day

http://www.linkedin.com/profile/vie...412163,VSRPtargetId:40564790,VSRPcmpt:primary

 

[Rod Speed]

Huh!? I don't think he's advocating any such thing.

Yes he is, particularly with the RSP providing the NTU
with nothing in the home provided by the NBN at all.

Yes, he advocates to lower the costs (of *all* the steps/parts),
but not by handing a part of the cost to the RSPs. *hich share
of which cost(s) do you think he is handing over to the RSPs?

The hardware in the home/premises.

I think he gives excellent arguments why implementing an *additional*,
*very* costly, network, is a stupid idea. All current networks, happily
carry non-RSP services. There is no reason to do it in another way for
the NBN. As he says (have you read his further comments?), any service
which does not go the [TCP/]IP route is brain-dead from the start.

Eliminating the POTS ports would also channel the
supply of telephone services via an RSP whereas the NBN Co design
allows a telephone-only connection using the customers existing
telephones.

Like any current network, the NBN can do "a telephone-only connection
using the customers existing telephones". And yes, there will be a SP
for that connection, but that that SP may or may not be called an "RSP",
is just semantics.

He *said* that he could not give such an estimate,

Again, he is *not* propopsing to "transfer[ring] a small
fraction of those costs to the consumer RSP".

Yes he is with the hardware in the house/premises.

The whole point of his proposal is to *lower* *all* cost parts.

No, his proposal does not lower the cost of running the fiber
down the streets for example.

I think you should 'watch' (listen and read) the presentation again.

You too.

 

[Rod Speed]

Rod Speed wrote

Which sysop would that be?

If I told you that I'd have to kill you too, stupid.

BTW I came across this the other day

http://www.linkedin.com/profile/vie...412163,VSRPtargetId:40564790,VSRPcmpt:primary

Just produces the signup page.

Yeah, been emailing him quite a bit when he isn't in the loony bin.

He rang me from the loony bin quite literally, wanted to know
which of the region free DVD players his wife should get for him.

He's since divorced her and has just bought a new unit.

 

[Don McKenzie]

On 22-Jul-13 11:01 AM, Don McKenzie wrote:

Hmmm...

I have the NBN pulling in cables at the top end of my street this morning.

Don...


--
Don McKenzie

$30 for an Olinuxino Linux PC:
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/olinuxino.html

The World's Cheapest Computer:
DuinoMite the PIC32 $25 Basic Computer-MicroController
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/the-maximite-computer.html
Add VGA Monitor/TV, and PS2 Keyboard, or use USB Terminal
Arduino Shield, Programmed in Basic, or C.

 

[keithr]

If I told you that I'd have to kill you too, stupid.

Smells like bullshit.

 

[Rod Speed]

Smells like bullshit.

You with egg all over your face, as always.