It's like you've known me all my life!
Liberal Federal Govt
- Thread starter Dazz
- Start date
It's like you've known me all my life!
Winston,
I will try to be as specific as I can because I for one am not prepared to continue this topic particularly given your comments are laced with your own political prejudices which makes any discussion on the topic almost impossible.
First, don’t assume my political persuasion unlike yourself I have never expressed my own political views and have attacked both parties equally over the years. Just read any of my comments regarding NSW labor.
Regarding the proposed “sensible” alternatives you put forward as a sporadic list. You fail to understand that you are NOT an expert on this topic, you simply google the technology then read about it and think it allows you to comment as an expert. The fact is that neither you nor I can claim to be experts and this is despite myself having a degree in Computer Science from USYD. As is the case with any government policy we should be making fundamental decisions based on process rather than outcome something rarely done.
For instance if you got 10 eminent technology experts and 10 eminent economists and they concluded the NBN was the best solution would you accept their decision or still go on a googlethon and spew out alternate solutions?
I am sorry but your understanding about Wireless technology and statistics for that matter is lacking.
While it’s accepted that the popularity of mobile devices are on the rise (we only have to look to the iphone as proof) it doesn’t mean we are moving away from “fixed” lines. Your graph doesn’t show for instance how many of those people own more than one kind of device? Mobile and a desktop? Its not unreasonable to assume I check the news on my blackberry but wait to get home to do my work and download files from my remote server. Its obvious to anyone that a graph of subscription explains little and definitely is useless in the argument as to which was to go is better NBN or WIRELESS. If you want to push the issue maybe you can contact the company UNWIRED and see how popular such technology is as a stand-alone solution.
*note* if you don’t believe me simply refer to the website you got that graph from http://www.zdnet.com.au/should-the-...39302160.htm?omnRef=http://www.google.com.au/ and read the section that refers to “substitutors” and “complementors”. You seem very selective in what you post, instead of posting the graph why not provide the link? Maybe because the article goes on to contradict your own views – ouch.
Like I have mentioned before it’s also hard divide the groups neatly as your graph attempts. First the ABS takes a very macro approach to statistics gathering i.e. it does not differential between a cable connected directly to a wireless device? Through a docking station, wirelessly enabled by a fixed line etc etc or the time used on each or their use on each?
All you have shown is some people most likely the same people are using cable AND wireless not moving from one to the other. It definitely says nothing in way that one technology is replacing the other.
Also your attempt to discount the inherent scalability\capacity and speed issues with wireless is frustrating as it’s the core reason why this debate is so stupid. Just listen to the 7:30 report with your beloved Tony Abbott and you will cringe with his total non-understanding of either technology. Basically the peak speed of the technology he proposes is no much faster than what we have today.
Also comparing us with Japan and South Korea is like comparing chalk and cheese. Sorry to say this but there are other factors that affect those countries GDP and their communication network isn’t the sole reason why it goes up or down nor is it the case for us. This is just an absurd proposition and requires no more attention. Mind you Those countries you mentioned together with Singapore, USA and Europe are seeking higher speeds than 100mbps – up to 1gb. Its thanks to narrow minded people that Australia if it keeps blinking will be left well and truly behind the world.
What about your cost\benefit analysis argument? This is just political rubbish coming from the opposition. If you applied a cost\benefit analysis with ROI etc etc in a similar way a private company does to everything a government does then we will all be living in the dark ages. Do you know why we have a public service? Must I really explain why no market can be 100% market driven? The public sector is there because there is no cost benefit for a private institution to build a suburban rd? plant trees on the rd? Give free health care? Education? What about a high speed train link with fees that allow the bulk of the population to use the service? Or what about a new broadband network?
The opposition knows this but the claims sound so proper that they make people such as yourself that its entirely reasonable. Mind you the same people claiming no cost\benefit analysis was done was the same people who refused to run their figures past treasury until forced by independents which we then find was off by a mere 10 something billion? – I know what you’re thinking CONSPIRACY!
You will now argue relative important rather than cost benefit. But you yourself agree that the numbers of people using the internet in whichever format is growing at an exponential rate then its undeniable that its needed its just a case of what technology.
Smarter people than you and I have looked into this issue, determined that the NBN is the best solution available today. Wireless cannot handle the load NOW or on the future this is just fact and you need to come to grips with it. Now if you want to argue whether we have fibre to the home\street\neighbourhood (to save a few dollars) that’s fine but if you are trying to argue that we don’t need fixed lines and somehow everything we do now and into the future will work with wireless then I am sorry you are wrong.
PS:
When you post your reply is it done on a wireless internet e.g. on a laptop? - Just curious.
I will try to be as specific as I can because I for one am not prepared to continue this topic particularly given your comments are laced with your own political prejudices which makes any discussion on the topic almost impossible.
First, don’t assume my political persuasion unlike yourself I have never expressed my own political views and have attacked both parties equally over the years. Just read any of my comments regarding NSW labor.
Regarding the proposed “sensible” alternatives you put forward as a sporadic list. You fail to understand that you are NOT an expert on this topic, you simply google the technology then read about it and think it allows you to comment as an expert. The fact is that neither you nor I can claim to be experts and this is despite myself having a degree in Computer Science from USYD. As is the case with any government policy we should be making fundamental decisions based on process rather than outcome something rarely done.
For instance if you got 10 eminent technology experts and 10 eminent economists and they concluded the NBN was the best solution would you accept their decision or still go on a googlethon and spew out alternate solutions?
I am sorry but your understanding about Wireless technology and statistics for that matter is lacking.
While it’s accepted that the popularity of mobile devices are on the rise (we only have to look to the iphone as proof) it doesn’t mean we are moving away from “fixed” lines. Your graph doesn’t show for instance how many of those people own more than one kind of device? Mobile and a desktop? Its not unreasonable to assume I check the news on my blackberry but wait to get home to do my work and download files from my remote server. Its obvious to anyone that a graph of subscription explains little and definitely is useless in the argument as to which was to go is better NBN or WIRELESS. If you want to push the issue maybe you can contact the company UNWIRED and see how popular such technology is as a stand-alone solution.
*note* if you don’t believe me simply refer to the website you got that graph from http://www.zdnet.com.au/should-the-...39302160.htm?omnRef=http://www.google.com.au/ and read the section that refers to “substitutors” and “complementors”. You seem very selective in what you post, instead of posting the graph why not provide the link? Maybe because the article goes on to contradict your own views – ouch.
Like I have mentioned before it’s also hard divide the groups neatly as your graph attempts. First the ABS takes a very macro approach to statistics gathering i.e. it does not differential between a cable connected directly to a wireless device? Through a docking station, wirelessly enabled by a fixed line etc etc or the time used on each or their use on each?
All you have shown is some people most likely the same people are using cable AND wireless not moving from one to the other. It definitely says nothing in way that one technology is replacing the other.
Also your attempt to discount the inherent scalability\capacity and speed issues with wireless is frustrating as it’s the core reason why this debate is so stupid. Just listen to the 7:30 report with your beloved Tony Abbott and you will cringe with his total non-understanding of either technology. Basically the peak speed of the technology he proposes is no much faster than what we have today.
Also comparing us with Japan and South Korea is like comparing chalk and cheese. Sorry to say this but there are other factors that affect those countries GDP and their communication network isn’t the sole reason why it goes up or down nor is it the case for us. This is just an absurd proposition and requires no more attention. Mind you Those countries you mentioned together with Singapore, USA and Europe are seeking higher speeds than 100mbps – up to 1gb. Its thanks to narrow minded people that Australia if it keeps blinking will be left well and truly behind the world.
What about your cost\benefit analysis argument? This is just political rubbish coming from the opposition. If you applied a cost\benefit analysis with ROI etc etc in a similar way a private company does to everything a government does then we will all be living in the dark ages. Do you know why we have a public service? Must I really explain why no market can be 100% market driven? The public sector is there because there is no cost benefit for a private institution to build a suburban rd? plant trees on the rd? Give free health care? Education? What about a high speed train link with fees that allow the bulk of the population to use the service? Or what about a new broadband network?
The opposition knows this but the claims sound so proper that they make people such as yourself that its entirely reasonable. Mind you the same people claiming no cost\benefit analysis was done was the same people who refused to run their figures past treasury until forced by independents which we then find was off by a mere 10 something billion? – I know what you’re thinking CONSPIRACY!
You will now argue relative important rather than cost benefit. But you yourself agree that the numbers of people using the internet in whichever format is growing at an exponential rate then its undeniable that its needed its just a case of what technology.
Smarter people than you and I have looked into this issue, determined that the NBN is the best solution available today. Wireless cannot handle the load NOW or on the future this is just fact and you need to come to grips with it. Now if you want to argue whether we have fibre to the home\street\neighbourhood (to save a few dollars) that’s fine but if you are trying to argue that we don’t need fixed lines and somehow everything we do now and into the future will work with wireless then I am sorry you are wrong.
PS:
When you post your reply is it done on a wireless internet e.g. on a laptop? - Just curious.
Last edited:
hi all
here is my view
from listening to the two that were three.
the reason they went the way they did was because the went with the weakest team
they went with a weak team because they knew that that team could not go back to the people and win.
now how can you have a group to run a country when the leader did not want to be there
the people that have sided with you know you are the weakest link and could not go to the people and even your party could not get you past the post
we do not have a elected leader we have a leader that is there because a group think she has a number to lead but that number is not a voted number
is an agreement
and if I had an agreement where my partner said look I will run with you but
you are the weakest person I know and I don't think you are up to the job but I will screw you for all I have got would I take that deal
sorry no
we have not got a deal yet
we have a group that wants a whole lot of money and when they can't get it or can't in the amounts they want I think we back to the position as before
back to the polls
and then the three amegos may well be two or one
and they won't get the promises
I understand what they wanted to do but it just not possible
the people have said we do not want this goverment anyway you look at it.
the three amegos were voted in to be independant not a group of three.
or they should have been the amego party
and they should have looked at what they people voted and for me it was simple
go back and ask a very simple poll same voters same booths
vote 1 gillard 2 abbott no greens no african american indians or sex party just 1 or 2
look at those votes from all in the community alp greens national who ever
and then decide
if the split is 75/75 so be it and you can tell the people that voted for you that you have done your best
as is we have 3 hr press conferences and meetings here there and everywhere
and what has it got you
gillard was voted out on any look at the polls
the amegos where voted in as independant and have not voted independant as I see it they have voted to get the money(thats not independant in my books and even Icac don't see going for the money as being independant its simple you wanted the cash)
why didn't they ask the people vote for me as i will try to get as much cash as possible will they have got the votes
no
independant should mean you look at the deal not as how much money or you can get out of it
but what does the people want
not is this one stronger or this one weaker thats not up to you
vote what the people that put you there want you to do
katter did that.
all the rest is just fluffy cream and people can see it
and that fluffy cream will end up on your face
some one said to day spin and sugar ( and thats what we have here sugar gillard and spin the amegos) makes candy floss looks great tastes nice has no substance and when left falls apart very quick and you are left with a molten sugar glob
this will happen.
the trouble for the amegos is that it will be their fault anyway you look at it
they will be to blame.
there is just no way I see it working
yes it will move forward as someone said but its a v8 running on 3 cylinders will it get to the 3 years
for me no
abbott should just keep putting up no confidence in this and that and the amegos have to go along or go to the polls
and they just can't
they hope to get a few in before hand but these are promises and they are 3 and 4 years out and will not get thru
so lets just see and watch this all fall apart.
here is my view
from listening to the two that were three.
the reason they went the way they did was because the went with the weakest team
they went with a weak team because they knew that that team could not go back to the people and win.
now how can you have a group to run a country when the leader did not want to be there
the people that have sided with you know you are the weakest link and could not go to the people and even your party could not get you past the post
we do not have a elected leader we have a leader that is there because a group think she has a number to lead but that number is not a voted number
is an agreement
and if I had an agreement where my partner said look I will run with you but
you are the weakest person I know and I don't think you are up to the job but I will screw you for all I have got would I take that deal
sorry no
we have not got a deal yet
we have a group that wants a whole lot of money and when they can't get it or can't in the amounts they want I think we back to the position as before
back to the polls
and then the three amegos may well be two or one
and they won't get the promises
I understand what they wanted to do but it just not possible
the people have said we do not want this goverment anyway you look at it.
the three amegos were voted in to be independant not a group of three.
or they should have been the amego party
and they should have looked at what they people voted and for me it was simple
go back and ask a very simple poll same voters same booths
vote 1 gillard 2 abbott no greens no african american indians or sex party just 1 or 2
look at those votes from all in the community alp greens national who ever
and then decide
if the split is 75/75 so be it and you can tell the people that voted for you that you have done your best
as is we have 3 hr press conferences and meetings here there and everywhere
and what has it got you
gillard was voted out on any look at the polls
the amegos where voted in as independant and have not voted independant as I see it they have voted to get the money(thats not independant in my books and even Icac don't see going for the money as being independant its simple you wanted the cash)
why didn't they ask the people vote for me as i will try to get as much cash as possible will they have got the votes
no
independant should mean you look at the deal not as how much money or you can get out of it
but what does the people want
not is this one stronger or this one weaker thats not up to you
vote what the people that put you there want you to do
katter did that.
all the rest is just fluffy cream and people can see it
and that fluffy cream will end up on your face
some one said to day spin and sugar ( and thats what we have here sugar gillard and spin the amegos) makes candy floss looks great tastes nice has no substance and when left falls apart very quick and you are left with a molten sugar glob
this will happen.
the trouble for the amegos is that it will be their fault anyway you look at it
they will be to blame.
there is just no way I see it working
yes it will move forward as someone said but its a v8 running on 3 cylinders will it get to the 3 years
for me no
abbott should just keep putting up no confidence in this and that and the amegos have to go along or go to the polls
and they just can't
they hope to get a few in before hand but these are promises and they are 3 and 4 years out and will not get thru
so lets just see and watch this all fall apart.
I dont need an NBN, but metro better than 56 k dial up would be nice 
ta
rolf
ta
rolf
Tim, I am glad you accept you are not an expert.
That renders you incapable of judging whether the advice the Coalition or Labor received provides the more apt and cost effective solution.
Ease off on the presumptions...I didn't get the chart from zednet, I got it direct from the ABS.
It seems the gist of your post is that when the govt wants to throw a lot of money at something and it can get together a team of professionals who will benefit, then we should blindly accept that they know best.
So which team of professionals do you listen to on uranium mining and exports? How about the sale of public assets? How about the acquisition of Collins class submarines, the Sydney Opera House, the Port Adelaide Flower Farm, Qld Govt Magnesium Light Metals Project, National Wine Centre, Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium Redevelopment, the Millenium Train, Melbourne Federation Square, how about what has happened with Tabcorp and Telstra....
If you think govt spends money efficiently, then demand they increase taxes, and then give them a bit extra Tim.
Why do you think State Labor govts are selling off public assets?
I don't develop my opinion by only fgi-ing Tim. I talk to a lot of well connected rational people with real jobs in the real world.
Your defense of NBN is based on 'experts tell us we need it'. Really? which experts in the health and education fields have done a cost benefit analysis? Where's the cba showing 1 hr/day of recreational use from Australian homes is going to justify NBN? You are just buying the hype Tim.
Re GDP, if there's all this other stuff that makes it go up and down, then how can anyone gauge accurately the productivity benefits of FTTH. And shouldn't we be spending money on things that help gdp go up, or not fall down? Maybe Japan and Korea should be focusing on what really moves GDP rather than a faster online gaming network.
I have not yet had anyone present a rational reason to pay $100b+ for ftth NBN. I've spelt out why I think it is a foolish decision to proceed with something so expensive with no solid evidence of the need or a payoff.
You obviously are convinced your life and that of most Australians is going to be severely compromised without it. But I take it you don't know why. You are just taking the words of the telecommunication specialists that you need FTTH.
Like Tony Windsor, you think NBN is the most important piece of infrastructure to Australia's future and we can put off everything else while we pay down debt and fund NBN. But you cannot say exactly how NBN can increase GDP. Excuse me, but it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Stick with your view Tim and I'll stick with mine. I've been around enough to see one govt white elephant after another, and how often ignorant public servant egos refine and justify wastage.
Re my internet connection, I have fixed wireless because there's a rim in my local exchange that cannot deliver enough adsl. It's adequate enough for most of my needs. I certainly don't think its worth charging every household $15,000 to get faster internet here.
I also have two mobile network backup connections because I often have large stock trades on and want to avoid connectivity issues. So what's my redundancy connectivity going to be when FTTP comes in and kills all the competition, at least temporarily?
That renders you incapable of judging whether the advice the Coalition or Labor received provides the more apt and cost effective solution.
Ease off on the presumptions...I didn't get the chart from zednet, I got it direct from the ABS.
It seems the gist of your post is that when the govt wants to throw a lot of money at something and it can get together a team of professionals who will benefit, then we should blindly accept that they know best.
So which team of professionals do you listen to on uranium mining and exports? How about the sale of public assets? How about the acquisition of Collins class submarines, the Sydney Opera House, the Port Adelaide Flower Farm, Qld Govt Magnesium Light Metals Project, National Wine Centre, Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium Redevelopment, the Millenium Train, Melbourne Federation Square, how about what has happened with Tabcorp and Telstra....
If you think govt spends money efficiently, then demand they increase taxes, and then give them a bit extra Tim.
Why do you think State Labor govts are selling off public assets?
I don't develop my opinion by only fgi-ing Tim. I talk to a lot of well connected rational people with real jobs in the real world.
Your defense of NBN is based on 'experts tell us we need it'. Really? which experts in the health and education fields have done a cost benefit analysis? Where's the cba showing 1 hr/day of recreational use from Australian homes is going to justify NBN? You are just buying the hype Tim.
Re GDP, if there's all this other stuff that makes it go up and down, then how can anyone gauge accurately the productivity benefits of FTTH. And shouldn't we be spending money on things that help gdp go up, or not fall down? Maybe Japan and Korea should be focusing on what really moves GDP rather than a faster online gaming network.
I have not yet had anyone present a rational reason to pay $100b+ for ftth NBN. I've spelt out why I think it is a foolish decision to proceed with something so expensive with no solid evidence of the need or a payoff.
You obviously are convinced your life and that of most Australians is going to be severely compromised without it. But I take it you don't know why. You are just taking the words of the telecommunication specialists that you need FTTH.
Like Tony Windsor, you think NBN is the most important piece of infrastructure to Australia's future and we can put off everything else while we pay down debt and fund NBN. But you cannot say exactly how NBN can increase GDP. Excuse me, but it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Stick with your view Tim and I'll stick with mine. I've been around enough to see one govt white elephant after another, and how often ignorant public servant egos refine and justify wastage.
Re my internet connection, I have fixed wireless because there's a rim in my local exchange that cannot deliver enough adsl. It's adequate enough for most of my needs. I certainly don't think its worth charging every household $15,000 to get faster internet here.
I also have two mobile network backup connections because I often have large stock trades on and want to avoid connectivity issues. So what's my redundancy connectivity going to be when FTTP comes in and kills all the competition, at least temporarily?
I dont need an NBN, but metro better than 56 k dial up would be nice
presuming you are not an online gaming fanatic or avid porn and illegal movie downloader (or uploader), you need the much cheaper fibre to the node backbone solution Tony Abbott was advised can deliver faster broadband to most homes.
One of my staff that works 3 days on telecommute, we cant get her wired dsl..........................
Shes in the boosh WW................Murramba Downs, bout 20 ks nth of Bris CBD.
I have had the same issue locally here on the GC with other staff at Gaven.
I reckon we dont need super fast speeds.........just any ADSL service will be nice, 256 k ADSL one would do.
Ironically, if my staff moved to the average 100 + person small country town I have been told they can get DSL 1 at least and maybe DSL 2 if we are lucky.
So in my mind the concept of the NBN is flawed to start with. I can have DSL in the bush, but not in metro.
ta
rolf
Shes in the boosh WW................Murramba Downs, bout 20 ks nth of Bris CBD.
I have had the same issue locally here on the GC with other staff at Gaven.
I reckon we dont need super fast speeds.........just any ADSL service will be nice, 256 k ADSL one would do.
Ironically, if my staff moved to the average 100 + person small country town I have been told they can get DSL 1 at least and maybe DSL 2 if we are lucky.
So in my mind the concept of the NBN is flawed to start with. I can have DSL in the bush, but not in metro.
ta
rolf
That's a given. As you know, we're only 30km from Brisbane and Telstra has refused for 8 years at least to update the local exchange to cope with the new housing out here, and my previous isp told me it is a trivial cost to do so. Probably the same at Murrumba Downs and many new estates on the GC.
If there hadn't been so much Govt indecisiveness and changing of direction, then the exchanges would have been updated, no doubt in my mind.
Most "homes" would get by fine with 1500k imho.
The only people who need more are kids not doing homework.
Your understanding of the uses of the NBN (or faster\higher capacity networks) limits your understanding of its benefits and subsequently its true value... Feel free to continue thinking people will use the NBN only for netbanking, gaming, porn and browsing the web.
Given your so fond of the ABS how about you tell me the rate of growth of broadband? In 9 years its gone from 4 to 9 million, adoption rate from dialup to faster forms is close to 90% over the same period and more importantly average downloads have gone from negigble amounts in 2000 up to about 14000 mbs per month in 2009 which is more than double the amount just 3 years before.
Now you may sit there and cannot comprehend how companies/small business and individuals are using ever increasing amounts (14gig!) due to your own personal limited use but given you are so fond of stats they are the facts. Deal with the fact most people\business use the net more than you seem to.
Given this rate of growth your beloved wireless solution is unsatisfactory.
My own business (which is a non technological business - development) has seen its own use of technology rise in direct correlation with speed and capacity. Not because "I chose to" but because the industry as a whole mandated it given industry players all adopted and took advantage of new technologies such as ADSL.
For instance i cannot remember the last time I have received a set of plans in the mail and not electronically, these are usually very large and is thanks to increased speed of transfer.
This has allowed councils to expect a certain level of speed amongs its residents and therefore has started to shift all approval/submission processes online.
Given the increased use of online form for our business this has forced most architects to turn to CAD rather than drawings by hand.
This has then allowed my company to setup a server hosting sharepoint whereby all my consultants\bankers and relevant stakeholders can log into and download the relevant plans\forms\applications they need.
All of this was only made realistically possible with the widespread adoption of ADSL+
Now if capacity and speed dramatically increases further, I invisage councils to allow consultants to load and render plans directly onto an online platform (similar to google earth) so people, consultants developers can see proposed developments in real-time and how they will sit within their community. I invisage such developments to be linked to online discussion forums, and ABS stats to see impact on water\sewer etc to allow for expedited submissions periods and approvals process.
I can go on and on and on regarding the possibilities that increased capacity and speed can provide which go far beyond your immensly small world view on such technology and its uses.
I will stake everything I own, beleive in that there is an inherent need for capacity and speed of our communications networks to FOREVER increase to higher and higher levels... its something called progress. It sounds corny but its a very simple idea that you seem to not grasp. There is nothing in human history that "could be" improved and hasnt because it failed a cost/benefit analysis. It eventually ALWAYS gets upgraded, it can take longer than expected but we will always get there.
I can remember the days when people questioned what the point was to upgrade from tape and cds. I can remember on TV people being tested as to whether they could distinguish by ear any difference. What a narrow view!! but thats because most peoples exposure to tapes was music tapes... much like now most peoples exposure to the net is porn\banking\browsing.
What you seem to fail to understand is that unlike health\education etc our communication networks is "infrastructure". A road will never be as important as a doctor savinging someones life but if there is no road to that hospital the doctor wont be there to do his work in the first place. Australia are champions of the half baked measure.... half baked train networks. I can remember when we were deciding on which way to go rattlers or high speed bullet trains (about 20 years ago) like Japan... it was determined to expensive so what did we do? We bought tangaras... my god!!! And here we are same problems, same issues, same crap trains. We eventually have to decide do we do whats righ or do we buy a bandaid.
Increased communication networks will allow the health industry to work more collaboratively and much more richly it may allow regional areas to perhaps through the net render 3d images of patients hearts to allow an interstate doctor examine the patient live bridging the divide between regional and metro.
The internet is porn\netbanking\browsing for many people just as TV is watching sitcoms and oprah for many more... You sound intelligent enough to realise that these technologies have much further reaching benefits that that!! Seriously... For instance the technology that allows 3d tv will be used for engineering and my above example of examining patients hearts not just for people to watch 3d tits and porn on tv!!
Lets agree to disagree but I bet the house your wrong and worse still in the comming years when you realise your wrong you will look back and somehow gloss over your error and see no error at all... I say this is worse because its the reason why we never learn and always raise the same issues, over and over again.
If it aint broke why fix it.... im sure its your favourite moto... it definitely isnt mine.
Given your so fond of the ABS how about you tell me the rate of growth of broadband? In 9 years its gone from 4 to 9 million, adoption rate from dialup to faster forms is close to 90% over the same period and more importantly average downloads have gone from negigble amounts in 2000 up to about 14000 mbs per month in 2009 which is more than double the amount just 3 years before.
Now you may sit there and cannot comprehend how companies/small business and individuals are using ever increasing amounts (14gig!) due to your own personal limited use but given you are so fond of stats they are the facts. Deal with the fact most people\business use the net more than you seem to.
Given this rate of growth your beloved wireless solution is unsatisfactory.
My own business (which is a non technological business - development) has seen its own use of technology rise in direct correlation with speed and capacity. Not because "I chose to" but because the industry as a whole mandated it given industry players all adopted and took advantage of new technologies such as ADSL.
For instance i cannot remember the last time I have received a set of plans in the mail and not electronically, these are usually very large and is thanks to increased speed of transfer.
This has allowed councils to expect a certain level of speed amongs its residents and therefore has started to shift all approval/submission processes online.
Given the increased use of online form for our business this has forced most architects to turn to CAD rather than drawings by hand.
This has then allowed my company to setup a server hosting sharepoint whereby all my consultants\bankers and relevant stakeholders can log into and download the relevant plans\forms\applications they need.
All of this was only made realistically possible with the widespread adoption of ADSL+
Now if capacity and speed dramatically increases further, I invisage councils to allow consultants to load and render plans directly onto an online platform (similar to google earth) so people, consultants developers can see proposed developments in real-time and how they will sit within their community. I invisage such developments to be linked to online discussion forums, and ABS stats to see impact on water\sewer etc to allow for expedited submissions periods and approvals process.
I can go on and on and on regarding the possibilities that increased capacity and speed can provide which go far beyond your immensly small world view on such technology and its uses.
I will stake everything I own, beleive in that there is an inherent need for capacity and speed of our communications networks to FOREVER increase to higher and higher levels... its something called progress. It sounds corny but its a very simple idea that you seem to not grasp. There is nothing in human history that "could be" improved and hasnt because it failed a cost/benefit analysis. It eventually ALWAYS gets upgraded, it can take longer than expected but we will always get there.
I can remember the days when people questioned what the point was to upgrade from tape and cds. I can remember on TV people being tested as to whether they could distinguish by ear any difference. What a narrow view!! but thats because most peoples exposure to tapes was music tapes... much like now most peoples exposure to the net is porn\banking\browsing.
What you seem to fail to understand is that unlike health\education etc our communication networks is "infrastructure". A road will never be as important as a doctor savinging someones life but if there is no road to that hospital the doctor wont be there to do his work in the first place. Australia are champions of the half baked measure.... half baked train networks. I can remember when we were deciding on which way to go rattlers or high speed bullet trains (about 20 years ago) like Japan... it was determined to expensive so what did we do? We bought tangaras... my god!!! And here we are same problems, same issues, same crap trains. We eventually have to decide do we do whats righ or do we buy a bandaid.
Increased communication networks will allow the health industry to work more collaboratively and much more richly it may allow regional areas to perhaps through the net render 3d images of patients hearts to allow an interstate doctor examine the patient live bridging the divide between regional and metro.
The internet is porn\netbanking\browsing for many people just as TV is watching sitcoms and oprah for many more... You sound intelligent enough to realise that these technologies have much further reaching benefits that that!! Seriously... For instance the technology that allows 3d tv will be used for engineering and my above example of examining patients hearts not just for people to watch 3d tits and porn on tv!!
Lets agree to disagree but I bet the house your wrong and worse still in the comming years when you realise your wrong you will look back and somehow gloss over your error and see no error at all... I say this is worse because its the reason why we never learn and always raise the same issues, over and over again.
If it aint broke why fix it.... im sure its your favourite moto... it definitely isnt mine.
I was involved in a property start up 8 years ago (which grew quickly to $200m in holdings) and am intimately familiar with what you are talking about. I know DAs and architect plans and drawings are sent electronically in most instances now (and I knew what a hassle they present for outlook email backup and server backup).
I also know more than anything else, staff wanted to work away from the office using wireless in hotels, at client's sites, and up the beachhouse.
Anyway, I digress. You are talking about commercial needs, not domestic.
Your take on the medical use of broadband is the usual outsider promoted spin. You've been misled. Health care requires not only a specialist looking at an image over broadband, but a GP to screen, a radiology centre to take the pics, a path lab to screen other stuff, and then a physical assessment by the specialist. Once again the images are sent between commercial operations. Radiology centers are on the whole already connected via high speed broadband. They've been sending images that way for years.
A Brisbane friend is a radiologist and she earns double what she could working in Australian health care by contracting to a US radiology business. She assesses US images viewed via fast broadband. Guess what, she doesn't have fibre and doesn't need it.
All these things are commercial uses. In no way does the expense of laying and connecting fibre to homes.
If people want faster internet at home for commercial application, let the user pay. but don't slam the taxpayer for yet another service they won't fully utilize.
Until you get out of your commercial sphere and open your eyes to the lack of services in health care, education, road and rail infrastructure Tim, you cannot possibly judge whether Rudd's 100b FTTH is justified.
I also know more than anything else, staff wanted to work away from the office using wireless in hotels, at client's sites, and up the beachhouse.
Anyway, I digress. You are talking about commercial needs, not domestic.
Your take on the medical use of broadband is the usual outsider promoted spin. You've been misled. Health care requires not only a specialist looking at an image over broadband, but a GP to screen, a radiology centre to take the pics, a path lab to screen other stuff, and then a physical assessment by the specialist. Once again the images are sent between commercial operations. Radiology centers are on the whole already connected via high speed broadband. They've been sending images that way for years.
A Brisbane friend is a radiologist and she earns double what she could working in Australian health care by contracting to a US radiology business. She assesses US images viewed via fast broadband. Guess what, she doesn't have fibre and doesn't need it.
All these things are commercial uses. In no way does the expense of laying and connecting fibre to homes.
If people want faster internet at home for commercial application, let the user pay. but don't slam the taxpayer for yet another service they won't fully utilize.
Until you get out of your commercial sphere and open your eyes to the lack of services in health care, education, road and rail infrastructure Tim, you cannot possibly judge whether Rudd's 100b FTTH is justified.
Hi
Have i missed it or no one has mentioned the costings of Abbotts promises that he didnt want to get out because he didnt trust treasury. $11billion dollar black hole. Say no more....
Labor did the impossible had a shocking run up with botched projects that went sour eg the insulation saga etc. then the dumping of Kevin Rudd and Julia took over only a few months ago, they have had the GFC etc etc
Despite the odds stacked against Labor they have prevailed just but nevertheless prevailed as forming a minority government with a couple of independents that tend to side with the coalition.
If Kevin Rudd had stayed in Liberals would have won in a landslide thats how much he was on the nose.
They did what they had to do to win and the other side would've done exactly the same, lets not forget Brendon nelson, Malcolm Turnbull and Abbott
SG
Have i missed it or no one has mentioned the costings of Abbotts promises that he didnt want to get out because he didnt trust treasury. $11billion dollar black hole. Say no more....
Labor did the impossible had a shocking run up with botched projects that went sour eg the insulation saga etc. then the dumping of Kevin Rudd and Julia took over only a few months ago, they have had the GFC etc etc
Despite the odds stacked against Labor they have prevailed just but nevertheless prevailed as forming a minority government with a couple of independents that tend to side with the coalition.
If Kevin Rudd had stayed in Liberals would have won in a landslide thats how much he was on the nose.
They did what they had to do to win and the other side would've done exactly the same, lets not forget Brendon nelson, Malcolm Turnbull and Abbott
SG
WW:
Tcocaro, if it's any consolation, he thinks he knows about health needs/procedures as much as NBN, an embarrassingly lack of knowledge in this post too. A jumped up physiotherapist with a very big sense of himself and all Australians needs. Motivated by a sense of political righteousness and absolute bias. Has anyone given serious contention WW maybe Tony Abbotts little/older illegitimate brother?
He picks out one more, minor issue and considers that to be all health service requirements. Ridiculous post!
Tcocaro, if it's any consolation, he thinks he knows about health needs/procedures as much as NBN, an embarrassingly lack of knowledge in this post too. A jumped up physiotherapist with a very big sense of himself and all Australians needs. Motivated by a sense of political righteousness and absolute bias. Has anyone given serious contention WW maybe Tony Abbotts little/older illegitimate brother?
He picks out one more, minor issue and considers that to be all health service requirements. Ridiculous post!
Well, thanks Dazz.....
It's going to be a very interesting ride ahead. I might consider making another prediction about what I think could happen next election... I'll wait a couple of days and see how things settle down, both in the government and in my workload!!
cheers
Pen
hi all
I put under 6 months
give them 2 months to get over the sugar(like a bear or bee)and then its back and hungry
and when next batts housing or bandwidth comes in it will fall apart.
remember all abbott has to do is make sure he has 73 members at every bill
for sure in 6 months some one just can't be there
some times there is under 30 there
so just make sure all your guys are there every day for 6 months
yes they can bring a doona and have a sleep but when it no confidence its whos here and vote
everytime some one leaves to go to the loo vote of no confidence
it will be like fly fishing
first throw you don't catch keep casting and I think 6 months will be the max
just a side line did abbott come out anywhere with the 1 b offer the amegos said he offered 1 b but have not seen anywhere that this was confirmed
I find it interesting that just because someone said it was offered that its been taken as fact that it was.
just interested
I must admit I am for neither of them and think both parties need to look within there groups for a leader
abbott is the stronger of the two but he still for me is not strong enough or has not shown the same backbone that he has shown in running and swimming
for me he should have come out first day and said this is the deal take it or leave it
when they asked for this or that just said no
this is the deal
make a deal
stick to it or walk away
I put under 6 months
give them 2 months to get over the sugar(like a bear or bee)and then its back and hungry
and when next batts housing or bandwidth comes in it will fall apart.
remember all abbott has to do is make sure he has 73 members at every bill
for sure in 6 months some one just can't be there
some times there is under 30 there
so just make sure all your guys are there every day for 6 months
yes they can bring a doona and have a sleep but when it no confidence its whos here and vote
everytime some one leaves to go to the loo vote of no confidence
it will be like fly fishing
first throw you don't catch keep casting and I think 6 months will be the max
just a side line did abbott come out anywhere with the 1 b offer the amegos said he offered 1 b but have not seen anywhere that this was confirmed
I find it interesting that just because someone said it was offered that its been taken as fact that it was.
just interested
I must admit I am for neither of them and think both parties need to look within there groups for a leader
abbott is the stronger of the two but he still for me is not strong enough or has not shown the same backbone that he has shown in running and swimming
for me he should have come out first day and said this is the deal take it or leave it
when they asked for this or that just said no
this is the deal
make a deal
stick to it or walk away
You're showing your lack of familiarity with Parliamentary procedure, GR.
Do you think they haven't thought about this before? There's an informal, but robust, system of vote-pairing which has been in operation for a very long time. Both sides of politics know that there will be times when one or more of their MPs will be unable to be present, and the Party Whips arrange to "pair" absent members with somebody opposite.
So if 3 Labor MPs and 2 Liberal MPs are going to be absent on a particular day, the Liberals agree that one more of their MPs won't vote, in order to preserve the relative strength of the parties. Likewise, if 4 Libs are going to be absent on another day, Labor agrees that 4 of their MPs will abstain. (Or Senators; pairing happens in both chambers.)
Yes, it's really a "gentleman's agreement" rather than law, but it'd be an incredibly brave Whip or Party who decided to go against this long-standing convention, particularly on something significant. And when the vote is something as important as no confidence, the Speaker would - I'm pretty sure - check that pairing agreements have been honoured prior to calling for a vote.
One of the reforms which the Independents fought for - and obtained - during the recent negotiations was to win pairing rights for themselves, as well. So if, for a particular piece of legislation, they're going to vote "aye" and can't be there, the two majors have agreed to pair them with somebody who'd be voting "no", to prevent the independents being disadvantaged by forced absences.
Yes, Joh was undoubtedly brave, and this was extraordinary!
I wasn't aware of this particular aspect of the 1975 dismissal until now (I've just read up a bit), so thanks for bringing it to my attention. I note that Senate vacancies must be filled by a Party appointee by law now, rather than relying on convention.
Hey Thommo - I saw a picture of Wayne Swan the other day and thought to myself 'Oh hey, that's Wayne Swan. He's the treasurer.' The things I know that I didn't know I knew!
I also thought to myself 'Who's the bloke with the bright orange hair standing next to him?' then I realised it was Julia Gillard.
I also thought to myself 'Who's the bloke with the bright orange hair standing next to him?' then I realised it was Julia Gillard.
