-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusPoliGAF |OT| Boats? What Boats?
- Thread starter Bernbaum
- Start date
- Status
Yeah I'll contest to that, my employer wants to move all our services into the cloud and since we're never going to get NBN at the moment all plans are on hold. We don't want to buy new servers and storage because the ROI is non existent but we're going to have no choice.
roosters93
Member
Because that clearly is the primary or secondary or tertiary or 4th, 5th, 6th... or 20th purpose of the NBN. It's much easier to shrug off the loss when you belittle what it would have achieved hey
Edit: and it seems like you also conveniently ignored Jintor's explanation of why rural and remote markets would be exclusive.
While it's even unlikely a single company would enter into a unprofitable rollout of NBN equivalent services this century to rural and remote areas, it's even more unlikely another company would. It's extremely likely that first company would then either gouge it's competitors to use its infrastructure or gouge the consumer directly. Much better than the (inevitably cheaper) NBN situation.
Name them. I want all of them. All twenty things that the NBN would have done, that are more important than delivering faster internet.
I'm not that across the NBN all that well... but wasn't one of the primary reasons for its existence that it could provide better medical care and education to people in remote areas?
Guess that's out the window, and they won't even be able to consul themselves with My Big Fat Greek Wedding.
edit: no shit it's for faster internet. stop being obtuse.
There you go.
And again.
That's not to mention the advantages for business.
Guess that's out the window, and they won't even be able to consul themselves with My Big Fat Greek Wedding.
edit: no shit it's for faster internet. stop being obtuse.
There you go.
And again.
That's not to mention the advantages for business.
roosters93
Member
Hardly. Like it or not, It's going to cost more to deliver internet to rural communities. Your logic is that it's better that the government price gauges people instead of private companies. It costs more to deliver internet to Oodnadatta than it does to Wayville and there isn't much anything anyone can do about it.
Nice! The abuse in here is lovely. No wonder I'm the only liberal voter here.
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
There is so much I disagree with in this post that I don't know where to begin. Let's start by ignoring that every major network in history has been run and run successfully by these principles of subsidisation, a chain being only as strong as its weakest link. I'll go though your post point by point:
- "Money forcibly expropriated": Do you mean from customers or taxpayers? If the former, then unless you have been a first adopter and/or pay for the highest tier of any communications technology you use then that's exactly what you are doing. If you mean the latter, then you need to learn some fundamental economics which I will come to in part later.
- "Essentially rich farmers asking for world class internet": Since you are clearly a management consultant who has never done a day's work in any field of primary production, I'm willing to forgive this crass generalisation (see what I did there?). You seem to be forgetting that under both the original NBN and the Coalition's stunted mockery of it more remote areas are covered by either fixed wireless or satellite. I can tell you right now that neither are world class. As has already been mentioned, the rural areas receiving fibre are regional centres, towns with populations in the thousands, hospitals, schools, tertiary institutes, libraries etc... The people in those towns would have greater utility and arguably generate greater return from broadband infrastructure than metro centres.
- "Private growth which is going to create sustainable long term jobs in the broadband sector": How are these jobs more sustainable or long term than the jobs that would be created under a scheme where significantly more infrastructure is created and therefore maintained/upgraded? Because private companies would be employing the subcontractors?
- "Lots of tax money from the profits of these companies to fill the government coffers": This is not the purpose of taxes. Once again, I'm not sure why you think that private companies produce better economic results by default. The ubiquity of service that only the government could or would provide would involve more resources and therefore higher tax revenue, not to mention the larger increase to GDP the infrastructure would provide once in place. Even if one applied the concept of "coffers" to the federal level, why would taxation be preferred to a revenue producing asset?
- "Cheaper, faster internet connection": It may be cheaper for some, but it wouldn't be that much faster as the backbone would be the same and potentially the lower prevalence of the technology would bottleneck transfers occurring intra-nationally. A point on price gouging: public assets have less imperative to deliver a profit. The whole point is that the price differential would not be the same as a private company attempting to do the same thing. OTOH, localised monopolies run by private companies can and do lead to worse outcomes for consumers.
The stakes are pretty high, I can't believe people openly support fucking vital infrastructure to save a few bucks.
roosters93
Member
Why would the government price gouge people? Price gouge doesn't mean set the price at cost to deliver internet to Oodnadatta.
Yes it would cost more to deliver to rural and remote areas than inner city areas. I don't know why you're stating the obvious. No one's disputing it.
You're not the only Liberal voter!
Phantomzone is ultimately substance less but entertaining.
Ventron is reasonable and in touch with reality except it seems when it comes to whether Andrew Bolt is a dick.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Australia is so great. What a great sporting nation we are. Australia is great.
In terms of getting infrastructure up and running, it probably is better that a government run monopoly gouge people. For one thing, since it'll be a monopoly, it'll be evenly distributed over the entire populace. Secondly, given that the profit motive wouldn't be as high as shareholder backed companies (given the political times, it would probably still exist, of course), people would likely not be getting reamed up the arse for service. Private corporations won't be gouged for delivering internet to rural communities, because they'll weight up the cost/benefit and just ignore it completely. End result: urban communities getting slaughtered for profit and rural with no fibre at all.
I agree the stakes are pretty high. Luckily we live in a democracy where we the public were able to have our say and we have as a society rejected Labor's NBN.
Would you say the government has a mandate for it? :3
Yes, so very happy to live in the country of the 'fuck you, got mines'.
Fuck, I hate tories.
As opposed to 'fuck you, want yours.'?
Legend is a Liberal voter right? But I don't think he comes in here very often
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
Did I miss the referendum?
Please see Jintor's and my own posts above for why this isn't accurate.
roosters93
Member
You got a link to the poll on that issue?
Edit: damn you a more normal bird
Yep and yep.
CrazedProfessional
Member
Can we change the thread title to reflect our post-election status?
Maybe Eats will do it if we ask him politely
The ignorance at thinking there are no benefits at all for regional and rural areas is ridiculous. Whole classes of business that could not afford to operate without it will spring up given the chance (due to the fact a lot of areas HAVE to use Telstra and their pricing is ridiculous for something as pititful as a 10Mbit full duplex link) . But yeah, makes more sense to force any tech related business to operate in a capital city where other infrastructure is strained than to allow regional areas to compete.
Whiteshirt
Member
I've worked in the spatial industry. Let me tell you that decent internet is much, much, much more useful than just giving farmers good, reliable internet. What governments, private industry, and non-profit organisations are trying to do right now is to build a spatial data infrastructure but that needs robust infrastructure...which Labor's NBN would have offered. You cannot share thousands and thousands of spatial datasets between numerous different agencies and data silos easily with the shit we currently have. Its too slow and unreliable. Western Australia has done a lot to try and build something where people can easily access and visualise spatial data (the implementation of Landgate and SCLIP is very top heavy but that's a different talk about). That's really nice but the main problem is that everything is amazingly slow as shit to upload and download.
And really, I know you're being factitious with the whole farmer angle but giving farmers good internet makes them ultimately more productive because you know, internet is very good at gathering and sharing information. That's its whole purpose. You absolutely cannot think short term with infrastructure and unfortunately, people literally do not understand this and only like projects that put out immediate results even if they are awful and suboptimal.
And really, I know you're being factitious with the whole farmer angle but giving farmers good internet makes them ultimately more productive because you know, internet is very good at gathering and sharing information. That's its whole purpose. You absolutely cannot think short term with infrastructure and unfortunately, people literally do not understand this and only like projects that put out immediate results even if they are awful and suboptimal.
CrazedProfessional
Member
AusPoliGAF 2013 - Darkness won
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
You may be disappointed with the result in this case
More seriously though, my point was more that claiming an election result is directly representative of public opinion on any one issue is pretty iffy, unless it's an election like 2007.I think there's one on Q&A next week as well. I know the new government is only just getting settled in, but the media focus on the ALP leadership seems to be a bit much. They do know the winner will be Opposition Leader, not PM, right?
AusPoliGAF - "But the future refused to change..."
Sky News loves its dramatic-looking promos. Sometimes they're warranted, sometimes they're not.
Whiteshirt
Member
Which is the hilarious thing, its shittier for literally everyone from basic consumers to small businesses to very large businesses and its not really saving the government any money in the process. 10 billion is chump change when we're talking about an entire country.
But people in Camberwell think "my internet is good enough why do I need faster internet?" and "why should my tax payer money go and provide poor people with stable internet?".
But people in Camberwell think "my internet is good enough why do I need faster internet?" and "why should my tax payer money go and provide poor people with stable internet?".
Yeah $10bn in savings and most people who have a decent ADSL2+ connection aren't going to notice a difference. Good for those who are stuck on RIMs or can't get a port at their exchange or those that live 5km from their exchange but a complete waste of money for anyone getting decent speeds on ADSL. I don't believe they're going to get anywhere near fibre speeds out of it despite Malcolm's best intentions because the technology has massive limitations when cable lengths aren't kept extremely short.
As a society? LOL. Nice way to pretend there is consensus.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
I'm pretty dumb with the specifics, but the Coalitions NBN scheme just seems like one of those things that is objectively worse in performance, exposure, longevity, and groudwork for the future, and every cent of the savings over Labor's NBN will in no way be seen or benefited from by the average Australian. Like, even wealthy, selfish, conservative assholes benefit from Labor's NBN over the Coalition. Everyone benefits. Everyone. For a long time.
But no, we decided to pick the poo option, because we're a great sporting nation god bless Australia (I don't fucking know).
But no, we decided to pick the poo option, because we're a great sporting nation god bless Australia (I don't fucking know).
'Penny wise, pound foolish' should be the Liberal's motto.
If society voted to jump off a cliff would you do it?
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
When it was first announced I was actually ok with the Coalition's scheme. or at least the FTTN part, mostly because it was such an improvement over their physically impossible previous policy and because it seemed like an acceptable stop-gap. Sure the idea that the government needs to save money on an investment like that is economic quackery, but that just comes with the territory. Once I discovered that it would use twice as much electricity as Labor's plan (making telecoms 4% of national consumption), have higher maintenance costs, lower reliability and would end up costing more once it was replaced/upgraded that enthusiasm subsided.
shanshan310
Member
I didn't realise small businesses required fiber optic cable to have an online presence. I shall concede to you good sir!
My job certainly requires faster internet. I'm barely floating as is. But go on, pretend faster internet only matters to gamers and people who like movies.
Thanks EatChildren.
A while back I was waiting for you to show up online on Steam chat so we could OT-ify this here AusPoliGAF thread because writing PMs is hard and I am lazy.
Now we play the waiting game of being shipped off to the digital Christmas Island of 'OFF-TOPIC Community'.
A while back I was waiting for you to show up online on Steam chat so we could OT-ify this here AusPoliGAF thread because writing PMs is hard and I am lazy.
Now we play the waiting game of being shipped off to the digital Christmas Island of 'OFF-TOPIC Community'.
What's wrong with people who like movies and games anyway? Imagine an internet-based content-delivery infrastructure breaking Murdoch's iron grip on terrestrial cable TV. Maybe there's some opportunities for local production houses and digital effects studios to get back in the game. Maybe some new media delivery platform will spring up or it'll suddenly become viable to get mid-tier game studios in Australia again.
TriangleOfCorruption
Member
ahhh fuck everyone
also no sympathy for liberal voters who wanted the nbn
also no sympathy for liberal voters who wanted the nbn
Won't be the case while costs of starting up a business are so astronomically high.
People here argue for the NBN for rural communities, yet I'll be willing to bet that no one here has really advocated for any other ideas for helping rural communities, and if you have, I'd love to hear what you've got in mind.
Can you please explain to me how you're barely floating?
The NBN technology is wonderful, just wanted to put that out there. I've had it at work for what, 2 years or something now and at home for a bit over 9 months. It's great.
Best of all? I don't even need the 100/40Mbps@2tb of data per month at home, but it's fucking great having it.
If it wasn't so 'pie in the sky' for so many people, if the messaging around the NBN wasn't mired in controversy (and this must include the hopeless rate of roll out, the uselesness of Telco's (fucking Telstra and the NBN, oh man, the horror stories - funny how little they care when there is so little in it for them) in getting small business hooked up, even here in Armidale where it has been a disaster for some businesses) and FUD - all three things actually unrelated to the technology - we wouldn't be having this discussion. We'd just get the fuck on with it and build the goddamn thing and then we could all revel in how magnanimous and altruistic the decision was to build such infrastructure
Best of all? I don't even need the 100/40Mbps@2tb of data per month at home, but it's fucking great having it.
If it wasn't so 'pie in the sky' for so many people, if the messaging around the NBN wasn't mired in controversy (and this must include the hopeless rate of roll out, the uselesness of Telco's (fucking Telstra and the NBN, oh man, the horror stories - funny how little they care when there is so little in it for them) in getting small business hooked up, even here in Armidale where it has been a disaster for some businesses) and FUD - all three things actually unrelated to the technology - we wouldn't be having this discussion. We'd just get the fuck on with it and build the goddamn thing and then we could all revel in how magnanimous and altruistic the decision was to build such infrastructure
Like the Harbour Bridge.
Is there anything that isnt the governments fault?
Nice straw man!
shanshan310
Member
I teach English online to people living in Japan. My connection is barely fast enough and my latency is ridiculous. I've been pulled up a few times by my manager but there's little I can do but hope tonight it's not too bad.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked