All aboard the slow train called Australia. We don’t have the know-how here to go any faster

The Intertubes have been ablaze at the apparent ‘betrayal’ by the Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP. In fact they have been ablaze almost constantly with each successive bout of cerebral flatulence perpetrated by the new coalition government. However, the enraged denizens of our slow-band future need to appreciate that the Hon MP is merely following the footsteps of his political forefathers; he is just the most recent in a proud line of ‘infrastructure deniers’.

In 1903 the early sire of the modern conservatives, the Protectionist Party were denouncing the construction of the Trans-Australian Railway that would connect the eastern states to Western Australia.

The rail connection was a major incentive given to WA to join the Federation in 1901, as at the time the only way to get anywhere from Perth was by a long boat journey. Protectionist Senator James Styles complained to the parliament that the works would draw resources away from NSW and QLD, and that traffic simply did not justify the expense.

It wasn’t until 1911 that an ALP government got the project in motion. When the two sides of the nation were finally connected in 1917, the railway revolutionised internal trade and freight carriage with travel now taking days instead of weeks.

In the 1960’s similar small-mindedness by a coalition government almost saw the end to a modern cultural icon, the Sydney Opera House, and gives another clear illustration of how poorly the coalition understands future value.

Throughout history the conservative coalition has been fixated on the expense, instead of the investment. This compartmentalised thinking is again illustrated by the inability of the government in 2013 to perceive the flow on impacts that the Holden shut-down will have.

Even the great Menzies lacked vision in opposition. When confronted with the Snowy Mountains Scheme in 1948 he declared that it couldn’t, and shouldn’t, be done.  He argued that despite the attacks on Darwin and Sydney the coastal power stations would be safe, that diverting rivers for irrigation during drought was a waste, and Australia had plenty of coal . . . in the unlikely event we ever needed to produce that much power. Most of all, Menzies decried that the price-tag of $400 million, or 4 per cent of GDP (the same percentage of GDP as the NBN) was too high.


Costing benefits

Malcolm Turnbull agreed with ‘Opposition Menzies’ and declared that an FTTP NBN needed a cost-benefit analysis like the Snowy Mountain Scheme. This, like his investment in France Telecom, has the odour-de-rank-hypocrisie; or worse, a complete ignorance of history.

The Snowy scheme didn’t have a cost-benefit analysis, certainly not in the way that modern accountancy firms and corporations run them. The 56-page final report that was tabled in May 1950 has passing similarly to the 7-month, 546-page implementation and feasibility study performed by international auditor KPMG. Despite the NBN study including “a cost-benefit analysis of the macro-economic and social benefits that would result from the implementation of a superfast broadband network”, the main similarity is that the projects are both so new and daring that it is impossible to conduct a precise cost-benefit, as the future benefits are mostly unknown.

Now we have, thanks to even more government largesse, a new report that apparently tells us what Turnbull was claiming all along; that the cost is too high, and traffic simply does not justify the expense.

So what does a cost-benefit-analysis do?  Firstly, it determines if something is a sound investment; secondly, it compares the costs of two options against expected benefits, to establish if the benefits outweigh the costs, and by how much.

In the first case, the original NBN Co laid out the business case that ensured the project paid for itself (so no tax-payer money required) and established a 7 per cent by project completion; in comparison over the past decade residential housing produced 5.3 per cent, and that figure did not include any profits made from privatisation.

In the second case; KPMG looked at super-fast versus slightly fast and ruled in favour of FTTP (aka FTTH). Very public comparisons of two options have almost overwhelmingly confirmed that FTTP delivers the best cost-benefit. Even the OECD stated that fibre-to-home or premises is the better option.

Turnbull’s Strategic Review claims that the 7 per cent is gone, that we don’t need faster broadband after all (50Mbps will do), and the “Labor” project will cost a horrific $73 billion. This means that a full FTTP 1000Mbps NBN would now directly cost the tax-payer around $30 billion. Divvy that up between tax-payers over the 8+ years of the project, and that means about $4.90 per week. Hmmm, coffee and muffin or the nation’s future?

continue

Trickle-Down Benefits

There is one thing significantly absent from the Snowy report; that is the benefit of ranks of engineers gaining invaluable experience, which fed directly into the 1960’s manufacturing and construction boom in “heavy construction, including roads . . . dams, bridges, ports . . . mining, oil refining and industrial plant.” This legacy still benefits Australia to this day; with the export of Australian engineering services, employed throughout the world on major projects.

Countries across the globe are currently putting together plans and proposals for FTTP rollouts. Within the next 5 years there could be Australian engineers, project managers, even entire companies skilled and experienced in rolling out large-scale fibre-optic infrastructure and the supporting software.

Australian companies that could tender for work in the USA, Japan, China, Russia, and even Kenya. Australia could become a Net-exporter of technology services. For want of investment, this is a future that we are in danger of missing out on.

With the death of Auto-manufacturing and associated businesses in Australia now imminent, should not the nation’s government, and our self-proclaimed ‘infrastructure PM’ be pursuing a viable alternative?

When Menzies won the December 1949 election he re-examined the Snowy Mountain Scheme. As ‘Prime Minister’ Menzies he bucked the ‘infrastructure denial’ trend. He decided to keep the scheme and was henceforth instrumental in its funding and initiated many other massive public infrastructure projects that were central in the modernising of Australia. In 1958 Menzies humbly said this of the Snowy Scheme. “In a period in which we in Australia are still, I think, handicapped by parochialism, by a slight distrust of big ideas and of big people or of big enterprises . . . this Scheme is teaching us and everybody in Australia to think in a big way, to be thankful for big things, to be proud of big enterprises and . . . to be thankful for big men.”

“The Snowy” was, according to the American Society of Engineers in 1967, “one of the seven engineering wonders” of the modern world.  While it has since been supplanted by other feats, it remains Australia’s largest engineering project. In 1949 Menzies was a big enough man to see the immediate and long term benefits of the project, even though he had tried to stop it in opposition. The question is; will Malcolm Turnbull or Prime Minster Abbott be big enough to do the same?


http://theaimn.com/2013/12/18/all-aboard-the-slow-train/

just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt

HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::)

cods wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 5:29am:

just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::)

If we didn't have a labor government we would't have a Trans Australian railway or the Sydney Opera House. So what is your point cods?

John S wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:26am:

cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:29am: just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::) If we didn't have a labor government we would't have a Trans Australian railway or the Sydney Opera House. So what is your point cods?

and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:42am:

John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:26am: cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:29am: just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::) If we didn't have a labor government we would't have a Trans Australian railway or the Sydney Opera House. So what is your point cods? and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again.

CRAP!

That lie's so old and tired it's not funny.

John S wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:26am:

cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:29am: just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::) If we didn't have a labor government we would't have a Trans Australian railway or the Sydney Opera House. So what is your point cods?

you dont think the SNOWY is more important than a rail or opera house.. I take it???

fair enough..

you do know the greens would have opposed the SNOWY dont you...ye gods they flooded a whole town..and god knows how many trees..

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:42am:

John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:26am: cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:29am: just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::) If we didn't have a labor government we would't have a Trans Australian railway or the Sydney Opera House. So what is your point cods? and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again.

DIDNT GREINER PAY OFF THE HARBOUR BRIDGE??????????


;D ;D ;D ;D

cods wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:51am:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:42am: John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:26am: cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:29am: just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::) If we didn't have a labor government we would't have a Trans Australian railway or the Sydney Opera House. So what is your point cods? and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again. DIDNT GREINER PAY OFF THE HARBOUR BRIDGE?????????? ;D ;D ;D ;D

No.

The people of NSW did.

cods wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:51am:

DIDNT GREINER PAY OFF THE HARBOUR BRIDGE?????????? ;D ;D ;D ;D

Then why are we still paying a toll to travel over it?

John S wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:58am:

cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:51am: DIDNT GREINER PAY OFF THE HARBOUR BRIDGE?????????? ;D ;D ;D ;D Then why are we still paying a toll to travel over it?

b ecause IT NEEDs MAINTAINING..dummy..and if you wan t other roads.built. well its the only way.

why do I PAY RATES>>>I have kerb and guttering.....

Kat wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:52am:

cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:51am: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:42am: John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:26am: cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:29am: just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::) If we didn't have a labor government we would't have a Trans Australian railway or the Sydney Opera House. So what is your point cods? and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again. DIDNT GREINER PAY OFF THE HARBOUR BRIDGE?????????? ;D ;D ;D ;D No. The people of NSW did.

and if Obeid and his mobsters had been in power it would have all ended up in his coffers
instead.. ::) ::) if it wasnt for Greiner they would still be paying the bloody thing off. >:( >:(

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:42am:

and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again.

Tell my one government that paid for the Trans Australia Railway or the Sydney Opera house that didn't go into debt?

Don't forget that Howard didn't built any infrastructure for Public use. He built the Darwin to Alice Springs railway and sold it as soon as it was finish.

My impression of malcolm is that he is a chronic people pleaser.
this is a bad attribute.
if you are a ruler, your job is to rule.
I rule over my horses and they are in no doubt who the boss is.
Pleaser type people come and be all lovey to them, feed them sugar cubes and before you know it, the horses are biting them and lining them up to double barrell kick them.
This is what happens when you are a soft leader who doesnt establish authority. you become a target for an increasingly unruly and selfish mob. i would liken the australian electorate in general to a mob of horse who have been 'over-loved' and now have zero respect and are more than willing to kick the living sh^t out of those they see as weak leaders.
malcolm is weak, there is no doubt. i cant think back to the last strong leader we had in australia.
maybe sir joh bjelke petersen.
i remember when an aboriginal activist conducted an intitiation ceremony on the steps of qld parliament house and spilt his blood there (as a protest for the blood spilt by his ancstors)
joh responded that "he'd be more impressed if he spilt a few drops of honest sweat"

you wont get strong leadership like that again, and we will all suffer for it.

our asian neighbours, china for example, understand that submission to strong aggressive leadership unites the country and makes everyone more prosperous.

the socialist greens, labor and to a great extent the liberals are more interested in being "likeable' than governing.
pathetic malcolm, just pathetic

Kat wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:45am:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:42am: John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:26am: cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:29am: just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::) If we didn't have a labor government we would't have a Trans Australian railway or the Sydney Opera House. So what is your point cods? and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again. CRAP! That lie's so old and tired it's not funny.

except it actually IS true and demonstrably so.  I'd prove it to you but that would require from you two thinks you lack - intelligence and intellectual honesty.

John S wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 7:21am:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:42am: and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again. Tell my one government that paid for the Trans Australia Railway or the Sydney Opera house that didn't go into debt? Don't forget that Howard didn't built any infrastructure for Public use. He built the Darwin to Alice Springs railway and sold it as soon as it was finish.

because the railway had purpose and made profit. it had economic benefit.  So far the only obviously use for the NBN is faster porn and downloading TV shows.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 11:28am:

John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 7:21am: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:42am: and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again. Tell my one government that paid for the Trans Australia Railway or the Sydney Opera house that didn't go into debt? Don't forget that Howard didn't built any infrastructure for Public use. He built the Darwin to Alice Springs railway and sold it as soon as it was finish. because the railway had purpose and made profit. it had economic benefit.  So far the only obviously use for the NBN is faster porn and downloading TV shows.

1. “This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication.” — Western Union internal memo, 1876.

2. “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” — Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943. “The world potential market for copying machines is 5,000 at most,” IBM executives to the eventual founders of Xerox, 1959.

3. “Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18 000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers of the future may have only 1 000 vacuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1½ tons.” — Popular Mechanics, March 1949

4. “I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.” — Jack Valenti, MPAA president, testimony to the House of Representatives, 1982

5. “Do not bother to sell your gas shares. The electric light has no future.” —Professor John Henry Pepper, Victorian-era celebrity scientist, sometime in the 1870s

6. “Television won’t be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night,” Darryl Zanuck, 20th Century Fox, 1946.

7. “The problem of TV was that people had to glue their eyes to a screen, and that the average American wouldn’t have time for it.”
− The New York Times, 1939

8. “The subscription model of buying music is bankrupt. I think you could make available the Second Coming in a subscription model and it might not be successful.” Steve Jobs — Rolling Stone, Dec. 3, 2003

9. “Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.” — Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre

10. “The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to no one in particular?” — Associates of David Sarnoff responding to the latter’s call for investment in the radio in 1921


And now we can add

11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 11:37am:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:28am: John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 7:21am: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:42am: and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again. Tell my one government that paid for the Trans Australia Railway or the Sydney Opera house that didn't go into debt? Don't forget that Howard didn't built any infrastructure for Public use. He built the Darwin to Alice Springs railway and sold it as soon as it was finish. because the railway had purpose and made profit. it had economic benefit.  So far the only obviously use for the NBN is faster porn and downloading TV shows. 1. “This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication.” — Western Union internal memo, 1876. 2. “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” — Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943. “The world potential market for copying machines is 5,000 at most,” IBM executives to the eventual founders of Xerox, 1959. 3. “Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18 000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers of the future may have only 1 000 vacuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1½ tons.” — Popular Mechanics, March 1949 4. “I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.” — Jack Valenti, MPAA president, testimony to the House of Representatives, 1982 5. “Do not bother to sell your gas shares. The electric light has no future.” —Professor John Henry Pepper, Victorian-era celebrity scientist, sometime in the 1870s 6. “Television won’t be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night,” Darryl Zanuck, 20th Century Fox, 1946. 7. “The problem of TV was that people had to glue their eyes to a screen, and that the average American wouldn’t have time for it.” − The New York Times, 1939 8. “The subscription model of buying music is bankrupt. I think you could make available the Second Coming in a subscription model and it might not be successful.” Steve Jobs — Rolling Stone, Dec. 3, 2003 9. “Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.” — Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre 10. “The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to no one in particular?” — Associates of David Sarnoff responding to the latter’s call for investment in the radio in 1921 And now we can add 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013

the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true.

The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street.

but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL.  You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people!

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 11:48am:

the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies

One could argue the mobile phone is just an extension of the telephone, the VCR an extension of the 32mm camera.


But hey I don't care, just like EVERYTHING else your against this, not for any real reason but just because Tony is.

If Murdoch turned around tomorrow & saw a $$$ opportunity in the NBN, Tony would build it within his 1st term & hang the cost.
And of course you'd be here telling us what an essential piece of infrastructure this was for the nation & how Labor would never have the vision or guts to do it.

BORING

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 11:48am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:28am: John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 7:21am: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:42am: and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again. Tell my one government that paid for the Trans Australia Railway or the Sydney Opera house that didn't go into debt? Don't forget that Howard didn't built any infrastructure for Public use. He built the Darwin to Alice Springs railway and sold it as soon as it was finish. because the railway had purpose and made profit. it had economic benefit.  So far the only obviously use for the NBN is faster porn and downloading TV shows. 1. “This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication.” — Western Union internal memo, 1876. 2. “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” — Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943. “The world potential market for copying machines is 5,000 at most,” IBM executives to the eventual founders of Xerox, 1959. 3. “Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18 000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers of the future may have only 1 000 vacuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1½ tons.” — Popular Mechanics, March 1949 4. “I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.” — Jack Valenti, MPAA president, testimony to the House of Representatives, 1982 5. “Do not bother to sell your gas shares. The electric light has no future.” —Professor John Henry Pepper, Victorian-era celebrity scientist, sometime in the 1870s 6. “Television won’t be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night,” Darryl Zanuck, 20th Century Fox, 1946. 7. “The problem of TV was that people had to glue their eyes to a screen, and that the average American wouldn’t have time for it.” − The New York Times, 1939 8. “The subscription model of buying music is bankrupt. I think you could make available the Second Coming in a subscription model and it might not be successful.” Steve Jobs — Rolling Stone, Dec. 3, 2003 9. “Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.” — Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre 10. “The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to no one in particular?” — Associates of David Sarnoff responding to the latter’s call for investment in the radio in 1921 And now we can add 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL.  You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people!

So going from single lane roads to multi-lane express ways was just an 'incremental' change?

Going from copper line technology to fibre is just incremental change?

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 12:12pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies One could argue the mobile phone is just an extension of the telephone, the VCR an extension of the 32mm camera. But hey I don't care, just like EVERYTHING else your against this, not for any real reason but just because Tony is. If Murdoch turned around tomorrow & saw a $$$ opportunity in the NBN, Tony would build it within his 1st term & hang the cost. And of course you'd be here telling us what an essential piece of infrastructure this was for the nation & how Labor would never have the vision or guts to do it. BORING

crap on your idiotic Murdoch and abbott conspiracy theories.  it makes you look like sound like and act like a wanker.  You should know by now that I hold positions based largely on my own personal preferences and beliefs.  I oppose the NBN because it is a largely an uber-expensive exercise in providing very little of substance.  And unlike you, I can articulate a position for my belief.  Your's amounts to little more than trotting out the Murdoch excuse  which is nothing more than a conspiracy-theory that is so implausible as to question your intelligence.  Your integrity is already gone.

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 12:17pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:28am: John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 7:21am: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:42am: and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again. Tell my one government that paid for the Trans Australia Railway or the Sydney Opera house that didn't go into debt? Don't forget that Howard didn't built any infrastructure for Public use. He built the Darwin to Alice Springs railway and sold it as soon as it was finish. because the railway had purpose and made profit. it had economic benefit.  So far the only obviously use for the NBN is faster porn and downloading TV shows. 1. “This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication.” — Western Union internal memo, 1876. 2. “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” — Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943. “The world potential market for copying machines is 5,000 at most,” IBM executives to the eventual founders of Xerox, 1959. 3. “Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18 000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers of the future may have only 1 000 vacuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1½ tons.” — Popular Mechanics, March 1949 4. “I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.” — Jack Valenti, MPAA president, testimony to the House of Representatives, 1982 5. “Do not bother to sell your gas shares. The electric light has no future.” —Professor John Henry Pepper, Victorian-era celebrity scientist, sometime in the 1870s 6. “Television won’t be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night,” Darryl Zanuck, 20th Century Fox, 1946. 7. “The problem of TV was that people had to glue their eyes to a screen, and that the average American wouldn’t have time for it.” − The New York Times, 1939 8. “The subscription model of buying music is bankrupt. I think you could make available the Second Coming in a subscription model and it might not be successful.” Steve Jobs — Rolling Stone, Dec. 3, 2003 9. “Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.” — Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre 10. “The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to no one in particular?” — Associates of David Sarnoff responding to the latter’s call for investment in the radio in 1921 And now we can add 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL.  You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! So going from single lane roads to multi-lane express ways was just an 'incremental' change? Going from copper line technology to fibre is just incremental change?

yes.  it is simply another form of cable.  better sure, but still a cable that has to be laid and repaired.  Incremental.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 1:53pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 12:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies One could argue the mobile phone is just an extension of the telephone, the VCR an extension of the 32mm camera. But hey I don't care, just like EVERYTHING else your against this, not for any real reason but just because Tony is. If Murdoch turned around tomorrow & saw a $$$ opportunity in the NBN, Tony would build it within his 1st term & hang the cost. And of course you'd be here telling us what an essential piece of infrastructure this was for the nation & how Labor would never have the vision or guts to do it. BORING crap on your idiotic Murdoch and abbott conspiracy theories.  it makes you look like sound like and act like a wanker.  You should know by now that I hold positions based largely on my own personal preferences and beliefs.  I oppose the NBN because it is a largely an uber-expensive exercise in providing very little of substance.  And unlike you, I can articulate a position for my belief.  Your's amounts to little more than trotting out the Murdoch excuse  which is nothing more than a conspiracy-theory that is so implausible as to question your intelligence.  Your integrity is already gone.

Mate, take a look

I'm a Ninja cat, in front of a rainbow on a Unicorn with a golden D eagle breathing phucking fire.

I don't need integrity or intelligence.

I'm a BOSS

---

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 2:02pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 1:53pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 12:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies One could argue the mobile phone is just an extension of the telephone, the VCR an extension of the 32mm camera. But hey I don't care, just like EVERYTHING else your against this, not for any real reason but just because Tony is. If Murdoch turned around tomorrow & saw a $$$ opportunity in the NBN, Tony would build it within his 1st term & hang the cost. And of course you'd be here telling us what an essential piece of infrastructure this was for the nation & how Labor would never have the vision or guts to do it. BORING crap on your idiotic Murdoch and abbott conspiracy theories.  it makes you look like sound like and act like a wanker.  You should know by now that I hold positions based largely on my own personal preferences and beliefs.  I oppose the NBN because it is a largely an uber-expensive exercise in providing very little of substance.  And unlike you, I can articulate a position for my belief.  Your's amounts to little more than trotting out the Murdoch excuse  which is nothing more than a conspiracy-theory that is so implausible as to question your intelligence.  Your integrity is already gone. Mate, take a look I'm a Ninja cat, in front of a rainbow on a Unicorn with a golden D eagle breathing phucking fire. I don't need integrity or intelligence. I'm a BOSS

then you nailed it. 

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 2:08pm:

then you nailed it.

As I always do. ;)

Cost-benefits analysis of the Sydney Opera House? Forget about it. Hardly anyone in Sydney uses the place.

But that building put Sydney - and Australia - on the world map. It helped to transform the way Australians saw themselves back in the 1970s and was part of a cultural revolution.

It's impossible to think of such projects today. Back then, ordinary Australians believed the Opera House was a necessity. The Daily Telegraph rained front page bullets on the waste of funds, but Australians still wanted it, and it survived.

Now, it's one of the most impressive modern buildings in the world. For most, the opera House is useless, but as a shell - as a work of art in itself - it's impossible to imagine Sydney (and Australia) without it. It sings of self confidence, ingenuity, workmanship, and beauty for its own sake.

And I doubt we'll see any projects like it in our lifetime.

Enquiring mind wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 2:54pm:

Cost-benefits analysis of the Sydney Opera House? Forget about it. Hardly anyone in Sydney uses the place. But that building put Sydney - and Australia - on the world map. It helped to transform the way Australians saw themselves back in the 1970s and was part of a cultural revolution. It's impossible to think of such projects today. Back then, ordinary Australians believed the Opera House was a necessity. The Daily Telegraph rained front page bullets on the waste of funds, but Australians still wanted it, and it survived. Now, it's one of the most impressive modern buildings in the world. For most, the opera House is useless, but as a shell - as a work of art in itself - it's impossible to imagine Sydney (and Australia) without it. It sings of self confidence, ingenuity, workmanship, and beauty for its own sake. And I doubt we'll see any projects like it in our lifetime.

Of course we won't
We won't even have the NDIS by 2017, to much money for poor people(as 99% of disabled are).

No Australian tax $$ are much better spent supplying retirees with 3 million in Super with tax breaks is a much smarter move for the Economy & Nation.

Just don't ask anyone to explain why ;)

Now thats out of the way

Lets have some more awesomeness

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-CyitTdSbzr0/UrPGV1cKoAI/AAAAAAAAIDI/yngCdI-epcg/w378-h211-no/e.gif

Enquiring mind wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 2:54pm:

Cost-benefits analysis of the Sydney Opera House? Forget about it. Hardly anyone in Sydney uses the place. But that building put Sydney - and Australia - on the world map. It helped to transform the way Australians saw themselves back in the 1970s and was part of a cultural revolution. It's impossible to think of such projects today. Back then, ordinary Australians believed the Opera House was a necessity. The Daily Telegraph rained front page bullets on the waste of funds, but Australians still wanted it, and it survived. Now, it's one of the most impressive modern buildings in the world. For most, the opera House is useless, but as a shell - as a work of art in itself - it's impossible to imagine Sydney (and Australia) without it. It sings of self confidence, ingenuity, workmanship, and beauty for its own sake. And I doubt we'll see any projects like it in our lifetime.

we built a landmark - not a usable building.  it went way, way, way over budget,  was behind by a decade and is close to useless as an actual opera house.

why do you think that is such a success??  there is already a call for $100M for repairs to... a useless building.  The opera house is actually a perfect example of how to waste money and get nothing in return for it as well.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 3:06pm:

Enquiring mind wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 2:54pm: Cost-benefits analysis of the Sydney Opera House? Forget about it. Hardly anyone in Sydney uses the place. But that building put Sydney - and Australia - on the world map. It helped to transform the way Australians saw themselves back in the 1970s and was part of a cultural revolution. It's impossible to think of such projects today. Back then, ordinary Australians believed the Opera House was a necessity. The Daily Telegraph rained front page bullets on the waste of funds, but Australians still wanted it, and it survived. Now, it's one of the most impressive modern buildings in the world. For most, the opera House is useless, but as a shell - as a work of art in itself - it's impossible to imagine Sydney (and Australia) without it. It sings of self confidence, ingenuity, workmanship, and beauty for its own sake. And I doubt we'll see any projects like it in our lifetime. Of course we won't We won't even have the NDIS by 2017, to much money for poor people(as 99% of disabled are). No Australian tax $$ are much better spent supplying retirees with 3 million in Super with tax breaks is a much smarter move for the Economy & Nation. Just don't ask anyone to explain why ;) Now thats out of the way Lets have some more awesomeness https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-CyitTdSbzr0/UrPGV1cKoAI/AAAAAAAAIDI/yngCdI-epcg/w378-h211-no/e.gif

Ive never really understood the philosophy that some has  - and you repeat - which is that if you can afford it then you should be penalised and if you are poor you should be rewarded.  Supporting the poor is not the same as penalising the rich but alas, most fail to see the distinction.  Probably because penalising the rich is usually the primary goal anyhow.

Prove it you Liberal hack!

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 4:45pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 3:06pm: Enquiring mind wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 2:54pm: Cost-benefits analysis of the Sydney Opera House? Forget about it. Hardly anyone in Sydney uses the place. But that building put Sydney - and Australia - on the world map. It helped to transform the way Australians saw themselves back in the 1970s and was part of a cultural revolution. It's impossible to think of such projects today. Back then, ordinary Australians believed the Opera House was a necessity. The Daily Telegraph rained front page bullets on the waste of funds, but Australians still wanted it, and it survived. Now, it's one of the most impressive modern buildings in the world. For most, the opera House is useless, but as a shell - as a work of art in itself - it's impossible to imagine Sydney (and Australia) without it. It sings of self confidence, ingenuity, workmanship, and beauty for its own sake. And I doubt we'll see any projects like it in our lifetime. Of course we won't We won't even have the NDIS by 2017, to much money for poor people(as 99% of disabled are). No Australian tax $$ are much better spent supplying retirees with 3 million in Super with tax breaks is a much smarter move for the Economy & Nation. Just don't ask anyone to explain why ;) Now thats out of the way Lets have some more awesomeness https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-CyitTdSbzr0/UrPGV1cKoAI/AAAAAAAAIDI/yngCdI-epcg/w378-h211-no/e.gif Ive never really understood the philosophy that some has  - and you repeat - which is that if you can afford it then you should be penalised and if you are poor you should be rewarded.  Supporting the poor is not the same as penalising the rich but alas, most fail to see the distinction.  Probably because penalising the rich is usually the primary goal anyhow.

Oh garbage! Money is taken from the poor and given to the rich under Lib govts like Howard’s and now the shambles’!

St George of the Garden wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 4:50pm:

Prove it you Liberal hack!

Prove what, dumber-than-soup George?

St George of the Garden wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 4:52pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 3:06pm: Enquiring mind wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 2:54pm: Cost-benefits analysis of the Sydney Opera House? Forget about it. Hardly anyone in Sydney uses the place. But that building put Sydney - and Australia - on the world map. It helped to transform the way Australians saw themselves back in the 1970s and was part of a cultural revolution. It's impossible to think of such projects today. Back then, ordinary Australians believed the Opera House was a necessity. The Daily Telegraph rained front page bullets on the waste of funds, but Australians still wanted it, and it survived. Now, it's one of the most impressive modern buildings in the world. For most, the opera House is useless, but as a shell - as a work of art in itself - it's impossible to imagine Sydney (and Australia) without it. It sings of self confidence, ingenuity, workmanship, and beauty for its own sake. And I doubt we'll see any projects like it in our lifetime. Of course we won't We won't even have the NDIS by 2017, to much money for poor people(as 99% of disabled are). No Australian tax $$ are much better spent supplying retirees with 3 million in Super with tax breaks is a much smarter move for the Economy & Nation. Just don't ask anyone to explain why ;) Now thats out of the way Lets have some more awesomeness https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-CyitTdSbzr0/UrPGV1cKoAI/AAAAAAAAIDI/yngCdI-epcg/w378-h211-no/e.gif Ive never really understood the philosophy that some has  - and you repeat - which is that if you can afford it then you should be penalised and if you are poor you should be rewarded.  Supporting the poor is not the same as penalising the rich but alas, most fail to see the distinction.  Probably because penalising the rich is usually the primary goal anyhow. Oh garbage! Money is taken from the poor and given to the rich under Lib govts like Howard’s and now the shambles’!

the reverse is true and has been since federation.  you are just another unemployed bogan wanting the world handed to you on a platter while you play video games and watch downloaded porn on your 4K TV - given to you of course.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 4:45pm:

Ive never really understood the philosophy that some has  - and you repeat - which is that if you can afford it then you should be penalised and if you are poor you should be rewarded.  Supporting the poor is not the same as penalising the rich but alas, most fail to see the distinction.  Probably because penalising the rich is usually the primary goal anyhow.

You have a funny definition of penalising.

Being asked to pay 15 in in every $ over 200K earned from investments is hardly penalising the rich.

And where did I say that money had to be used as a reward/handout to the poor?

Once you understand the tax you pay provides the society you get it makes sense.

Do you want a society like the USA? No I've seen you argue against Andrei many times about the inequality over there.

Do you want a society like SA where you have to live in an armed compound & still not safe?
I doubt it.

Would you want to live in Sweden where your taxed high but are looked after if you fall on hard times with A grade health education and aged care?

Out of the 3 which would you really choose.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 11:48am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL.

There's a difference between "can't run" and "can run but impractical". I doubt you've learned it yet.

Here's one example. It is now possible to back up your hard disk onto disk space hosted by a remote server. Suppose someone has 250Gb to back up. With 25 Mb/s, that backup would take about three hours to complete. With 1 Gb/s, that backup would be complete in about four minutes.

Assume that this is important business data - payroll, etc. There are real costs here. For a four-minute backup, it can be completed in the time it takes to prepare a cup of coffee. For a three-hour backup, that would be far more disruptive. If the files need to be closed to do the backup, then it can only be done after hours, which means paying someone to stay behind for three hours after everyone else is gone, which means the option is definitely in the "impractical" category.

Furthermore, with 25Mb/s, the most that can be backed up daily in this way is a bit more than 2 terabytes - roughly the capacity of a modern hard disk. So forget backing up 2 Tb daily at 25 Mb/s, it's impractical. At 1Gb/s, that backup is complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits.

Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated.


Quote:

You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people!

You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night?

There is the reliability aspect as well. You start a huge upload going just before you go home.

You come back in the morning and find the connection crashed DAMN!

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 5:20pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Ive never really understood the philosophy that some has  - and you repeat - which is that if you can afford it then you should be penalised and if you are poor you should be rewarded.  Supporting the poor is not the same as penalising the rich but alas, most fail to see the distinction.  Probably because penalising the rich is usually the primary goal anyhow. You have a funny definition of penalising. Being asked to pay 15 in in every $ over 200K earned from investments is hardly penalising the rich. And where did I say that money had to be used as a reward/handout to the poor? Once you understand the tax you pay provides the society you get it makes sense. Do you want a society like the USA? No I've seen you argue against Andrei many times about the inequality over there. Do you want a society like SA where you have to live in an armed compound & still not safe? I doubt it. Would you want to live in Sweden where your taxed high but are looked after if you fall on hard times with A grade health education and aged care? Out of the 3 which would you really choose.

and making SOME superannuants pay double the taxation IS penalising no matter what you like to think.  When one group is paying more for the same service then they are being penalised.  the income tax system is essentially a penalising system but everyone accepts it as the only way in which it can work.  But there are way too many who actively advocate PENALTY taxation on those they think earn too much or have too much.  The mining tax was the perfect example - a penalty for being profitable.  the superannuation changes (now dumped) were also a penalty.

Just because you can afford a penalty doesn't make it right or justifiable.

and I argue against Andrei because he has a heart of stone and zero interests in the welfare of others.  I don't.  I support the social support systems we have.  I just oppose the never-ending demand that the poor pay less and get more welfare while the middle and upper groups are expected to get LESS and pay more.  That's a penalty system

South Africa's problems are not economic - they are social from generations back.  Not that being a backward, violent poor, badly governemed country sets them apart in Africa.

Bam wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 5:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL. There's a difference between "can't run" and "can run but impractical". I doubt you've learned it yet. Here's one example. It is now possible to back up your hard disk onto disk space hosted by a remote server. Suppose someone has 250Gb to back up. With 25 Mb/s, that backup would take about three hours to complete. With 1 Gb/s, that backup would be complete in about four minutes. Assume that this is important business data - payroll, etc. There are real costs here. For a four-minute backup, it can be completed in the time it takes to prepare a cup of coffee. For a three-hour backup, that would be far more disruptive. If the files need to be closed to do the backup, then it can only be done after hours, which means paying someone to stay behind for three hours after everyone else is gone, which means the option is definitely in the "impractical" category. Furthermore, with 25Mb/s, the most that can be backed up daily in this way is a bit more than 2 terabytes - roughly the capacity of a modern hard disk. So forget backing up 2 Tb daily at 25 Mb/s, it's impractical. At 1Gb/s, that backup is complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits. Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated. Quote: You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night?

great example for discussion.  the first question is why that data needs to be backed up to the cloud.  We managed to do this for decades using onsite and offsite backups with perfect safety.  (Ive worked in IT for 30 years).  4mins vs 3 hours.  interesting comparison but the point is 'so what'?  My business has scheduled backups that occur off the server at night.  I have no idea how long they take and I don't care because it doesn't matter.  IM not there nor is anyone else.  Just because anything CAN be done faster or better is not an intrinsic reason to do it.  I could have done many changes to the database systems I developed to make them faster or this that and the other thing.  But clients didn't want to pay for it because... the benefit was negiigable or zero.

faster doesn't equate to better.  It is just faster.

buy yourself and external drive.  it will be faster than ANY internet, just as secure and you can do it today.

OCCAMS RAZOR.

Bam wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 5:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL. There's a difference between "can't run" and "can run but impractical". I doubt you've learned it yet. Here's one example. It is now possible to back up your hard disk onto disk space hosted by a remote server. Suppose someone has 250Gb to back up. With 25 Mb/s, that backup would take about three hours to complete. With 1 Gb/s, that backup would be complete in about four minutes. Assume that this is important business data - payroll, etc. There are real costs here. For a four-minute backup, it can be completed in the time it takes to prepare a cup of coffee. For a three-hour backup, that would be far more disruptive. If the files need to be closed to do the backup, then it can only be done after hours, which means paying someone to stay behind for three hours after everyone else is gone, which means the option is definitely in the "impractical" category. Furthermore, with 25Mb/s, the most that can be backed up daily in this way is a bit more than 2 terabytes - roughly the capacity of a modern hard disk. So forget backing up 2 Tb daily at 25 Mb/s, it's impractical. At 1Gb/s, that backup is complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits. Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated. Quote: You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night?

then why don't you ask yourself why Deloitte came up with such a gobsmackingly dumb statement?  That's the real question because it seems to imply they were casting about for reasons and the best they could find was this.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 5:41pm:

Bam wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:22pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL. There's a difference between "can't run" and "can run but impractical". I doubt you've learned it yet. Here's one example. It is now possible to back up your hard disk onto disk space hosted by a remote server. Suppose someone has 250Gb to back up. With 25 Mb/s, that backup would take about three hours to complete. With 1 Gb/s, that backup would be complete in about four minutes. Assume that this is important business data - payroll, etc. There are real costs here. For a four-minute backup, it can be completed in the time it takes to prepare a cup of coffee. For a three-hour backup, that would be far more disruptive. If the files need to be closed to do the backup, then it can only be done after hours, which means paying someone to stay behind for three hours after everyone else is gone, which means the option is definitely in the "impractical" category. Furthermore, with 25Mb/s, the most that can be backed up daily in this way is a bit more than 2 terabytes - roughly the capacity of a modern hard disk. So forget backing up 2 Tb daily at 25 Mb/s, it's impractical. At 1Gb/s, that backup is complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits. Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated. Quote: You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night? then why don't you ask yourself why Deloitte came up with such a gobsmackingly dumb statement?  That's the real question because it seems to imply they were casting about for reasons and the best they could find was this.

You've never heard of scheduled backups before done by a server or PC without user intervention???  tyr Goodsync for starters.

There are some d!ckheads on here.

Here is longy saying now that FTTN is all we need, but back in 2007 when labor proposed FTTN longy was saying that ADSL2 is all we need.

So make up your mind d!ckhead what do we need? FTTN or ADSL2 or are you just going on what the libturds party is saying

You poor deluded individuals...  still praying for a Labor leader...  get Mal to switch parties first.  ;D

John S wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 11:19pm:

There are some d!ckheads on here. Here is longy saying now that FTTN is all we need, but back in 2007 when labor proposed FTTN longy was saying that ADSL2 is all we need. So make up your mind d!ckhead what do we need? FTTN or ADSL2 or are you just going on what the libturds party is saying

idiot.  in 2007 Labor was proposing ADSL to everyone after cancelling howards contracts to do exactly that.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 21^st, 2013 at 2:55pm:

John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:19pm: There are some d!ckheads on here. Here is longy saying now that FTTN is all we need, but back in 2007 when labor proposed FTTN longy was saying that ADSL2 is all we need. So make up your mind d!ckhead what do we need? FTTN or ADSL2 or are you just going on what the libturds party is saying idiot.  in 2007 Labor was proposing ADSL to everyone after cancelling howards contracts to do exactly that.

You know f*%# all longy  labor propose FTTN in 2007 after cancelling Howard ADSL contracts and you were saying that ADSL2 is all we needed, go back and have a look what you were saying

John S wrote on Dec 21^st, 2013 at 3:07pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 2:55pm: John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:19pm: There are some d!ckheads on here. Here is longy saying now that FTTN is all we need, but back in 2007 when labor proposed FTTN longy was saying that ADSL2 is all we need. So make up your mind d!ckhead what do we need? FTTN or ADSL2 or are you just going on what the libturds party is saying idiot.  in 2007 Labor was proposing ADSL to everyone after cancelling howards contracts to do exactly that. You know f*%# all longy  labor propose FTTN in 2007 after cancelling Howard ADSL contracts and you were saying that ADSL2 is all we needed, go back and have a look what you were saying

yeah you just believe that.  the tenders that came in were around $7B-$9B.  that woiuldnt have built a national network of any technology.

grow a brain.  as usual, you get everything wrong.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 5:42pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Bam wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:22pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL. There's a difference between "can't run" and "can run but impractical". I doubt you've learned it yet. Here's one example. It is now possible to back up your hard disk onto disk space hosted by a remote server. Suppose someone has 250Gb to back up. With 25 Mb/s, that backup would take about three hours to complete. With 1 Gb/s, that backup would be complete in about four minutes. Assume that this is important business data - payroll, etc. There are real costs here. For a four-minute backup, it can be completed in the time it takes to prepare a cup of coffee. For a three-hour backup, that would be far more disruptive. If the files need to be closed to do the backup, then it can only be done after hours, which means paying someone to stay behind for three hours after everyone else is gone, which means the option is definitely in the "impractical" category. Furthermore, with 25Mb/s, the most that can be backed up daily in this way is a bit more than 2 terabytes - roughly the capacity of a modern hard disk. So forget backing up 2 Tb daily at 25 Mb/s, it's impractical. At 1Gb/s, that backup is complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits. Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated. Quote: You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night? then why don't you ask yourself why Deloitte came up with such a gobsmackingly dumb statement?  That's the real question because it seems to imply they were casting about for reasons and the best they could find was this. Yes but bam has the point that backing up over an adsl link is virtually impossible.  For business, ftth would've made a whole lot of cheaper sense.  Oh well, goodbye productivity because longy only wonders about porn. You've never heard of scheduled backups before done by a server or PC without user intervention???  tyr Goodsync for starters.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21^st, 2013 at 7:34pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Bam wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:22pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL. There's a difference between "can't run" and "can run but impractical". I doubt you've learned it yet. Here's one example. It is now possible to back up your hard disk onto disk space hosted by a remote server. Suppose someone has 250Gb to back up. With 25 Mb/s, that backup would take about three hours to complete. With 1 Gb/s, that backup would be complete in about four minutes. Assume that this is important business data - payroll, etc. There are real costs here. For a four-minute backup, it can be completed in the time it takes to prepare a cup of coffee. For a three-hour backup, that would be far more disruptive. If the files need to be closed to do the backup, then it can only be done after hours, which means paying someone to stay behind for three hours after everyone else is gone, which means the option is definitely in the "impractical" category. Furthermore, with 25Mb/s, the most that can be backed up daily in this way is a bit more than 2 terabytes - roughly the capacity of a modern hard disk. So forget backing up 2 Tb daily at 25 Mb/s, it's impractical. At 1Gb/s, that backup is complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits. Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated. Quote: You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night? then why don't you ask yourself why Deloitte came up with such a gobsmackingly dumb statement?  That's the real question because it seems to imply they were casting about for reasons and the best they could find was this. Yes but bam has the point that backing up over an adsl link is virtually impossible.  For business, ftth would've made a whole lot of cheaper sense.  Oh well, goodbye productivity because longy only wonders about porn. You've never heard of scheduled backups before done by a server or PC without user intervention???  tyr Goodsync for starters.

it is not only NOT impossible, people have been doing it for years.  Many years in my case.  And it works well.  Once again, the point is not that FTTH would be faster but rather to put an economic benefit on it.  Backing up faster to the cloud would have a close to zero benefit since it is done out of business hours anyhow. And that is before you even ask the question of why you are backing up to the cloud when physical media is faster and more reliable than internet storage will ever be.

I can make all the productivity arguments you want.  But so fare the NBN Fanatics have done a pretty poor job of doing once for their case.  Backup to the cloud??? that's it???  $100B for a network so you can backup faster???

I am sure that in an earlier time you would have been like the rest of the stupid talking about the 'future of computing' ie diskless workstations and network computers - computers with no storage.  After all, we all just upload and download form the internet, right?  every time we want to start MS Word we just wait 5-10mins while the app downloads... every time.  Those ideas died a miserable death because they were stupid, but most tech-heads embraced it with a  passion.  I said it was stupid at the time and was howled down.  I was right.  I see the same argument here. 

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 21^st, 2013 at 7:43pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Bam wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:22pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL. There's a difference between "can't run" and "can run but impractical". I doubt you've learned it yet. Here's one example. It is now possible to back up your hard disk onto disk space hosted by a remote server. Suppose someone has 250Gb to back up. With 25 Mb/s, that backup would take about three hours to complete. With 1 Gb/s, that backup would be complete in about four minutes. Assume that this is important business data - payroll, etc. There are real costs here. For a four-minute backup, it can be completed in the time it takes to prepare a cup of coffee. For a three-hour backup, that would be far more disruptive. If the files need to be closed to do the backup, then it can only be done after hours, which means paying someone to stay behind for three hours after everyone else is gone, which means the option is definitely in the "impractical" category. Furthermore, with 25Mb/s, the most that can be backed up daily in this way is a bit more than 2 terabytes - roughly the capacity of a modern hard disk. So forget backing up 2 Tb daily at 25 Mb/s, it's impractical. At 1Gb/s, that backup is complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits. Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated. Quote: You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night? then why don't you ask yourself why Deloitte came up with such a gobsmackingly dumb statement?  That's the real question because it seems to imply they were casting about for reasons and the best they could find was this. Yes but bam has the point that backing up over an adsl link is virtually impossible.  For business, ftth would've made a whole lot of cheaper sense.  Oh well, goodbye productivity because longy only wonders about porn. You've never heard of scheduled backups before done by a server or PC without user intervention???  tyr Goodsync for starters. it is not only NOT impossible, people have been doing it for years.  Many years in my case.  And it works well.  Once again, the point is not that FTTH would be faster but rather to put an economic benefit on it.  Backing up faster to the cloud would have a close to zero benefit since it is done out of business hours anyhow. And that is before you even ask the question of why you are backing up to the cloud when physical media is faster and more reliable than internet storage will ever be. I can make all the productivity arguments you want.  But so fare the NBN Fanatics have done a pretty poor job of doing once for their case.  Backup to the cloud??? that's it???  $100B for a network so you can backup faster??? I am sure that in an earlier time you would have been like the rest of the stupid talking about the 'future of computing' ie diskless workstations and network computers - computers with no storage.  After all, we all just upload and download form the internet, right?  every time we want to start MS Word we just wait 5-10mins while the app downloads... every time.  Those ideas died a miserable death because they were stupid, but most tech-heads embraced it with a  passion.  I said it was stupid at the time and was howled down.  I was right.  I see the same argument here.

How much data do you backup each night?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21^st, 2013 at 7:44pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:43pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Bam wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:22pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL. There's a difference between "can't run" and "can run but impractical". I doubt you've learned it yet. Here's one example. It is now possible to back up your hard disk onto disk space hosted by a remote server. Suppose someone has 250Gb to back up. With 25 Mb/s, that backup would take about three hours to complete. With 1 Gb/s, that backup would be complete in about four minutes. Furthermore, with 25Mb/s, the most that can be backed up daily in this way is a bit more than 2 terabytes - roughly the capacity of a modern hard disk. So forget backing up 2 Tb daily at 25 Mb/s, it's impractical. At 1Gb/s, that backup is complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits. Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated. Quote: You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night? then why don't you ask yourself why Deloitte came up with such a gobsmackingly dumb statement?  That's the real question because it seems to imply they were casting about for reasons and the best they could find was this. Yes but bam has the point that backing up over an adsl link is virtually impossible.  For business, ftth would've made a whole lot of cheaper sense.  Oh well, goodbye productivity because longy only wonders about porn. You've never heard of scheduled backups before done by a server or PC without user intervention???  tyr Goodsync for starters. it is not only NOT impossible, people have been doing it for years.  Many years in my case.  And it works well.  Once again, the point is not that FTTH would be faster but rather to put an economic benefit on it.  Backing up faster to the cloud would have a close to zero benefit since it is done out of business hours anyhow. And that is before you even ask the question of why you are backing up to the cloud when physical media is faster and more reliable than internet storage will ever be. I can make all the productivity arguments you want.  But so fare the NBN Fanatics have done a pretty poor job of doing once for their case.  Backup to the cloud??? that's it???  $100B for a network so you can backup faster??? I am sure that in an earlier time you would have been like the rest of the stupid talking about the 'future of computing' ie diskless workstations and network computers - computers with no storage.  After all, we all just upload and download form the internet, right?  every time we want to start MS Word we just wait 5-10mins while the app downloads... every time.  Those ideas died a miserable death because they were stupid, but most tech-heads embraced it with a  passion.  I said it was stupid at the time and was howled down.  I was right.  I see the same argument here.  How much data do you backup each night?

60-100Gb.  of course I back up CHANGES ONLY - a factor that has been embarrassingly missing from the debate and it crucial to any form of network management.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 21^st, 2013 at 7:50pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:44pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:43pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Bam wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:22pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:48am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 11:37am: 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. The NBN is not new technology at all and is simply an incremental change to an existing one.  Not dissimilar to rebuilding the nations roads and building lane freeways everywhere - including down every suburban street. but if you are so clever than you too can go to the experience of all these other countries and states etc with a FTTH network in place and tell me of all the amazing industries that have sprung up overnight and all the amazing new technologies that have been developed that cant run on ADSL. There's a difference between "can't run" and "can run but impractical". I doubt you've learned it yet. Here's one example. It is now possible to back up your hard disk onto disk space hosted by a remote server. Suppose someone has 250Gb to back up. With 25 Mb/s, that backup would take about three hours to complete. With 1 Gb/s, that backup would be complete in about four minutes. Furthermore, with 25Mb/s, the most that can be backed up daily in this way is a bit more than 2 terabytes - roughly the capacity of a modern hard disk. So forget backing up 2 Tb daily at 25 Mb/s, it's impractical. At 1Gb/s, that backup is complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits. Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated. Quote: You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night? then why don't you ask yourself why Deloitte came up with such a gobsmackingly dumb statement?  That's the real question because it seems to imply they were casting about for reasons and the best they could find was this. Yes but bam has the point that backing up over an adsl link is virtually impossible.  For business, ftth would've made a whole lot of cheaper sense.  Oh well, goodbye productivity because longy only wonders about porn. You've never heard of scheduled backups before done by a server or PC without user intervention???  tyr Goodsync for starters. it is not only NOT impossible, people have been doing it for years.  Many years in my case.  And it works well.  Once again, the point is not that FTTH would be faster but rather to put an economic benefit on it.  Backing up faster to the cloud would have a close to zero benefit since it is done out of business hours anyhow. And that is before you even ask the question of why you are backing up to the cloud when physical media is faster and more reliable than internet storage will ever be. I can make all the productivity arguments you want.  But so fare the NBN Fanatics have done a pretty poor job of doing once for their case.  Backup to the cloud??? that's it???  $100B for a network so you can backup faster??? I am sure that in an earlier time you would have been like the rest of the stupid talking about the 'future of computing' ie diskless workstations and network computers - computers with no storage.  After all, we all just upload and download form the internet, right?  every time we want to start MS Word we just wait 5-10mins while the app downloads... every time.  Those ideas died a miserable death because they were stupid, but most tech-heads embraced it with a  passion.  I said it was stupid at the time and was howled down.  I was right.  I see the same argument here.  How much data do you backup each night? 60-100Gb.  of course I back up CHANGES ONLY - a factor that has been embarrassingly missing from the debate and it crucial to any form of network management.

Now try to back up 280Gb OF CHANGES ONLY over the course of one night over a 20 Mbps ADSL2 link and lets see how you go :)

The point is the constraints. For you it may work well, but it's constrained to a limit that for many, MANY, small-medium sized businesses it doesn't work.

Try argue with an overall view of the issue, not on just personal experience being the norm

and let me ask you, wouldn't you agree that you backup CHANGES ONLY depending on how fast you can restore a full image?

And if thats the case, then surely you'd agree at times it warrants to do a FULL backup. And if that';s the case, good luck with your link.

Also Alevine, for uploads you don't get 20mbps, typically its 1-2mBITSps.  So Gigabyte backups are truly out of the question.

Longweekend (who claims to be an IT professional) advocates backing up to physical media, whereas every professional organisation I worked for created offsite backups (for the obvious reasons of fire or other possible damage).

Its not just business users that should have backups.  Over the years I have accumulated gigabytes of files (documents, emails, photos, videos) mainly to do with my family or my personal business contracts, warranties, etc.  The loss of the files would be devastating, so apart from having a physical media backup, its very reassuring to have a cloud backup as well.

Before Longweekend jumps up and down saying that the cost of FTTH can't be justified on cloud backups = I agree wholeheartedly.  But by his logic, why should the government even be involved at all?

FTTH (or even FTTN) cannot be justified on any individual application for personal use.  But it is clear that the government (as a generic term not just Labor/Liberal) fully endorses the use of electronic communications for all. Centrelink, Medicare, AEC  to mention just a few.  The take up of electronic communications has been staggering growth in government, commercial and the pubic sector.

Since private enterprise is not capable of setting up a nationwide network (to ensure its availability to all) it has fallen on the government to do so.  To replace a copper network partially with fibre that gives no benefit to existing users is just an expensive joke.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21^st, 2013 at 7:52pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:50pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:44pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:43pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:42pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Bam wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:22pm: [quote author=longweekend58 link=1387471134/17#17 date=1387504129][quote author=dsmithy70 link=1387471134/16#16 date=1387503479] 11. The NBN will only ever be used for Porn & Pirating TV shows - Longweekend58 20/12/2013 the difference is that all the above were NEW technologies and while they sound amusing and embarrassing today what you don't read about is the 1000 other such comments which were... true. complete in about half an hour. That is also assuming that the user doesn't exceed upload limits. Of course, it's a waste of time discussing benefits of high-speed broadband with you because you obviously adhere to a religious belief that whatever we can do with high speed broadband is either porn, illegal movies, can be done on ADSL, or are exaggerated. [quote]You might come up with the amazing revelation that DEloitte came up with that we will be able to do... online shopping.  Spare us from the stupidity of such people! You must live in an interesting world. Do the roars of the dinosaurs keep you awake at night? You've never heard of scheduled backups before done by a server or PC without user intervention???  tyr Goodsync for starters. it is not only NOT impossible, people have been doing it for years.  Many years in my case.  And it works well.  Once again, the point is not that FTTH would be faster but rather to put an economic benefit on it.  Backing up faster to the cloud would have a close to zero benefit since it is done out of business hours anyhow. And that is before you even ask the question of why you are backing up to the cloud when physical media is faster and more reliable than internet storage will ever be. I can make all the productivity arguments you want.  But so fare the NBN Fanatics have done a pretty poor job of doing once for their case.  Backup to the cloud??? that's it???  $100B for a network so you can backup faster??? I am sure that in an earlier time you would have been like the rest of the stupid talking about the 'future of computing' ie diskless workstations and network computers - computers with no storage.  After all, we all just upload and download form the internet, right?  every time we want to start MS Word we just wait 5-10mins while the app downloads... every time.  Those ideas died a miserable death because they were stupid, but most tech-heads embraced it with a  passion.  I said it was stupid at the time and was howled down.  I was right.  I see the same argument here.  How much data do you backup each night? 60-100Gb.  of course I back up CHANGES ONLY - a factor that has been embarrassingly missing from the debate and it crucial to any form of network management.

Now try to back up 280Gb OF CHANGES ONLY over the course of one night over a 20 Mbps ADSL2 link and lets see how you go :)

The point is the constraints. For you it may work well, but it's constrained to a limit that for many, MANY, small-medium sized businesses it doesn't work.

Try argue with an overall view


There are TWO problems with your post. 

1) Why backup to the cloud at all?  Its the same question I ask of the NBN - why - and no one can answer.  On-site backup with always be orders of magnitude faster than any internet system therefore begging the question of why do it at all.  Perhaps for a few residential users wanting to backup their photos perhaps  but that's hardly a compelling argument for it.  If you REALLY need to back up 260Gb of data each and every night to a internet cloud server then you are either in love with technology for its own sake or should buy a fiber connection to cover it.

b) even assuming your argument is valid, exactly how many residential or small business users are going to need that?  0.1%?  less?  and medium to large business will already have their own back systems in place.


but a further observation is that you seem to be supporting a notion because it is possible, not because it poses an economic benefit.  The cloud is very valuable but it is - like all new technologies - hopelessly over-hyped leading people to think that MUST be on the cloud... 'whatever that is' (and I've heard that exact statement - word for word.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21^st, 2013 at 7:54pm:

and let me ask you, wouldn't you agree that you backup CHANGES ONLY depending on how fast you can restore a full image? And if thats the case, then surely you'd agree at times it warrants to do a FULL backup. And if that';s the case, good luck with your link.

its pretty easy using local data storage devices.  Extremely easy actually. So I ask again... why are you using cloud backup for such important data?

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 11:08am:

Also Alevine, for uploads you don't get 20mbps, typically its 1-2mBITSps.  So Gigabyte backups are truly out of the question. Longweekend (who claims to be an IT professional) advocates backing up to physical media, whereas every professional organisation I worked for created offsite backups (for the obvious reasons of fire or other possible damage). Its not just business users that should have backups.  Over the years I have accumulated gigabytes of files (documents, emails, photos, videos) mainly to do with my family or my personal business contracts, warranties, etc.  The loss of the files would be devastating, so apart from having a physical media backup, its very reassuring to have a cloud backup as well. Before Longweekend jumps up and down saying that the cost of FTTH can't be justified on cloud backups = I agree wholeheartedly.  But by his logic, why should the government even be involved at all? FTTH (or even FTTN) cannot be justified on any individual application for personal use.  But it is clear that the government (as a generic term not just Labor/Liberal) fully endorses the use of electronic communications for all. Centrelink, Medicare, AEC  to mention just a few.  The take up of electronic communications has been staggering growth in government, commercial and the pubic sector. Since private enterprise is not capable of setting up a nationwide network (to ensure its availability to all) it has fallen on the government to do so.  To replace a copper network partially with fibre that gives no benefit to existing users is just an expensive joke.

which I said as well...  but you don't necessarily need to offsite backup every day.  most small businesses can do it weekly and if you are big enough to need offsite backups stored daily then you are more than capable of paying for it.

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 11:08am:

Also Alevine, for uploads you don't get 20mbps, typically its 1-2mBITSps.  So Gigabyte backups are truly out of the question. Longweekend (who claims to be an IT professional) advocates backing up to physical media, whereas every professional organisation I worked for created offsite backups (for the obvious reasons of fire or other possible damage). Its not just business users that should have backups.  Over the years I have accumulated gigabytes of files (documents, emails, photos, videos) mainly to do with my family or my personal business contracts, warranties, etc.  The loss of the files would be devastating, so apart from having a physical media backup, its very reassuring to have a cloud backup as well. Before Longweekend jumps up and down saying that the cost of FTTH can't be justified on cloud backups = I agree wholeheartedly.  But by his logic, why should the government even be involved at all? FTTH (or even FTTN) cannot be justified on any individual application for personal use.  But it is clear that the government (as a generic term not just Labor/Liberal) fully endorses the use of electronic communications for all. Centrelink, Medicare, AEC  to mention just a few.  The take up of electronic communications has been staggering growth in government, commercial and the pubic sector. Since private enterprise is not capable of setting up a nationwide network (to ensure its availability to all) it has fallen on the government to do so.  To replace a copper network partially with fibre that gives no benefit to existing users is just an expensive joke.

yeah because 25Mbps is not more than 8Mbsp.  and because the availablility of fibre to EVERYONE in the country (not just those who pay to be on a backbone) is of no consequence and of course endsuring that everyone in the country gets true broadband is nothing, right?

try again.

longweekend:

Quote:

yeah because 25Mbps is not more than 8Mbsp.

I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse, or perhaps have poor comprehension skills, or you just open your mouth and sprout what ever bs come to mind.

I did show you a link that states the Australian average is 13.6mbps (not 8).

I am lucky, I get 16mbps.  If I got the 25mbps that Longweekend keeps sprouting I would be more than happy and I doubt I would need more for the remaining years of my life.

HOWEVER, neither Turnbull nor NBNco is making any guarantee that 25mbps will be available to anyone.  In fact, I can't even be sure that I will maintain the current 16mbps that I 'enjoy'.

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 5:09pm:

longweekend: Quote: yeah because 25Mbps is not more than 8Mbsp. I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse, or perhaps have poor comprehension skills, or you just open your mouth and sprout what ever bs come to mind. I did show you a link that states the Australian average is 13.6mbps (not 8). I am lucky, I get 16mbps.  If I got the 25mbps that Longweekend keeps sprouting I would be more than happy and I doubt I would need more for the remaining years of my life. HOWEVER, neither Turnbull nor NBNco is making any guarantee that 25mbps will be available to anyone.  In fact, I can't even be sure that I will maintain the current 16mbps that I 'enjoy'.

25 is still more than 13.8.  its called basic maths.  and if you are getting 16 now then you must be close to an exchange suggesting you would probably get 25 or more.  and you still have access to fibre if you want it.  Do you want it?????

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 5:38pm:

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:09pm: longweekend: Quote: yeah because 25Mbps is not more than 8Mbsp. I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse, or perhaps have poor comprehension skills, or you just open your mouth and sprout what ever bs come to mind. I did show you a link that states the Australian average is 13.6mbps (not 8). I am lucky, I get 16mbps.  If I got the 25mbps that Longweekend keeps sprouting I would be more than happy and I doubt I would need more for the remaining years of my life. HOWEVER, neither Turnbull nor NBNco is making any guarantee that 25mbps will be available to anyone.  In fact, I can't even be sure that I will maintain the current 16mbps that I 'enjoy'. 25 is still more than 13.8.  its called basic maths.  and if you are getting 16 now then you must be close to an exchange suggesting you would probably get 25 or more.  and you still have access to fibre if you want it.  Do you want it?????

You truly are obtuse Longwanker.

Are you going to guarantee that i get 25mbps when nbn comes to my area?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont.  Can you guarantee that I will get that i will at least get the same as I get now?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont.

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 5:54pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:38pm: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:09pm: longweekend: Quote: yeah because 25Mbps is not more than 8Mbsp. I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse, or perhaps have poor comprehension skills, or you just open your mouth and sprout what ever bs come to mind. I did show you a link that states the Australian average is 13.6mbps (not 8). I am lucky, I get 16mbps.  If I got the 25mbps that Longweekend keeps sprouting I would be more than happy and I doubt I would need more for the remaining years of my life. HOWEVER, neither Turnbull nor NBNco is making any guarantee that 25mbps will be available to anyone.  In fact, I can't even be sure that I will maintain the current 16mbps that I 'enjoy'. 25 is still more than 13.8.  its called basic maths.  and if you are getting 16 now then you must be close to an exchange suggesting you would probably get 25 or more.  and you still have access to fibre if you want it.  Do you want it????? You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Are you going to guarantee that i get 25mbps when nbn comes to my area?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont.  Can you guarantee that I will get that i will at least get the same as I get now?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont.

all you are doing is whinging and trying to find the worst-case scenario and when they fails, make one up.  if you really need superfast broadband you will be able to get ir right up to 1Gbs if you want.  your problem is that you might have to pay for it.  How awful!!!

ISPs are already talking about installing fibre for customers for free as part of contract deals. 

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:06pm:

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:38pm: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:09pm: longweekend: Quote: yeah because 25Mbps is not more than 8Mbsp. I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse, or perhaps have poor comprehension skills, or you just open your mouth and sprout what ever bs come to mind. I did show you a link that states the Australian average is 13.6mbps (not 8). I am lucky, I get 16mbps.  If I got the 25mbps that Longweekend keeps sprouting I would be more than happy and I doubt I would need more for the remaining years of my life. HOWEVER, neither Turnbull nor NBNco is making any guarantee that 25mbps will be available to anyone.  In fact, I can't even be sure that I will maintain the current 16mbps that I 'enjoy'. 25 is still more than 13.8.  its called basic maths.  and if you are getting 16 now then you must be close to an exchange suggesting you would probably get 25 or more.  and you still have access to fibre if you want it.  Do you want it????? You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Are you going to guarantee that i get 25mbps when nbn comes to my area?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont.  Can you guarantee that I will get that i will at least get the same as I get now?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont. all you are doing is whinging and trying to find the worst-case scenario and when they fails, make one up.  if you really need superfast broadband you will be able to get ir right up to 1Gbs if you want.  your problem is that you might have to pay for it.  How awful!!! ISPs are already talking about installing fibre for customers for free as part of contract deals.

wow you post BS longwanker!!!!!

I clearly stated that 25mbps will be all i need,   (if things change and I need more, I will pay for it) , but there is nothing on record for you to state that 25mbps will be made available for existing users.


PLEASE READ THE POST BEFORE RESPONDING.

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:11pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 6:06pm: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:38pm: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:09pm: longweekend: Quote: yeah because 25Mbps is not more than 8Mbsp. I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse, or perhaps have poor comprehension skills, or you just open your mouth and sprout what ever bs come to mind. I did show you a link that states the Australian average is 13.6mbps (not 8). I am lucky, I get 16mbps.  If I got the 25mbps that Longweekend keeps sprouting I would be more than happy and I doubt I would need more for the remaining years of my life. HOWEVER, neither Turnbull nor NBNco is making any guarantee that 25mbps will be available to anyone.  In fact, I can't even be sure that I will maintain the current 16mbps that I 'enjoy'. 25 is still more than 13.8.  its called basic maths.  and if you are getting 16 now then you must be close to an exchange suggesting you would probably get 25 or more.  and you still have access to fibre if you want it.  Do you want it????? You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Are you going to guarantee that i get 25mbps when nbn comes to my area?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont.  Can you guarantee that I will get that i will at least get the same as I get now?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont. all you are doing is whinging and trying to find the worst-case scenario and when they fails, make one up.  if you really need superfast broadband you will be able to get ir right up to 1Gbs if you want.  your problem is that you might have to pay for it.  How awful!!! ISPs are already talking about installing fibre for customers for free as part of contract deals.  wow you post BS longwanker!!!!! I clearly stated that 25mbps will be all i need,   (if things change and I need more, I will pay for it) , but there is nothing on record for you to state that 25mbps will be made available for existing users. PLEASE READ THE POST BEFORE RESPONDING.

what makes you think you even need 25???  what analysis have you performed other than to say it will be 'faster' than your current setup?

You seem to spend an awful amount of time complaining about a service you have no idea what it will be like.  For all you know, the node with be next door and you will get 90Mbps (which is close to the theoretical maximum)

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:14pm:

what makes you think you even need 25???  what analysis have you performed other than to say it will be 'faster' than your current setup? You seem to spend an awful amount of time complaining about a service you have no idea what it will be like.  For all you know, the node with be next door and you will get 90Mbps (which is close to the theoretical maximum)

Are you for real LongWanker?

Where have I complained about the service I have?  I have simply stated I was lucky to be getting 16mbps.  Sure I would like 25mbps and I know enough about IT, networking, etc to understand what my requirements are.

Just because you are a condescending @sshole that thinks he knows more about  the needs of others (while his business loses money in attempting to provide it) I can say without qualification that, LongWANKER, you are clueless.

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:08pm:

Are you for real LongWanker?

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:11pm:

wow you post BS longwanker!!!!!

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 5:54pm:

You truly are obtuse Longwanker.

Those 3 qoutes of cliff sums up longy to a T.

Back in 2008 longy was arguing that we didn't need FTTN all we needed was ADSL2, the only people that wanted FTTN was people that wanted to watch TV, play games or download porn movies.

But then again he says he has worked in IT for 30 odd years so he is a expert on what he is talking about, then again he has said he has work in a bank so he a expert on economics, he has been to university to study statistics so he know everything about how opinion polls, are done and dusted, he also said he is a writer and he has had a couple of book published but he won't say what the name of the books are or what they are about, now he is running his own company and when we were having a debate about the Murray-Darling water buy back, he has said that his company had something to do with water and knew what he was talking about.

With all the jobs he has had he must be 80 years old  I sometimes if he is wonder suffering from dementia.

cods wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 6:51am:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:42am: John S wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 6:26am: cods wrote on Dec 20th, 2013 at 5:29am: just think... IF the Greens had beena political party in 1949 we wouldnt HAVE A SNOWY to BRAG ABOUT ::) If we didn't have a labor government we would't have a Trans Australian railway or the Sydney Opera House. So what is your point cods? and if we didn't have Liberal govts we would never have paid for them meaning we wouldn't be able to afford anything ever again. DIDNT GREINER PAY OFF THE HARBOUR BRIDGE?????????? ;D ;D ;D ;D

NO


It was paid in full by TOLLS
TWO YEARS before Greiner was elected
TOLLS, today, cover maintenance




1986

Loans that paid for the Sydney Harbour Bridge are finally repaid, 54 years after the Bridge's completion. Loans had been taken because the actual cost of construction was three times more than the original estimated cost.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/constructingaustralia/thebridge/century.htm


SERIOUSLY, do you check ANYTHING before you post ?

John S wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 7:02am:

But then again he says he has worked in IT for 30 odd years so he is a expert on what he is talking about, then again he has said he has work in a bank so he a expert on economics, he has been to university to study statistics so he know everything about how opinion polls, are done and dusted, he also said he is a writer and he has had a couple of book published but he won't say what the name of the books are or what they are about, now he is running his own company and when we were having a debate about the Murray-Darling water buy back, he has said that his company had something to do with water and knew what he was talking about. With all the jobs he has had he must be 80 years old  I sometimes if he is wonder suffering from dementia.

Maybe he got SACKED a lot ?



http://www.paymentconsulting.net/images/email-fired.jpg

John S wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 7:02am:

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 7:08pm: Are you for real LongWanker? Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 6:11pm: wow you post BS longwanker!!!!! Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Those 3 qoutes of cliff sums up longy to a T. Back in 2008 longy was arguing that we didn't need FTTN all we needed was ADSL2, the only people that wanted FTTN was people that wanted to watch TV, play games or download porn movies. But then again he says he has worked in IT for 30 odd years so he is a expert on what he is talking about, then again he has said he has work in a bank so he a expert on economics, he has been to university to study statistics so he know everything about how opinion polls, are done and dusted, he also said he is a writer and he has had a couple of book published but he won't say what the name of the books are or what they are about, now he is running his own company and when we were having a debate about the Murray-Darling water buy back, he has said that his company had something to do with water and knew what he was talking about. With all the jobs he has had he must be 80 years old  I sometimes if he is wonder suffering from dementia.

how unsurprising that you have no idea what it is like to be employed in a variety of jobs and professions.  You've not even had a job yet so who are you to talk?

John S wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 7:02am:

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 7:08pm: Are you for real LongWanker? Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 6:11pm: wow you post BS longwanker!!!!! Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Those 3 qoutes of cliff sums up longy to a T. Back in 2008 longy was arguing that we didn't need FTTN all we needed was ADSL2, the only people that wanted FTTN was people that wanted to watch TV, play games or download porn movies. But then again he says he has worked in IT for 30 odd years so he is a expert on what he is talking about, then again he has said he has work in a bank so he a expert on economics, he has been to university to study statistics so he know everything about how opinion polls, are done and dusted, he also said he is a writer and he has had a couple of book published but he won't say what the name of the books are or what they are about, now he is running his own company and when we were having a debate about the Murray-Darling water buy back, he has said that his company had something to do with water and knew what he was talking about. With all the jobs he has had he must be 80 years old  I sometimes if he is wonder suffering from dementia.

Hi guys,
forgive Longy - he has Walter Mitty syndrome.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:06pm:

Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:38pm: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:09pm: longweekend: Quote: yeah because 25Mbps is not more than 8Mbsp. I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse, or perhaps have poor comprehension skills, or you just open your mouth and sprout what ever bs come to mind. I did show you a link that states the Australian average is 13.6mbps (not 8). I am lucky, I get 16mbps.  If I got the 25mbps that Longweekend keeps sprouting I would be more than happy and I doubt I would need more for the remaining years of my life. HOWEVER, neither Turnbull nor NBNco is making any guarantee that 25mbps will be available to anyone.  In fact, I can't even be sure that I will maintain the current 16mbps that I 'enjoy'. 25 is still more than 13.8.  its called basic maths.  and if you are getting 16 now then you must be close to an exchange suggesting you would probably get 25 or more.  and you still have access to fibre if you want it.  Do you want it????? You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Are you going to guarantee that i get 25mbps when nbn comes to my area?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont.  Can you guarantee that I will get that i will at least get the same as I get now?  Turnbull wont.  NBNco wont. all you are doing is whinging and trying to find the worst-case scenario and when they fails, make one up.  if you really need superfast broadband you will be able to get ir right up to 1Gbs if you want.  your problem is that you might have to pay for it.  How awful!!! ISPs are already talking about installing fibre for customers for free as part of contract deals.

Germany went down the same track as what the libbos want to do and guess what ? In the end they had to replace the copper network and go fibre to the home. It was a case of penny-wise pound foolish.

And for all of the money that has been squandered in the mining boom and super taxes that weren't collected we shouldn't even be having this debate !!

Bobby. wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 9:59am:

John S wrote on Dec 23rd, 2013 at 7:02am: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 7:08pm: Are you for real LongWanker? Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 6:11pm: wow you post BS longwanker!!!!! Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Those 3 qoutes of cliff sums up longy to a T. Back in 2008 longy was arguing that we didn't need FTTN all we needed was ADSL2, the only people that wanted FTTN was people that wanted to watch TV, play games or download porn movies. But then again he says he has worked in IT for 30 odd years so he is a expert on what he is talking about, then again he has said he has work in a bank so he a expert on economics, he has been to university to study statistics so he know everything about how opinion polls, are done and dusted, he also said he is a writer and he has had a couple of book published but he won't say what the name of the books are or what they are about, now he is running his own company and when we were having a debate about the Murray-Darling water buy back, he has said that his company had something to do with water and knew what he was talking about. With all the jobs he has had he must be 80 years old  I sometimes if he is wonder suffering from dementia. Hi guys, forgive Longy - he has Walter Mitty syndrome.

he also said that he was a biblical scholar and writes articles for a motoring magazine ;D

as for his water business the only water flowing is when he tries to piss down everyone's back and tells them that it is raining :D

Sir lastnail wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 10:19am:

Bobby. wrote on Dec 23rd, 2013 at 9:59am: John S wrote on Dec 23rd, 2013 at 7:02am: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 7:08pm: Are you for real LongWanker? Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 6:11pm: wow you post BS longwanker!!!!! Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Those 3 qoutes of cliff sums up longy to a T. Back in 2008 longy was arguing that we didn't need FTTN all we needed was ADSL2, the only people that wanted FTTN was people that wanted to watch TV, play games or download porn movies. But then again he says he has worked in IT for 30 odd years so he is a expert on what he is talking about, then again he has said he has work in a bank so he a expert on economics, he has been to university to study statistics so he know everything about how opinion polls, are done and dusted, he also said he is a writer and he has had a couple of book published but he won't say what the name of the books are or what they are about, now he is running his own company and when we were having a debate about the Murray-Darling water buy back, he has said that his company had something to do with water and knew what he was talking about. With all the jobs he has had he must be 80 years old  I sometimes if he is wonder suffering from dementia. Hi guys, forgive Longy - he has Walter Mitty syndrome. he also said that he was a biblical scholar and writes articles for a motoring magazine ;D as for his water business the only water flowing is when he tries to piss down everyone's back and tells them that it is raining :D

better than being like you - angry, bitter, a total failure, living in a rented room in shared accommodation and driving a 20yo car while working in a servo.

not exactly the life to want to emulate.

http://b.vimeocdn.com/ts/228/130/228130736_640.jpg

LW i dont know if someone pissed in your cornflakes today but itd be appreciated if you stopped laying into varying posters.

Maybe we stick to the thread, which is errrrrrr - more left wing propaganda from the resident wise one

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 12:30pm:

LW i dont know if someone pissed in your cornflakes today but itd be appreciated if you stopped laying into varying posters. Maybe we stick to the thread, which is errrrrrr - more left wing propaganda from the resident wise one

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 1:12pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:54pm: and let me ask you, wouldn't you agree that you backup CHANGES ONLY depending on how fast you can restore a full image? And if thats the case, then surely you'd agree at times it warrants to do a FULL backup. And if that';s the case, good luck with your link. its pretty easy using local data storage devices.  Extremely easy actually. So I ask again... why are you using cloud backup for such important data?

Because it's fast becoming the cheaper and user friendly alternative for users. 

I think longy you severely under appreciate the movements in it, and the annual data need growth of users.  We will of course forever have alternatives, but then that's assuming we've stopped orbiting the sun.

And I think you fail to recognise the economic benefits that come from savings to small,medium,large businesses.  If people thought like you about everything, then we'd never have telephones because business that needs them can build their own infrastructure, and general public just uses it for phone sex or to gossip.  You need to understand that the infrastructure ensures future data needs of individual are met, and that costs of doing business are lowered for hundreds of thousands of businesses.  And let's not forget the scope for new business to emerge as a result.

Donlt argue with longlooser Aussie, he knows everything... everyone else is either an idiot, a moron, a failure, they don't understand or is just plain wrong.

Longloser will from this point on replace the Oracle of Delphi and become the oracle of Glenunga

Guess we will all learn to get along with tin cans with strings attached huh?

Here is a tip from one who has done the trip - don't worry so much, go have a beer, pull up a deck chair, watch the sun go down.

Sir lastnail wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 10:19am:

Bobby. wrote on Dec 23rd, 2013 at 9:59am: John S wrote on Dec 23rd, 2013 at 7:02am: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 7:08pm: Are you for real LongWanker? Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 6:11pm: wow you post BS longwanker!!!!! Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Those 3 qoutes of cliff sums up longy to a T. Back in 2008 longy was arguing that we didn't need FTTN all we needed was ADSL2, the only people that wanted FTTN was people that wanted to watch TV, play games or download porn movies. But then again he says he has worked in IT for 30 odd years so he is a expert on what he is talking about, then again he has said he has work in a bank so he a expert on economics, he has been to university to study statistics so he know everything about how opinion polls, are done and dusted, he also said he is a writer and he has had a couple of book published but he won't say what the name of the books are or what they are about, now he is running his own company and when we were having a debate about the Murray-Darling water buy back, he has said that his company had something to do with water and knew what he was talking about. With all the jobs he has had he must be 80 years old  I sometimes if he is wonder suffering from dementia. Hi guys, forgive Longy - he has Walter Mitty syndrome. he also said that he was a biblical scholar and writes articles for a motoring magazine ;D as for his water business the only water flowing is when he tries to piss down everyone's back and tells them that it is raining :D

In Longy's mind he's an expert in just about every field of human endeavor.

red baron wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 1:31pm:

Guess we will all learn to get along with tin cans with strings attached huh?

Looks like you've got a good understanding of Liberal party policy.  ;D


Quote:

Here is a tip from one who has done the trip - don't worry so much, go have a beer, pull up a deck chair, watch the sun go down.

My advice - choose a beach that faces west. It is the best chance of seeing the green flash.

Sir lastnail wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 10:08am:

Germany went down the same track as what the libbos want to do and guess what ? In the end they had to replace the copper network and go fibre to the home. It was a case of penny-wise pound foolish. And for all of the money that has been squandered in the mining boom and super taxes that weren't collected we shouldn't even be having this debate !!

Now that's what the tax revenue from the mining boom should have been spent on. Infrastructure. Not tax cuts, middle class welfare or other permanent expenditure.

Had Costello and Swan not made this mistake and instead Costello had funded an NBN in 2006 or so, taxes might well be a bit higher today, and there would have been a lot less of the cash splash of middle-class welfare. With less strain on the budget, it would have been in surplus (or at least the deficit would be a lot lower) and we would have been well on the way to completing a world-class communications network.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 12:30pm:

LW i dont know if someone pissed in your cornflakes today but itd be appreciated if you stopped laying into varying posters. Maybe we stick to the thread, which is errrrrrr - more left wing propaganda from the resident wise one

how is it 'laying into' a poster by calling lastnail a loser, given that it is clear and obvious truth?

plus, if you want to deal with abuse, I'm not the person to start with.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 1:07pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 1:12pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 21st, 2013 at 7:54pm: and let me ask you, wouldn't you agree that you backup CHANGES ONLY depending on how fast you can restore a full image? And if thats the case, then surely you'd agree at times it warrants to do a FULL backup. And if that';s the case, good luck with your link. its pretty easy using local data storage devices.  Extremely easy actually. So I ask again... why are you using cloud backup for such important data? Because it's fast becoming the cheaper and user friendly alternative for users.  I think longy you severely under appreciate the movements in it, and the annual data need growth of users.  We will of course forever have alternatives, but then that's assuming we've stopped orbiting the sun. And I think you fail to recognise the economic benefits that come from savings to small,medium,large businesses.  If people thought like you about everything, then we'd never have telephones because business that needs them can build their own infrastructure, and general public just uses it for phone sex or to gossip.  You need to understand that the infrastructure ensures future data needs of individual are met, and that costs of doing business are lowered for hundreds of thousands of businesses.  And let's not forget the scope for new business to emerge as a result.

and I repeat that LOCAL STORAGE will ALWAYS be a faster and cheaper option that cloud storage.  the 'convenience' factor is largely over-rated and illusory.  IN time there will entire articles written on the con that is cloud storage.

example:  a cloud company went bust and 1000s of users had to wait months to get access to THEIR date.  another cloud company had some of its servers confiscated by police because some clown uploaded illegal material. Again, it took 3 weeks for the courts to order their return.  Meanwhile, other users and companies never lost their data and their backups are fine.

and the worst example was the cloud company that had no backups at all and when their disk aray died.... so did everyone's data.

You last paragraph contains no facts merely opinion based on tech-head reasoning that it 'must be better because it is the cloud'.

Bobby. wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 3:20pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Dec 23rd, 2013 at 10:19am: Bobby. wrote on Dec 23rd, 2013 at 9:59am: John S wrote on Dec 23rd, 2013 at 7:02am: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 7:08pm: Are you for real LongWanker? Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 6:11pm: wow you post BS longwanker!!!!! Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Those 3 qoutes of cliff sums up longy to a T. Back in 2008 longy was arguing that we didn't need FTTN all we needed was ADSL2, the only people that wanted FTTN was people that wanted to watch TV, play games or download porn movies. But then again he says he has worked in IT for 30 odd years so he is a expert on what he is talking about, then again he has said he has work in a bank so he a expert on economics, he has been to university to study statistics so he know everything about how opinion polls, are done and dusted, he also said he is a writer and he has had a couple of book published but he won't say what the name of the books are or what they are about, now he is running his own company and when we were having a debate about the Murray-Darling water buy back, he has said that his company had something to do with water and knew what he was talking about. With all the jobs he has had he must be 80 years old  I sometimes if he is wonder suffering from dementia. Hi guys, forgive Longy - he has Walter Mitty syndrome. he also said that he was a biblical scholar and writes articles for a motoring magazine ;D as for his water business the only water flowing is when he tries to piss down everyone's back and tells them that it is raining :D In Longy's mind he's an expert in just about every field of human endeavor.

Be kind to longweekend58; he evidently isn't well. Most of us regard him as a pathological liar but, judging by the history of his posts, the concept of truth is a mystery to longweekend58. If truth is an unfamiliar concept, can one truly lie?

Truth, of course, is reality. If longweekend58 can't comprehend truth, then he's divorced from reality. Loss of contact with reality is characteristic of psychosis.

I reckon, if longweekend58's IQ was a couple of quartiles higher, he might be a sociopath. Be thankful for small mercies. :-)

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 12:30pm:

LW i dont know if someone pissed in your cornflakes today but itd be appreciated if you stopped laying into varying posters. Maybe we stick to the thread, which is errrrrrr - more left wing propaganda from the resident wise one

So tell me stupid how is this thread more left wing propaganda? It is about all infrastructure that has been built by liberal and labor governments.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2013 at 9:46am:

John S wrote on Dec 23rd, 2013 at 7:02am: Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 7:08pm: Are you for real LongWanker? Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 6:11pm: wow you post BS longwanker!!!!! Cliff48 wrote on Dec 22nd, 2013 at 5:54pm: You truly are obtuse Longwanker. Those 3 qoutes of cliff sums up longy to a T. Back in 2008 longy was arguing that we didn't need FTTN all we needed was ADSL2, the only people that wanted FTTN was people that wanted to watch TV, play games or download porn movies. But then again he says he has worked in IT for 30 odd years so he is a expert on what he is talking about, then again he has said he has work in a bank so he a expert on economics, he has been to university to study statistics so he know everything about how opinion polls, are done and dusted, he also said he is a writer and he has had a couple of book published but he won't say what the name of the books are or what they are about, now he is running his own company and when we were having a debate about the Murray-Darling water buy back, he has said that his company had something to do with water and knew what he was talking about. With all the jobs he has had he must be 80 years old  I sometimes if he is wonder suffering from dementia. how unsurprising that you have no idea what it is like to be employed in a variety of jobs and professions.  You've not even had a job yet so who are you to talk?

If you want to believe that I never had a job it just shows what you know about me which is SFA. Everything I said about you is what you have said on here and when you were on yahoo

I have worked for 50 years never been unemployed in my life and have worked in a number of industries.

Now come back and let me know how you are a expert on everything.

Do you know what a expert is? It is a drip under pressure.