Topic 'Absolutely Not' in forum '' - dslreports.com http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Absolutely-Not-22197273 en Sat, 11 Feb 2012 14:48:08 EDT Sat, 11 Feb 2012 14:48:08 EDT Re: Absolutely Not http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22203120 said by elios:

Hoover Dam was built UNDER BUDGET AND AHEAD OF TIME
>.> but yea every thing else pretty much
Australia only needs to suffer through a terrible global depression so that labor is abundant and practically free, and then somehow come up with what many consider to be one of the world's top engineering achievements. I can see it now, the Great Pyramid of Giza, the Eiffel Tower, and Australia's Fiber Network? Good luck. :)

As for the odd-looking Sydney Opera House, in 1957 it was estimated to be completed in 1963 at a total cost of $7 million. In the end it was finished in 1973 for $102 million. Just a bit over budget while taking a little longer than expected to complete. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22203120 Wed, 08 Apr 2009 08:47:16 EDT Re: Absolutely Not http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22202741 >.> but yea every thing else pretty much]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22202741 Wed, 08 Apr 2009 05:57:36 EDT Re: Absolutely Not http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22202697
But; I'll lay good odds that the Pyramids, the Colosseum, the Hoover Dam and any large, and I do mean Humongous, project all came in late, over budget and riddled with all sorts of scams and inefficiencies.

Would you bulldoze any of them??. Of course not.

At least it is a vision and a goal to aim at.

We have down here a good record with big government projects that eventually came good. Snowy River Hydro-Electric Scheme; Sydney Opera House, and now this.

I think it will in the long run be a real winner. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22202697 Wed, 08 Apr 2009 05:19:00 EDT Re: Absolutely Not http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22200458 said by Ignite:

We'll see - their efficiency may surprise you. First step is recognising what you need to do and a lot of these things can be done in parallel.
Because if government is known for anything, it's their overwhelmingly consistant efficiency :uhh:

From what I've heard, broadband access in Australia isn't very good; however this will come in overbudget, past deadline, and with problems of it's own. Look at all the failed muni efforts here in the US.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22200458 Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:47:28 EDT Re: Absolutely Not http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22198149 said by jmn1207:

Not a chance in the world, upside down or otherwise. I mean, Australia already tries to censor private networks, I can only imagine that exhaustive morality filtering will be applied to this government built version.
100% --

I would get excited about this if it wasn't for Australia's practices of censoring the net.

Robb
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- World Traveller -- KJ7RL
... Do something! ...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22198149 Tue, 07 Apr 2009 11:59:18 EDT Re: Absolutely Not http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22197651 said by ThrowDemsOut:

And now comes the typical gov't black hole:

But there's a long way to go before the dream of a national broadband network for Australia, a nation of 21 million people, becomes a reality. The government recognizes this, though, noting that it now needs to: organize an "implementation study to determine the company's operating arrangements, detailed network design and ways to attract private sector investment"; roll out fiber links between "cities, major regional centres and rural towns" to address backhaul "black spots"; introduce new legislation to govern the new company and ensure that all greenfield housing developments include fiber access links; and initiate a consultative process that will result in changes to Australia's telecom regulations.
If they actually complete 50% in 7 to 8 yrs it will be a major miracle, especially if they experience a chg in which party is in charge in that time.
We'll see - their efficiency may surprise you. First step is recognising what you need to do and a lot of these things can be done in parallel.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22197651 Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:30:56 EDT Re: Absolutely Not http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22197516
But there's a long way to go before the dream of a national broadband network for Australia, a nation of 21 million people, becomes a reality. The government recognizes this, though, noting that it now needs to: organize an "implementation study to determine the company's operating arrangements, detailed network design and ways to attract private sector investment"; roll out fiber links between "cities, major regional centres and rural towns" to address backhaul "black spots"; introduce new legislation to govern the new company and ensure that all greenfield housing developments include fiber access links; and initiate a consultative process that will result in changes to Australia's telecom regulations.
If they actually complete 50% in 7 to 8 yrs it will be a major miracle, especially if they experience a chg in which party is in charge in that time.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22197516 Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:04:04 EDT Re: Absolutely Not http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22197435 said by jmn1207:

Not a chance in the world, upside down or otherwise. I mean, Australia already tries to censor private networks, I can only imagine that exhaustive morality filtering will be applied to this government built version.

It worries me that this could be used as a powerful tool by those holding positions of power in Australia. Let's just say that I am rather wary about the entire project. It's too easy to go down the path of China and North Korea when deciding what should and should not be accessed over the internet. Politician's will surely agree that sites lambasting their policies would be considered hostile, and should be blacklisted.

No thanks, just give the money back to the tax payers.
I can't imagine a democratic nation would go through such a hassle. In the end, if content is filtered to that level, the number of subscribers will be indicative of the usage. There will be a balance of people who want broadband for cheap and the people who value freedom of speech.

I for one think this is an brilliant idea to drive competition, lower prices, increase subscription, and consumer spending. Plus it looks fantastic for the economy going forward, creating jobs.

My 2 cents
--
Chirag's Website]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Absolutely-Not-22197435 Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:48:22 EDT Absolutely Not http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Absolutely-Not-22197273
It worries me that this could be used as a powerful tool by those holding positions of power in Australia. Let's just say that I am rather wary about the entire project. It's too easy to go down the path of China and North Korea when deciding what should and should not be accessed over the internet. Politician's will surely agree that sites lambasting their policies would be considered hostile, and should be blacklisted.

No thanks, just give the money back to the tax payers.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Absolutely-Not-22197273 Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:06:40 EDT