6 ms·

By 'fit for service' they mean 12Mbps down, or average copper wire speeds. What's the point? Although the original goal was great, in hindsight it appears that

by Gatsky 9y ago

By 'fit for service' they mean 12Mbps down, or average copper wire speeds. What's the point? Although the original goal was great, in hindsight it appears that it could not be delivered anywhere near the original budget. For context, after a prolonged period of centre-right government, a centre-left government was elected, led by Kevin Rudd. He had a progressive agenda, but due to a combination of his unmitigated egotism and internal party conflicts, he instituted a variety of programs that were poorly conceived and executed, and was ultimately ousted by his own party in a fairly disasterous manner. The National Broadband network was a product of this highly disappointing and dysfunctional period of government. Since then the problems have continued across a change back to the centre-right government, who with a very slim majority have essentially stuffed around for the last few years with a lame duck leader who seems hamstrung by the ultra conservatives in his own party. For my part, I'm dropping all wires and switching to 4G/LTE, where I can stream 4K content, get decent uploads and still pay less than I would on the National Broadband network.

neumann 9y ago
This is an excellent summary of the situation. There was a few major potholes in the original plan. The nobel aim was to wire up (and use satellite to augment) the majority of australia, including, critically a large part of the rural population. The appeal was to level the access for the population to high quality internet. From then on; however, it became a political football, with both parties internal reworking it and bike shedding the entire technology stack with no clue on implementation and a strong lobby from the incumbent privatised telco (Telstra) and other telcos to ensure their business is not threatened. Bunch of muppets.
flukus 9y ago
> For my part, I'm dropping all wires and switching to 4G/LTE, where I can stream 4K content, get decent uploads and still pay less than I would on the National Broadband network. If everyone does that you'll be lucky to stream youtube videos at 240p. Wireless bandwidth is inherently shared between everyone, wired is dedicated.
- vacri 9y ago
  > wired is dedicated. Cable internet is shared. Most of the NBN rollout (HFC) is on ageing cable internet puchased from another vendor.
- Gatsky 9y ago
  Yeah, LTE capacity can definitely not meet everyone's needs. But in my part of an Australian major city, the only wired option at the moment is NBN over HFC, with a set up fee or a long contract, at a time when all the retailers are trying to undercut each other by buying insufficient capacity. Under these conditions, LTE is the clear winner. That may change as you point out.
- jbarham 9y ago
  > Wireless bandwidth is inherently shared between everyone, wired is dedicated. False. NBN FTTP connections use GPON which is a shared connection (https://www.nbnco.com.au/utility/glossary-of-terms.html#g https://www.nbnco.com.au/utility/glossary-of-terms.html#g).
- jimjimjim 9y ago
  yep. 4g relies on most other people doing little more than messaging, looking at facebook and checking maps to see where the nearest noodle place is. once everyone is pushing video levels of data around then it will be miserable.
gtkspert 9y ago
Where do you get your cheap 4G/LTE? Best I can find is prohibitively expensive, especially if I wan't to stream 4K content...
- Gatsky 9y ago
  It's not exactly 'cheap', but if you need 100-140Gb a month there are data only sims for $70 monthly from Optus and resellers. They guarantee minimum 12Mbps supposedly. In metro areas with the latest LTE modems people are pulling 200Mbps down. If you need lots of data though, the cost becomes less viable.
  - chrismorgan 9y ago
    Optus’s 100GB (if paid monthly)/140GB (if paid annually) plan: http://www.optus.com.au/shop/broadband/mobile-broadband/data-sim-card http://www.optus.com.au/shop/broadband/mobile-broadband/data... When I was investigating this stuff six months ago, I believe these plans were somewhat different (and indeed the Critical Information Summaries for them seem to have dates of May and July), with only the first month being cheaper or having as much data or something. (That the month-to-month one still uses the wording “$70 for the first month” on the marketing page makes me uneasy, but I don’t think there’s a catch, I think it’s merely outdated wording.) I shall consider switching from amaysim to Optus.
- boyter 9y ago
  Vivid Wireless offer unlimited 4G data capped at 12 Mbps for $90 a month. Its on the Optus network so your experience will depend on what the coverage is like where you live.
  - nrki 9y ago
    > Its on the Optus network Actually it's a completely separate network to Optus' 4G network. Optus bought them several years ago. It's also highly throttled and utterly shite for most users. I was one.
    - 9y ago
aplummer 9y ago
This is a great summary, and a large number of people I know are doing exactly this. Using 4g since the 4g network in major cities on Telstra is extremely fast, and fits their lifestyle (really just using phones at home, or a hotspot in a pinch).
zmmmmm 9y ago
I think you are going way too easy on the current government. "Stuffing around" - more like active sabotage. Their policy has been consistent in the NBN all the way through, and has defied all independent technical advice. It was a political solution that never made any technical sense.
- dibstern 9y ago
  I thought he was going too hard on Turnbull (current PM). What has he done that justifies your appraisal of his brief term? People seem to be forgetting about Abbott, who in my opinion did indeed fuck around with rubbish policy his entire term (helped into the grave by treasurer/idiot Joe Hockey).
  - JauntyHatAngle 9y ago
    >I thought he was going too hard on Turnbull (current PM). The problem with Turnbull appears to be that either: 1) He has to balance his rather more radically right wing members of his party while keeping his further centre members happy else he loses his position. (Many peoples explanation). or 2) He has significantly changed his opinions and position on many issues over the last 5 years. And this is a problem because people cant really tell which it is. Turnbull hasn't really changed many of the policies of his predecessor, he just wraps it up nicer and in a more statesman like fashion. He was previously a more moderate right wing (by australian standards) but has since gone significantly more right wing. Im not going into specifics because I don't want to go beyond the realms of the overall topic and end up talking about Gonski or something, but thats my take on why people are a bit bemused by Turnbull and not particularly forgiving despite his inheritance.
    - dibstern 9y ago
      I'm well aware of those two popularly perceived problems, but I don't see how either justifies him being a bad PM. I believe proposition (1), there being more evidence that supports this view and more rhetoric that supports (2). If he were elected with a significant majority of both houses, and the party returned to a more centrist state, such that he didn't need to appease the more Right-wing faction of his party in the same way, would he not still be the perfect PM many of us thought he might be? An aside -> his election strategy was mostly: (1) use data to find popular buzz-words ("JOBS", "GROWTH", "INNOVATION"); (2) repeat those ad infinitum; (3) shy away from any compelling political narrative or vision for the future of the country (e.g. "MAGA" narrative); (4) ???; (5) Lose House seats to Shorten and Senate seats to Pauline et al.
dis-sys 9y ago
> For my part, I'm dropping all wires and switching to 4G/LTE, where I can stream 4K content, get decent uploads and still pay less than I would on the National Broadband network. No, you don't. NBN is built using your tax money NBN will be maintained using your future tax money NBN is protected by laws from any potential competition from the private sector, those laws are passed using your names.
stephen_g 9y ago
> in hindsight it appears that it could not be delivered anywhere near the original budget. What makes you think that? It's on the public record that NBN Co were fairly well on-budget (after they'd upped the peak funding from $39bn to $44.1bn a few years earlier) up until to the 2013 election. Of course, the media preached it was over budget, so that's what most people think, and Malcolm Turnbull was so suspicious that he commissioned a forensic review into their financials - which was very quietly released when it found "no material issues". There was also some evidence of the incoming NBN management choosing to keep quiet and shut down a cost reduction program that had successfully found efficiency gains and cost improvements ('Project Fox' which was leaked to the media). All major fibre rollouts have tended to show that costs reduce over time - Chorus in NZ reported a 44% reduction in per-premises cost over their rollout so far, and Openreach in the UK have reported a 50% reduction from when they started. Coupled with the fact that the Coalition's plan blew out by $15 billion, I think it would have actually been better to continue with the original plan and try to fix the problems. What they ended up doing was to not fix any of the existing problems, and try to 'fix' the things that were good about the NBN (the technology)... This isn't counting that any upgrade to FTTN (which will be required in less than 10 years) would cost tens of billions of dollars more, or the much higher running cost of FTTN. In the end, the LNP really picked a dud and absolutely screwed up something that could have been fixed.
- Gatsky 9y ago
  Before they self destructed and lost the election, the labour party's costings increased by nearly 10x (along with changing the model). Your comment even describes a budget increase of 5 billion? Also, there are other reasons why the Chorus costs are coming down, that don't apply here: https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/10/nbn-co-comparisons-with-nzs-ultra-fast-broadband-are-apples-and-oranges/ https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/10/nbn-co-comparisons-with-nz...

by Gatsky 9y ago

neumann 9y ago

This is an excellent summary of the situation. There was a few major potholes in the original plan. The nobel aim was to wire up (and use satellite to augment) the majority of australia, including, critically a large part of the rural population. The appeal was to level the access for the population to high quality internet. From then on; however, it became a political football, with both parties internal reworking it and bike shedding the entire technology stack with no clue on implementation and a strong lobby from the incumbent privatised telco (Telstra) and other telcos to ensure their business is not threatened. Bunch of muppets.

flukus 9y ago

> For my part, I'm dropping all wires and switching to 4G/LTE, where I can stream 4K content, get decent uploads and still pay less than I would on the National Broadband network. If everyone does that you'll be lucky to stream youtube videos at 240p. Wireless bandwidth is inherently shared between everyone, wired is dedicated.

vacri 9y ago
> wired is dedicated. Cable internet is shared. Most of the NBN rollout (HFC) is on ageing cable internet puchased from another vendor.
Gatsky 9y ago
Yeah, LTE capacity can definitely not meet everyone's needs. But in my part of an Australian major city, the only wired option at the moment is NBN over HFC, with a set up fee or a long contract, at a time when all the retailers are trying to undercut each other by buying insufficient capacity. Under these conditions, LTE is the clear winner. That may change as you point out.
jbarham 9y ago
> Wireless bandwidth is inherently shared between everyone, wired is dedicated. False. NBN FTTP connections use GPON which is a shared connection (https://www.nbnco.com.au/utility/glossary-of-terms.html#g https://www.nbnco.com.au/utility/glossary-of-terms.html#g).
jimjimjim 9y ago
yep. 4g relies on most other people doing little more than messaging, looking at facebook and checking maps to see where the nearest noodle place is. once everyone is pushing video levels of data around then it will be miserable.

gtkspert 9y ago

Where do you get your cheap 4G/LTE? Best I can find is prohibitively expensive, especially if I wan't to stream 4K content...

Gatsky 9y ago
It's not exactly 'cheap', but if you need 100-140Gb a month there are data only sims for $70 monthly from Optus and resellers. They guarantee minimum 12Mbps supposedly. In metro areas with the latest LTE modems people are pulling 200Mbps down. If you need lots of data though, the cost becomes less viable.
- chrismorgan 9y ago
  Optus’s 100GB (if paid monthly)/140GB (if paid annually) plan: http://www.optus.com.au/shop/broadband/mobile-broadband/data-sim-card http://www.optus.com.au/shop/broadband/mobile-broadband/data... When I was investigating this stuff six months ago, I believe these plans were somewhat different (and indeed the Critical Information Summaries for them seem to have dates of May and July), with only the first month being cheaper or having as much data or something. (That the month-to-month one still uses the wording “$70 for the first month” on the marketing page makes me uneasy, but I don’t think there’s a catch, I think it’s merely outdated wording.) I shall consider switching from amaysim to Optus.
boyter 9y ago
Vivid Wireless offer unlimited 4G data capped at 12 Mbps for $90 a month. Its on the Optus network so your experience will depend on what the coverage is like where you live.
- nrki 9y ago
  > Its on the Optus network Actually it's a completely separate network to Optus' 4G network. Optus bought them several years ago. It's also highly throttled and utterly shite for most users. I was one.
  - 9y ago

aplummer 9y ago

This is a great summary, and a large number of people I know are doing exactly this. Using 4g since the 4g network in major cities on Telstra is extremely fast, and fits their lifestyle (really just using phones at home, or a hotspot in a pinch).

zmmmmm 9y ago

I think you are going way too easy on the current government. "Stuffing around" - more like active sabotage. Their policy has been consistent in the NBN all the way through, and has defied all independent technical advice. It was a political solution that never made any technical sense.

dibstern 9y ago
I thought he was going too hard on Turnbull (current PM). What has he done that justifies your appraisal of his brief term? People seem to be forgetting about Abbott, who in my opinion did indeed fuck around with rubbish policy his entire term (helped into the grave by treasurer/idiot Joe Hockey).
- JauntyHatAngle 9y ago
  >I thought he was going too hard on Turnbull (current PM). The problem with Turnbull appears to be that either: 1) He has to balance his rather more radically right wing members of his party while keeping his further centre members happy else he loses his position. (Many peoples explanation). or 2) He has significantly changed his opinions and position on many issues over the last 5 years. And this is a problem because people cant really tell which it is. Turnbull hasn't really changed many of the policies of his predecessor, he just wraps it up nicer and in a more statesman like fashion. He was previously a more moderate right wing (by australian standards) but has since gone significantly more right wing. Im not going into specifics because I don't want to go beyond the realms of the overall topic and end up talking about Gonski or something, but thats my take on why people are a bit bemused by Turnbull and not particularly forgiving despite his inheritance.
  - dibstern 9y ago
    I'm well aware of those two popularly perceived problems, but I don't see how either justifies him being a bad PM. I believe proposition (1), there being more evidence that supports this view and more rhetoric that supports (2). If he were elected with a significant majority of both houses, and the party returned to a more centrist state, such that he didn't need to appease the more Right-wing faction of his party in the same way, would he not still be the perfect PM many of us thought he might be? An aside -> his election strategy was mostly: (1) use data to find popular buzz-words ("JOBS", "GROWTH", "INNOVATION"); (2) repeat those ad infinitum; (3) shy away from any compelling political narrative or vision for the future of the country (e.g. "MAGA" narrative); (4) ???; (5) Lose House seats to Shorten and Senate seats to Pauline et al.

dis-sys 9y ago

> For my part, I'm dropping all wires and switching to 4G/LTE, where I can stream 4K content, get decent uploads and still pay less than I would on the National Broadband network. No, you don't. NBN is built using your tax money NBN will be maintained using your future tax money NBN is protected by laws from any potential competition from the private sector, those laws are passed using your names.

stephen_g 9y ago

> in hindsight it appears that it could not be delivered anywhere near the original budget. What makes you think that? It's on the public record that NBN Co were fairly well on-budget (after they'd upped the peak funding from $39bn to $44.1bn a few years earlier) up until to the 2013 election. Of course, the media preached it was over budget, so that's what most people think, and Malcolm Turnbull was so suspicious that he commissioned a forensic review into their financials - which was very quietly released when it found "no material issues". There was also some evidence of the incoming NBN management choosing to keep quiet and shut down a cost reduction program that had successfully found efficiency gains and cost improvements ('Project Fox' which was leaked to the media). All major fibre rollouts have tended to show that costs reduce over time - Chorus in NZ reported a 44% reduction in per-premises cost over their rollout so far, and Openreach in the UK have reported a 50% reduction from when they started. Coupled with the fact that the Coalition's plan blew out by $15 billion, I think it would have actually been better to continue with the original plan and try to fix the problems. What they ended up doing was to not fix any of the existing problems, and try to 'fix' the things that were good about the NBN (the technology)... This isn't counting that any upgrade to FTTN (which will be required in less than 10 years) would cost tens of billions of dollars more, or the much higher running cost of FTTN. In the end, the LNP really picked a dud and absolutely screwed up something that could have been fixed.

Gatsky 9y ago
Before they self destructed and lost the election, the labour party's costings increased by nearly 10x (along with changing the model). Your comment even describes a budget increase of 5 billion? Also, there are other reasons why the Chorus costs are coming down, that don't apply here: https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/10/nbn-co-comparisons-with-nzs-ultra-fast-broadband-are-apples-and-oranges/ https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/10/nbn-co-comparisons-with-nz...