, All Blacks
and now Internet
? ) 
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..
Since digging and laying cables is the most expensive part of that NBN work shouldn't we already put two or more fibres to every home instead of just one ? We could double the speed even further with this minimal expense.
One fiber then will serve us SuperExtra High Definition Movies, next will be used for gaming exclusively, two thicker cables could bring more porn and one tinny for email should do just fine.
You really have no idea how fibre optics networks work, do you? Hey but don't let that stop you from posting some random cr@p on the net about it instead of getting some basic facts first.
Select to expand quotekiteboy dave said..
^^^ come back in 30-50 years maybe.
Fine, Lets see what Abbot could do with 50 bln right now.
Another no brainer concept...
NSN _ National Solar Network
$50,000,000,000.00 / by solar panel price $0,5 /per Watt = 100,000,000,000 Watts Solar Panel = 100 GW
daily output 5 x 100GW x 365days = 182500000000 kwh !! or 182.5 billions kwh !!
Whole Australia production is 225 billions so we are not all covered but close enough !!
I am a bit surprised by results so you do check my calculations (mind boggling zeroes...I could be wrong either way.)
Select to expand quotegs12 said..
You really have no idea how fibre optics networks work,
Are you actually undermine my suggestion that two fibreoptics are able to send /provide twice as much data as a single one ?
...two aren't better then one ? Isn't that all discussion about ??
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..
Are you actually undermine my suggestion that two fibreoptics are able to send /provide twice as much data as a single one ?
nope - just the fact that what you are suggesting is like having two 4 lane highways going into your house but you drive a family sedan twice a week to local shops
Select to expand quotegs12 said..Macroscien said..
Are you actually undermine my suggestion that two fibreoptics are able to send /provide twice as much data as a single one ?
nope - just the fact that what you are suggesting is like having two 4 lane highways going into your house but you drive a family sedan twice a week to local shops
Excellent answer. I have ( you too have ) a ordinary driveway to you home. Now you are suggesting the ONE motorway line should be directed straight to your home ( and every other home !!! )
I am so happy to afford to buy a piece of land and put home that I could not hear any street ( or even worse motorway) traffic at all
Now if you are truck driver , that a different story, you spend most of your time on the road, but how many truckies you have in this country and how many just driving once a week to get groceries ?
^ It's a fair point: What about people that don't want the NBN, and/or don't want to pay for other people's NBN?
One could ask the same question replacing the appropriate terms with "federal highway".
Or "Public Schools"
Or "Public Hospitals"
Or "Public Transport"
Or "First Home Owners Grant"
Or "Baby Bonus"
Or "Defence Force"
Or a zillion other things.
^ It's a fair point:
Because I heard Mr Rudd say that the reason fibre had to go to every property in the country (presumably no matter the expense) was because everyone deserved equal access to the infrastructure (whether they actually wanted it or not).
presumably just like everyone has equal access to "federal highway".
Or "Public Schools"
Or "Public Hospitals"
Or "Public Transport"
Or "First Home Owners Grant"
Or a zillion other things.
Select to expand quoteCarantoc said..
^ It's a fair point:
Because I heard Mr Rudd say that the reason fibre had to go to every property in the country (presumably no matter the expense) was because everyone deserved equal access to the infrastructure (whether they actually wanted it or not).
presumably just like everyone has equal access to "federal highway".
Or "Public Schools"
Or "Public Hospitals"
Or "Public Transport"
Or "First Home Owners Grant"
Or a zillion other things.
Not everyone gets access to the first time home owners grant or the baby bonus. If your house exceed a certain value, you don't get it. If you earn more than a certain amount, you don't get it.
If you go down this path, you could easily argue that because the infrastructure is there, every deserves to drive in a BMW to get the real benefit of it and therefore the government should fund BMW's for everyone.
Until such time as every house "needs" optical fibre, why both investing in it. The cost will continue to drop and those who don't want it are a waste of good tax payer money.
Who needs 100mbps? Is there any valid reason for a non-business related entity to have it? If you bring up this 4K TV crap, then you can afford to pay for the NBN because 4K TV's are expensive.
Select to expand quotegs12 said..Macroscien said..
Are you actually undermine my suggestion that two fibreoptics are able to send /provide twice as much data as a single one ?
nope - just the fact that what you are suggesting is like having two 4 lane highways going into your house but you drive a family sedan twice a week to local shops
AFAIK its normally two fibres, one for transmit and one for receive in fibre networking.
That fibre is just the driveway onto the next road working up to the highway. Makes you wonder what is the total cable capacity into the continent ? Of course a high def video conference between houses would only be using the local roads and highways.
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..gs12 said..Macroscien said..
Are you actually undermine my suggestion that two fibreoptics are able to send /provide twice as much data as a single one ?
nope - just the fact that what you are suggesting is like having two 4 lane highways going into your house but you drive a family sedan twice a week to local shops
Excellent answer. I have ( you too have ) a ordinary driveway to you home. Now you are suggesting the ONE motorway line should be directed straight to your home ( and every other home !!! )
I am so happy to afford to buy a piece of land and put home that I could not hear any street ( or even worse motorway) traffic at all
Now if you are truck driver , that a different story, you spend most of your time on the road, but how many truckies you have in this country and how many just driving once a week to get groceries ?
The thing to remember hear is the maintenance cost of these roads, the old copper roads and Nodes boxes (We could think of them as traffic lights, only where all the minor roads start to come together). those node boxes (Im sure they have a proper name) all will be sucking in electricity to convert the fibre optic signal into electrical signals to be pushed down this old copper wiring system. When things go wrong a bloke will have to come out and fix it, just like now. You replace all the old copper with a new standard install it is bound to be more reliable. It certainly wont need that electricity.
Sending light down a fibre is a pretty efficient system in energy terms I imagine. Although anyone who knows how much power those lasers draw is welcome to tell us ;-)
Select to expand quoteMobydisc said..CMC said..
It won't happen.
Why do you think Murdoch wanted the Libs in so bad? It's simply to protect cable TV sales. Every other country with fast net (read most) cable TV sales have fallen heavily.
It was a major election issue so they will just say they were given a mandate that Australia did not want it. Game over regardless if Murdoch media presented all of the benefits of the slower slightly cheaper version...
Pay TV subscriptions is declining in Australia anyway. A fiber optic network would not have much of an effect one way or another. Most subscribers to pay TV got it in the nineties or early naughties. There probably have not been that many new subscribers since then. Check out the ads on Foxtel, 90% of them are for funeral insurance. Older people are their target market. The main problem pay TV has is not the NBN, its the fact most of the shows on it are rubbish and younger people have found alternatives with existing technology.
If we get the NBN I really doubt my Internet/TV/Music consumption would change all that much. Right now I can download a HD show recently aired in America quicker than I can watch it. This is with ADSL2. No fiber to the home. Of course this speed is not available everywhere. What should be a priority is improving access in areas where decent broadband Internet is not currently available. That would be the best bang for the buck.
Remember the sport ! Only reason to get foxtel.
Good point about prioritizing the current black spots. Perhaps the work already done wouldn't be wasted if we installed this technology into those areas.
Select to expand quoteGizmo said..
Is anyone actually producing TV material in 4k yet?......
I watched a documentary on the HD4K and HD8K about six or eight months ago, it was on the bbc and although most of the data was derived from the Japanese demographic, they surmised that there will be little to no media generated for the HD4K market
this is based on the fact that HD8K (equivalent to 16 regular full hd screens joined together 4 up 4 across or a 32 megapixle photo ) will be the pinnacle of definition for 2D television (next step will be holographic 3D or some other form of 3d that requires no glasses)
it is there opinion that even on screens far exceeding 100 inches that there is just no need for any more detail as it will be at photographic quality
They predicted that the media outlets will mostly not bother gearing up ( at huge expense ) for the 4K market instead they will aim for the 8K market as it will be not long behind HD4K (they were already sending test transmissions of HD8K a year ago )
from that i feel that apart from a few bits and pieces the available media just won't exist like all the people who bought 3d (with glasses) tv's
the short answer is no - up-scaling your blue ray will be all you get
. . . . .also 4K and 8K is closer than you think to being really cheap - a couple of weeks ago the Chinese released a couple of HD4K TV's onto the market at well under US$1000 one was 55inch and i forget the other size
so if the libs manage their crappy end of line copper NBN roll out how will that hold up to people streaming HD8K, or will it be as tragic as Tony Abbot in his budgie smugglers
EDIT: oh yeah i signed the petition too - as far as the internet goes after spending 13 years traveling to all sorts of places (and leaving my 100mB connection behind at my last home ). I came home to the country i love and find the internet here is basically powered by a hamster in a wheel 
www.ibm.com/au-en
FTTP the backbone of a trillion dollar economy by 2050 says IBM.
Staffer, Macro, your position is so shortsighted.
FFS, we just had an election and one side wanted to complete the NBN and the other side didn't. It's a little bit late for some of you guys to squeal about your NBN. You had your choice and now we've got what we've got.
Sign the petition..
Coz Tony is a smart guy, a forward thinker and one who listen's to the public.
Oh wait.. he's in. Fk.
Start saying ur Hail Marys and get used to going backwards in time.
The majority of you voted for his party and platform so stop ya b!tchin and get used to it.
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said...
Dribble dribble
That's 30 seconds I'm not getting back. Faced with fact you just dribble. Go away.
www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-12/malcolm-turnbull-labels-anti-nbn-petition-reckless/4954858
There's your mandate speech already. Pointless discussion.
As someone who works from home and connects to my office remotely in another country I can tell you the current adsl 2 network is far from fast enough.... That's now, the size of files and complexity doubles every couple of years.
To say we don't need as fast as we can get is down right stupidity. The world is changing and the sooner we join it the better.
Select to expand quoteCMC said..
As someone who works from home and connects to my office remotely in another country I can tell you the current adsl 2 network is far from fast enough....
And as someone who does the same I can honestly say that it's more than enough for what I need. Select to expand quoteCMC said..
To say we don't need as fast as we can get is down right stupidity.
Nobody on the FTTN-side of the argument thinks we don't need super fast porn, just that we don't need fast porn to every single household in the country.
Select to expand quotekiteboy dave said..
That's 30 seconds I'm not getting back.
Sure, with ultra fast streaming porn you could be dribbling in this 30 seconds, what a loss 
wait... I am wrong...
in fact that could be the best outcome... allow maroons to dribble their seed into the ground instead of repopulating the earth 
Select to expand quoteCMC said..
As someone who works from home and connects to my office remotely in another country I can tell you the current adsl 2 network is far from fast enough.....
On the Christ sake ! All that happen in Oz is streamed and controlled by Vatican ? in 21st Century ??
no surprise ADSL2 is not enough
Can I write new petition ?
CUT THE UNDERSEA CABLES OFF !
Select to expand quotekiteboy dave said..
Go away.
Don't be shy, Send your picture to the contest
I mean picture of your mind
Where money are made this days:
" Verizon in record $53b bond sale"
and US congress is not going to intervene with national plans to roll out glass fiber to every native wigwam in the prairie.
on another hand underground cable may looks less obtrusive then satellite dish on the roof of that structure
Forget the 'New Digital Super Highway" how about they start by fixing the existing Fkn roads..... haven't we been paying petrol tax for years under the pretext that it was for road maintenance....
well guess what it hasn't been used on that has it!!!!!!!!!
