[AusNOG] NBN Legislation

[David Connors]

On 1 December 2010 01:35, Steve Lisson <SteveL at dedicatedservers.net.au>wrote:

[ ... ]

 You may hate me for this but I am for the NBN, even if costs more than what
> would cost a commercial entity to do so as think it will realise better
> results overall than what any commercial roll-out would do, have been very
> surprised by their target percentage.
>

The key is for you to define "better overall result". Better Internets?
Better value for money?  If you take cost out of the equation of any
pie-in-the-sky project then the result will always be great.

$43bln (which will be $120bln and 50 dead technicians by the time Labor are
finished with the project) is a metric pantload of coinage and the federal
budget is finite. You might want to include mental
illness/health/education/state of the indigenous population in that "better
results overall"?

Oh wait, I forgot the nonsense du jour: roads and the JSF are expensive so
why not buy a $43bln Internets (personally, I want a space elevator while
we're at it).


>  I believe it _*should*_ already be better than this. At least with the
> NBN you will know when moving to a location you will know if it is there or
> not and that it will be rolled out at some point if not already. While I
> do not agree with some of what they are doing (e.g. gpon, L2 (but that is
> just personal and can not currently see how L3 deployment could work without
> NBN doing more than they will already need to)), but that is the _*cost*_
> of government getting involved to rectify an issue.
>

"that is the _cost_ of government getting involved to rectify an issue"
*chortle*

If by "rectify" you mean "stuff up" and if by "cost" you mean "unknown and
probably infinite cost plus dead people and quite a few commercial
casualties who are run out of business by the government running the project
in an economically dodgy way to make the thing look like a success when it
is done at any cost" - then I'd agree. Most everything run at a federal or
state level is a balls up/late/over budget/dead people. The government can't
deliver consistent or good health or education outcomes (and they've been
trying for 109 years now) or get value for money putting Stratco sheds up at
the local school - what the hell chance have they got of building the NBN in
time or budget?

I mean, if you had a supplier who ran every project for you as late, over
budget, and ultimately a dodgy outcome - would you give them $43bln and ask
them to build a national fibre network?

As for whether the government should be involved at all, as Mark Smith
posted earlier on this thread: http://fee.org/library/books/economics
-in-one-lesson/

-- 
*David Connors* | david at codify.com | www.codify.com
Software Engineer
Codify Pty Ltd
Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417
189 363
V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20101201/d3011217/attachment.html>