Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Australia's National Broadband Network To Go Ahead

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the beware-coriolis-effect dept.

Australia 222

angry tapir writes "After weeks of a hung parliament following the Australian federal election, the incumbent Labor Party has garnered enough support among independent MPs to form a minority government. Broadband was central to clinching the independents' support. Labor's victory means the $43 billion National Broadband Network will push ahead. The policy has generally been popular among ISPs and telcos — though some rebel operators preferred a policy that emphasized wireless technologies, similar to the proposals put forward by Labor's opponents. The primarily fiber-based NBN is set to offer Australians 1Gbps broadband."

cancel ×

222 comments

What's the point... (5, Insightful)

Deathnerd (1734374) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530154)

Of having broadband if you can't watch some good ol' small breasted porn?

Re:What's the point... (0, Redundant)

bistromath007 (1253428) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530166)

My thoughts exactly. Australia has no use for broadband, as they aren't allowed to do anything with it.

Re:What's the point... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530200)

We can do anything anyone else can do with it.

The "small breasted porn" issue is incorrect sensationalism, and the idiotic filter idea - which was never going to get through the senate previously - will now not even make it past the house of reps, so I'd be very surprised if we heard anything about it again in the near to medium future.

Re:What's the point... (4, Interesting)

twostix (1277166) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530644)

It doesn't have to get through the house of anything.

The department will argue that any filtering on it's own network is an operational issue well outside of the purvey of the house and completely under the responsibility of the department and minister.

Understand?

Government departments don't need legislation to enable them to make decisions regarding the technical operations of their departments so unless the law that allows the NBN *specifically restricts* the implementation of a filter the department can and will demand the ISP implement filtering.

They will simply say "you don't have a right to download illegal material over the public network" if you complain.

I really wish people understood how the public service / executive and government work under our system, it really is very important.

Re:What's the point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530790)

Is that really the average ISP's relationship to the NBN? I've been hearing quite a few people say this, but it does not seem correct to me.

Many ISPs here resell internet access via Telstra's ADSL (which seems like a roughly analogous situation), but I doubt they'd automatically inherit Telstra's filter.
I reckon the NBN would be the wrong level at which to insert any sort of filter; ISPs know what their traffic means, whereas the NBN infrastructure probably won't.

Re:What's the point... (4, Interesting)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530794)

Go here http://abc.com.au/ [abc.com.au] and then here http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/ActCompilation1.nsf/all/search/2E7F5179D6598E8DCA2574730019A00B [comlaw.gov.au] . As for fibre broadband network legislation is required to enable it, and unless language stipulating censorship is included then it can't happen and that legislation is amended. Government departments can not act outside of legislation unless that legislation incorporates that out of bounds operation, as for freedom of speech in Australia that is more complex http://www.aph.gov.au/LIBRARY/pubs/rn/2001-02/02rn42.htm [aph.gov.au] .

The biggest threat high bandwidth internet has politically, is an end to campaign contributions to pay for commercial broadcasting purposes. Every politician and every political party will be able to upload their message, speeches, supporting performance (on permanent record) to government hosted web sites (local, state and federal) which every citizen can freely access. No more for profit political commercials now that cripples the influence of the rich via mass media and promotes independent politicians as well as enabling smaller political parties to gain access to the electorate upon an equal basis. Additional every single sitting of any legislative body can be recorded, uploaded and accessed by anybody at any time.

Plus think of fun stuff it will enable, web hosted multi site parties, were web cams and big screen TV's can link together multiple locations around the world, for that family reunion Christmas (many sleepless day/night opportunities in there) etc.

Re:What's the point... (1)

Matt_R (23461) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530802)

and the idiotic filter idea - which was never going to get through the senate previously - will now not even make it past the house of reps, so I'd be very surprised if we heard anything about it again in the near to medium future.

They're still trying.. http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/conroys-net-filter-still-alive-and-kicking-20100910-1540s.html [smh.com.au]

Independent MP Rob Oakeshott, the Opposition and the Greens have all come out against the policy, leaving it effectively dead in the water.

Re:What's the point... (1)

pitchpipe (708843) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530220)

Australia has no use for broadband, as they aren't allowed to do anything with it.

Yes the DO! Imagine THIS [barneythedinosaur.com] at 1 Gbps! Hey, it's legal, he has no breasts.

Re:What's the point... (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530680)

Yes the DO! Imagine THIS at 1 Gbps! Hey, it's legal, he has no breasts.

That does not mean there are not people out there fapping away to Barney the Dinosaur. Trust me on that.

The whole breast issue is idiotic. What we need is a fapability index. Anything over a .08 fapability index gets instantly rejected by the routers themselves. Of course training the computers and creating the index will require enormous amounts of manpower.

Of course being the good, honest, pure, God fearing Christian that I is, I am willing to do my part in creating the index. Are YOU?

PEDOPHILE ALERT!!! PEDOPHILE ALERT!!! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530182)

This person is a pedophile. Please report him to the police.

Re:What's the point... (1)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530262)

Who cares about small breasted porn?

Re:What's the point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530756)

Anyone who likes Asian chicks.

What filter? (5, Informative)

DMJC (682799) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530188)

Greens/Liberals/Independants hold the balance of power and are all dead set against the filter. It's a dead scheme stop mentioning it. There will be no mandatory net filter in Australia. The ETS and mining tax are probably also going to get blocked. They don't have the numbers to pass that sort of legislation anymore.

Re:What filter? (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530206)

They don't have the numbers to pass that sort of legislation anymore.

I wonder if any legislation will get passed between now and the next election.

Re:What filter? (1)

Rik Rohl (1399705) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530266)

Hopefully not!

Re:What filter? (4, Funny)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530326)

If you're not passing any legislation, perhaps what you need is more fibre?

Re:What filter? (1)

breldis (1897786) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530798)

bazinga!

Re:What filter? (4, Informative)

Eskarel (565631) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530210)

While I agree with you, it's important to remember that the Liberals haven't actually said they won't support the filter. Joe Hockey has said they won't support the filter, but he is neither the leader, nor the communications minister.

That said, the filter was always a dead scheme, which is why Labor never tried to push it through.

Question for Aussies (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530284)

I have a legitimate question for any Aussies on /. Here in the US, the title "Liberal" refers to spineless douchebags who act like conservatives with their own money, property, etc., but who love to micromanage other people's money, property, and selves. Are Aussie Liberals the same as US Liberals?

Re:Question for Aussies (2, Informative)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530306)

Are Aussie Liberals the same as US Liberals?

No. Liberal here is supposed to refer to people with a somewhat Libertarian outlook. Small government, letting the market take care of things. That sort of thing.

Re:Question for Aussies (2, Informative)

H0D_G (894033) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530342)

It's classical liberalism, so it's primarily referring to their economic platform. In the US it applies to social platforms.

Re:Question for Aussies (3, Informative)

sortius_nod (1080919) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530350)

But they aren't, that's the problem. They're neo-cons these days. Someone like Malcolm Turnbull would be a true "Liberal", Tony Abbott (the guy who knifed Malcolm Turnbull to run the Liberals) is definitely a neo-con. They run the party these days and cop a lot of shit from Malcolm Fraser (one of the Liberal greats) for it.

Re:Question for Aussies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530588)

Neo-cons? Please. You have no-clue.

The name is totally irrelevant to the ideals of the party anyway. The current liberal party ideals are mostly conservatism, and therefore they lean to the right on most issues.

As with most governments, it's all about appealing to the majority of the public, so they all swing left and right from time to time and different issues.

Re:Question for Aussies (0, Offtopic)

twostix (1277166) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530750)

Lol this isn't insightful save for left wing fantasists.

Anybody who isn't in or completely shares the lefts beliefs is a "neo-con".

Yet it's the Labor party who tried so hard to implement government censorship on the Internet in Australia, not the "evil neocons" who had power over both houses of parliament for years. That must be *very* hard to reconcile.

Malcolm Turnbull a "true Liberal" LOL! A republican merchant banker who tossed a coin to decide whether to join Labor or the Liberals. In the US he'd be called a RINO or DINO, he holds no beliefs except for what gets him more money and fame. His 14% approval rating (remember) hardly showed great support among the electorate for the "true Liberal". In fact Liberals across the country absolutely could not stand him.

Tony Abbot brought down Rudd and nearly got elected over a first term government, unheard of in Australian politics. He also does enormous amounts of volunteer work out in central Australia, is a Rhodes scholar, vice captain of his local bush fire brigade, a volunteer life saver, etc, etc. Yet you try and paint him as some sort of monster. On the other hand lets look at the current Labor administration.

Most of them were to their ears in ratbag fringe left university politics (going over to Cuba as a Castro supporter in 1996! WTF?!), the majority of them graduated Uni straight into Union politics and most have never ever held a single job outside of left wing politics with not a hint of dirt "volunteer" work or anything that doesn't help their political career.

You need to brush up on the current state of affairs.

Re:Question for Aussies (1)

TeraCo (410407) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530822)

In the interests of accuracy, it wasn't abbott who knifed turnbull in the back (although I can't stand Abbott). Another MP triggered a leadership spill (Maybe Costello?) but Abbott was the third candidate and he skated in on the backs of both factions hating the 'other guy' more than they hated Abbott.

Re:Question for Aussies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530332)

No . Liberal here is your equivalent of a republican. Small brained, narrow minded, have a dislike of foreigners other than to provide maid services. you know the sort of thing.

Re:Question for Aussies (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530352)

I have a legitimate question for any Aussies on /. Here in the US, the title "Liberal" refers to spineless douchebags who act like conservatives with their own money, property, etc., but who love to micromanage other people's money, property, and selves. Are Aussie Liberals the same as US Liberals?

Find out from the Liberal Party website [liberal.org.au] . They have an overview of their party [liberal.org.au] covering their beliefs, history, and party structure. They're conservatives who like liberal economics.

Re:Question for Aussies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530384)

I have a legitimate question for any Aussies on /. Here in the US, the title "Liberal" refers to spineless douchebags who act like conservatives with their own money, property, etc., but who love to micromanage other people's money, property, and selves. Are Aussie Liberals the same as US Liberals?

to draw a parallel (Close enough, although incorrect), Labor/ALP would be the Democrats, Liberals would be the Republicans.

Re:Question for Aussies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530534)

US Liberal --> AU Labor
US Republican --> AU Liberal

Re:Question for Aussies (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530562)

Here in the US, the title "Liberal" refers to spineless douchebags who act like conservatives...Are Aussie Liberals the same as US Liberals?

Australian Liberals are liberal in name only. At best they are conservative, and at worst they are fascist bigots. Any reference to "liberal" (lowercase L) is entirely fictional.

Re:Question for Aussies (1)

nonguru (1777998) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530650)

No, Liberals in Australia are actually spineless Conservative douchebags who - like USA conservatives - are all about freedom except when it offends their social sensibilities.

Re:Question for Aussies (4, Informative)

Tim99 (984437) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530720)

For many years the Australian Liberals have been the friends of the "big end of town" often at the expense of their natural constituency, small and medium businesses. The Liberals have had a reasonably successful policy of privatising public assets, socialising business losses and doling out "middle-class welfare". Under the last Liberal government of John Howard, their success was ensured by relatively high levels of taxation and then using the money collected to bribe the swinging voter immediately before an election. Now their opponents, the Labor party, seem to be ensuring their survival by pork-barrelling the minority independents. Many of us note that everything seemed to work quite well over the last couple of months when Parliament did not sit and no legislation was passed.

Re:Question for Aussies (2, Insightful)

snookums (48954) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530830)

I have a legitimate question for any Aussies on /. Here in the US, the title "Liberal" refers to spineless douchebags who act like conservatives with their own money, property, etc., but who love to micromanage other people's money, property, and selves. Are Aussie Liberals the same as US Liberals?

Actually, looking in from the outside, it seems to me that in the USA the term "liberal" is a meaningless epithet applied by the conservative media to anyone that they don't like.

In Australia the term "Liberal" means "a member of the Liberal Party of Australia [wikipedia.org] ", or a person who regularly votes for the same.

Re:What filter? (2, Insightful)

zuperduperman (1206922) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530372)

Yep. They did come out against the filter fairly definitively in the end, however I still would not put it past them to have a "conscience vote" on it when it comes to the crunch - in which case even if less than 1/3 of them supported it it would still fly through the senate. Which is to say, it still entirely possible that this will happen.

My biggest concern about the NBN is that it will make it extremely simple for a future government to implement such a policy, possibly without putting it through parliament. Heck, they would barely even need to tell anyone - just build it into the infrastructure of the NBN and nobody will notice until it gets turned on. The only reason there has been any debate about this at all is that the government had to get the ISPs on board who kicked up a fuss and leaked information about it all over the place.

Re:What filter? (1)

Merls the Sneaky (1031058) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530404)

There is also the possibility that the greens could horse trade censorship for carbon trading or some other environmental pet project they want. Remember these people are polititians.

Re:What filter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530432)

Joe Hockey was chosen to make the announcement of the Liberal Party's position on the filter, what he said represents the Liberal's position on the issue.
- Anonymous Liberal Party Member

Re:What filter? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530488)

Actually, I attended the National IT Debate just before the election and the liberal minister for communications did explicitly say that the Liberals were against the filter and would prefer to return to the old Howard policy of providing filtering software for free that people could install on their own computer (and thus not affect others)

Re:What filter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530438)

The ETS and mining tax are probably also going to get blocked.

Don't be silly, I reckon the level of the extra tax would be the sole subject of negotiation.

If the mining tax is blocked, so is the NBN (and the current gov is gone). Because the mining tax is the only source for the budget that is able to support the NBN (and still be able to reduce the current debt/deficit): it is the keystone of all Labor policies (which were cost-ed and found more black-hole-free than the coalition's ones. At least, so the Treasury said, isn't it?)

Re:What filter? (1)

Tik0 (1088873) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530468)

The greens support an ETS AND mining tax and have the numbers to pass them. They're going through.

Re:What filter? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530478)

There will be no mandatory net filter in Australia

Sure sure. The NBN is a way of giving the gumbiment a monopoly on Internet access in the country. You might get to choose your ISP but all your data are belong to the gumbiment sponsored fiber. This means they can poke in an more easily insert filtering/spying at any point they want.

This just puts one of the big incumbent players in a better monopoly position than they already are and gives the government more control than they're prepared to admit that it really does.

And finally, access to some network is a luxury item. Why should my hard earned tax dollars subsidize it when the hospital system in this country is a shambles. Public transport is a joke, and the government is too cheap to build a two way road; they build one that changes direction in the middle of the day. There's far more important things to spend money on and $43B could real good in the country rather than letting a bunch of yokels get a subsidized luxury item.

Re:What filter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530554)

And honestly I seriously doubty anyone in the Labor party ever really supported it - they were just waving it around because they needed that Family First fruitcake Feldman's vote in the upper house to pass their legislation. The moment that clown is marched out the door next year and the green senators take their seats, the Labor party will basically come out and admit it was all a charade.

Re:What filter? (0)

twostix (1277166) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530612)

The NBN will be filtered, it's a state owned resource that the government is totally responsible for.

The executive doesn't need legislation enabling it to filter a network that it owns and is in charge of. In fact the argument will be made that the government is *required* and has no choice but to filter illegal material such as child porn and illegal information and music downloads on a government owned network in order to conform to its own laws regarding classification.

The government can't be seen breaking or facilitating the breaking of its own laws.

The NBN will be filtered, most private ISPs will be pushed out of business and Labor, Telstra and the Department of Broadband will (for all intents and purposes) enjoy control of the Internet in Australia for the masses.

Get it?

One more time.

In order for the Government to force private operators to implement a government filter requires legislation. The government will argue that any filtering on it's own network (the NBN) is an *operational decision* and at the purvey of the "private" ISP (lol), the department that is responsible for it and the minister responsible for the department. Anybody who doesn't like it can go use a separate private network, nobody is "forced" to use the NBN and nobody has a "right" to download unclassified and illegal material over the publics network, anymore than a person has a right to drive a car on a public road.

Except what ISP will be able "compete" with the state owned, taxpayer subsidised, $10,000 a household network? Very few and they will have to charge far more once they lose half their customers to it.

It's the height of naiveté to believe that Steven Conroy (who is in charge of the NBN and who masterminded it) who argued hard and passionately for Internet filtering as well as Labor who believe in censorship just "gave up" and won't make filtering mandatory on the STATE OWNED NETWORK. The Labor party and governments in general don't work that way, terribly sorry but the NBN will be filtered it's a foregone conclusion.

Not to worry, some ISPs will survive and if you want to use their networks unfiltered you'll be able to, obviously losing most of their customers and the loss of their purchasing power for bandwidth compared to the NBN for offshore data will mean their prices will have to rise dramatically . I predict $150 a month for normal ADSL speeds and data packages if you wish to continue to use a private network.

A monopoly ISP run on a state owned network. I can't believe geeks here are happy about that situation it took decades to wrest control of the phone system of the monopoly telco, now people who should no better are cheering for us to have something *worse*.

Re:What filter? (1)

BigBadRich (849128) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530784)

Greens/Liberals/Independants hold the balance of power and are all dead set against the filter. It's a dead scheme stop mentioning it. There will be no mandatory net filter in Australia. The ETS and mining tax are probably also going to get blocked. They don't have the numbers to pass that sort of legislation anymore.

Looks like Senator Conroy didn't get the memo, then: Doh! [theage.com.au]

Big enough to give you everything you want (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530192)

Anyone who lives in Australia and supports this doesn't get to complain when the government begins to censor their "right" that they demanded the government give them.

Re:Big enough to give you everything you want (1, Insightful)

Nursie (632944) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530278)

Why?

Because in any other area that the government provides a service and does it badly it's perfectly right to complain and/or try to get it fixed.

Please leave your stupid paranoia of government services in your head with the other crazy ideas. some things make sense for a government to provide, or even wouldn't happen without it. But i forgot, that's socialism in your mind isn't it? And anything that is tainted with socialism is necessarily bad...

Moron.

Re:Big enough to give you everything you want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530592)

while it is a bit of a stupid post it does have some validity, people voted labor and the NBN knowing full well Labor intends to try and get the numbers for censorship and filtering. you could argue that many chose the NBN for selfish reasons just hoping that the censorship somehow stays away, personally I voted against Labor even though I would love the NBN and live in a suburb listed as getting the NBN early next year. I won't vote for a party that believes and is actively trying to remove my freedoms, broadband can always be made better, freedoms are rarely returned once taken away.

Re:Big enough to give you everything you want (3, Insightful)

mirix (1649853) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530328)

Yeah, it's so much better to be held at the mercy of a corporation that has no accountability to you, vs. the government that has at least some accountability.

Re:Big enough to give you everything you want (2, Informative)

twostix (1277166) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530686)

Given that the many "corporations" (small businesses and small ISPs save four) that currently offer internet access in Australia are in vicious competition with each other and services are improving yearly, yes. I would rather be able to say screw you Telstra 3g I'm going with Optus 3G because it's better, wait now I'm going with Internode because they're better than both.

Then say screw you government monopoly NBN ISP who has implemented filtering I'm going with....oh, all the other are gone or eye wateringly expensive now that they've lost most of their customers.

You live in a fantasy if you think you have more accountability over the Federal Government in Canberra than over a tiny ISP. And if you don't like corporations go with one of the many local ISPs.

And here's a tip for you: The majority of Australians *want* the Internet to be filtered, and the government is accountable to *them* not *you*. So now what?

Re:Big enough to give you everything you want (1)

mirix (1649853) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530782)

My line of thought was more like the situation in north america, where in a lot of areas there is effectively no competition. You've got DSL if you aren't too far from the CO, or perhaps cable. if those suck you're pretty much stuck with satellite, which... leaves something to be desired.

At least if the only provider was govn't owned, you could write to your local seat of govn't, or vote on the issue. whatever.

Re:Big enough to give you everything you want (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530574)

Why don't they get to complain? Are you somehow powerful enough to bind the entire population of Australia to such a stupid deal?

Re:Big enough to give you everything you want (1)

pookemon (909195) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530580)

If the pedophiles want to complain that Labor is blocking their access to their pedophilia then let them.

Not that it's going to happen with independants and greens holding the balance of power.

And you probably don't know this, but technically it wasn't the Australian people that voted for this government. It was the cross-benchers. So don't tell us what we can or can't complain about.

Re:Big enough to give you everything you want (1)

Fluffeh (1273756) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530730)

And you probably don't know this, but technically it wasn't the Australian people that voted for this government. It was the cross-benchers. So don't tell us what we can or can't complain about.

I actually think that a lot of the choice was made for the cross benchers by the voting that happened in the senate. No-one holding a balance of power would really want to join a lower house government knowing that everything can be blocked by the upper house anyway.

This whole election outcome is a massive lose-lose scenario for Australia. A half decent majority by EITHER of the main parties would have been a better outcome. They would have at least had the opportunity to try a few ideas out. Would all have been good? No, of course not, but the way things stand, any even slightly "out there" legislation or initiatives have no chance of getting introduced or will be so watered down to appease the masses that they are doomed for failure.

We should have declared it hung and gone back for round two. Preferably with new candidates. I have never seen an election where EVERY campaign focused on "Don't vote for the other guy...". Seriously, whatever happened to "Vote for me because.[insert topics here]..."

Australian... with questions here (2, Insightful)

JohnnyKlunk (568221) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530222)

OK, so this seems like a good idea - but what can we do with it? Having that kind of speed is great, but only if you have infrastructure that can serve you data that fast. We're a long way from anywhere and have only a limited amount of fibre connections to other countries (where I imagine most data will come from), this is reflected in the silly high prices we pay for data already.

So whilst it's great that we will have these kinds of speeds, how are we going to get data services fast enough to take advantage of them?

Cached on continent (2, Informative)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530260)

We're a long way from anywhere and have only a limited amount of fibre connections to other countries (where I imagine most data will come from), this is reflected in the silly high prices we pay for data already ... So whilst it's great that we will have these kinds of speeds, how are we going to get data services fast enough to take advantage of them?

A lot of data/content can be cached on continent. Akamai claims that:
"Akamai routinely delivers between fifteen and thirty percent of all Web traffic, reaching more than 4 Terabits per second."
http://www.akamai.com/html/customers/index.html [akamai.com]

Re:Cached on continent (1)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530364)

All claims aside, you'd be horrified at how much content *MUST* be individually hauled across the phorkin-huge pond between US and DownUndahLand.

For a start "the internet" is more than just the google-indexable WWW, and carries more protocols than JUST HTTP.

Re:Cached on continent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530824)

So 4000 people in Aus get their broadband, even though Aus has a low population density, it's pretty big.

Re:Australian... with questions here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530264)

You can setup a game server at home rather than having to lobby a wealthy ISP that can afford the infrastructure to support low pings.

Re:Australian... with questions here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530642)

I can set a server up now on my ADSL2+ 24 people.

Not really important to me. But meh, I'm a fat kid when it comes to internet, and if you ask me if i'd like more cake, i'm not going to say no!

Don't know if it's the right time to be doing it but, i'm still worried about double dip on GFC, and climate related economic slowdown. We DO have the biggest deficit the nations has ever had.... Which is something that's kinda scary.

Re:Australian... with questions here (3, Insightful)

muphin (842524) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530296)

stop thinking globally and think locally.
when we get the NBN up, major IT contenders such as google, microsoft, facebook, youtube will have local caches within australia, jobs will be created from expansions of such companies, more data centres... let alone medical applications, video conferencing, IPTV streaming, extremely cheap phone calls, ability then to setup local call centres ...
Education expansion, schools no longer have to be where the most people are when it can be done vide a video link.
More bandwidth = more data processing so more research can be completed, super computers creates, technology advances made....
so many possibilities.

check out http://www.zdnet.com.au/election-rant-1-wireless-greed-339305187.htm [zdnet.com.au] for more info is the possibilities

Re:Australian... with questions here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530334)

Obviously you don't know what you're talking about.

Just believing the sentionalistic headlines the print media spews.

Australia has more then serveral submarine communication cables connecting us to the world, capable of terabit speeds.

And by having the infrastructure ready for ultra fast broadband, we can start setting up our own servers and start hosting things.

Re:Australian... with questions here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530840)

It's not about the technology, it's about the money.

The wrong time to be doing this. I wouldn't buy a Ferrari whilst I've got a massive mortgage on my house.

Re:Australian... with questions here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530348)

When you live a country where most companies have several offices half a continent apart, the NBN is quite useful, especially considering the current prices for 1mb fiber links. Most people think the NBN is "only" for the end user with their ADSL connection used to surf youtube, play farmville on facebook and download movies with BT.

Re:Australian... with questions here (3, Insightful)

DarkEmpath (1064992) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530386)

So whilst it's great that we will have these kinds of speeds, how are we going to get data services fast enough to take advantage of them?

If you build it he will come.

At the moment, everything is overseas because it's not practical to have them here. As soon as we have the infrastructure in place, not only does it become more practical to mirror a lot of content and as well as provide additional services here, but it provides an underlying platform for new services to be created/invented.

You have to start somewhere :-)

Re:Australian... with questions here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530484)

The high price we in Australia pay today has nothing really to do with the "limited" connections we have with the rest of the internet. It has all to do with Telstra being in control of most of the infrastructure. Want proof? Check out the price of adsl2+ from someone such as TPG who provide their own DSLAMS and have their own backbone to use. $50 for 150gb onpeak/150 offpeak @ up to 24mb/s. Now compare that to a similar offer from any company with the connection using Telstra's DSLAMS, $50 for 1.5mb/s adsl with 10gb onpeak, 15gb offpeak...

Great outcome from Election (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530272)

NBN (Fibre Network) is supported by:
All independants
The Greens
Labor Pary

Therefore it is guaranteed to pass throught the upper and lower houses :)

Censorhip is supported by:
Labor

Therefore it will not be able to pass through either house of parliament unless the Liberal/National Coalition switch their position (which wouldnt surprise me)

Re:Great outcome from Election (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530770)

The coalition side with the labour party on a policy? Especially when that policy is unpopular?

If the labour party even tries to raise this in parliament (which seems unlikely given the lack of independent and upper house support) the coalition couldn't give up the opportunity to ride this whipping boy for as long as they can keep getting anecdotes which make the leadership look like a pack of nuffies. Julia isn't my hero, but she is politically savvy.

The coalition isn't going to get a chance to look good here, they'll have to go back to relying on fingering the soon-to-be-bankrupt economy.

Re:Great outcome from Election (1)

Techman83 (949264) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530820)

Therefore it will not be able to pass through either house of parliament unless the Liberal/National Coalition switch their position (which wouldnt surprise me)

Actually I would be very surprised. They would have to do a complete 180 flip on how they've behaved as the opposing party for the last 3 years. Which mainly consists of opposing everything and slagging off at every opportunity. I dare say that's part of the reason why the Greens got 4% of the swing away from Labor and the Coalition (liberals) only got 1.5%. Admittedly they need to change their tactics, but being a conservative party, change isn't going to happen fast.

From laughingstock to leader (1)

mykos (1627575) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530310)

On all the internet forums I'm on, people from Australia complain constantly about their slow speeds and Draconian caps.

Now they're on their way to being the best! Congrats, entire country of Australia!

Re:From laughingstock to leader (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530314)

I will believe it when I see it. Even now innocent people get leeched for incredibly small ADSL plans. 200MB per month from Telstra. That sort of thing.

Re:From laughingstock to leader (1)

!eopard (981784) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530818)

I will believe it when I see it. Even now innocent people get leeched for incredibly small ADSL plans. 200MB per month from Telstra. That sort of thing.

Only because they don't look at what's available, or upgrade to newer plans. Telstra now seems to offer 2GB plans as minimum, with 200GB/month plans available. There are also now Terabyte plans available from a number of ISPs.

I still cannot believe there are people that oppose the NBN. The cost is small ($6B/yr for 8 years) in relation to the benefits we will reap for the next 50+ years. 93% are to get FTTP, while the rest (that remain in the other probable 93% of Australia) will be looking at wireless and satellite.

Help! Get the Vaseline! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530318)

Great. We're to be shafted by a massive white elephant.

1. The true cost will be much greater than $43 billion. This figure - guaranteed to blow out anyway - includes no allowance for the interest and other borrowing charges that will be incurred by the project. The true cost may be greater than $200 billion.

2. Funding sources for the project have not been defined. The Government's exposure is 20-something million in initial investment, with the remainder supposed to come from the private sector. Especially given the failure of other public-private-partnerships (Brisbane, Sydney ...) who would be foolish enough to tip billions into another government stuff-up?

3. The NBN will be superseded by newer technologies within its implementation timeframe, and we'll be stuck with expensive crap.

4. Australians will stick with their (possibly) slower current technology services when given the alternative of a faster, but significantly more expensive solution.

5. While the projected NBN speeds look good on paper, they'll be constrained by overseas pipes for the content people REALLY want to see.

6. The projected NBN speeds still won't be delivered to most of the Australian continent. City users may get high speeds, but a very large number of rural citizens will get nothing.

NBN is another Conroy joke at our expense. A consultant-driven, snouts-in-the-trough, cynical billing exercise that would put the typical US Defense project to shame.

Re:Help! Get the Vaseline! (4, Informative)

KingKaneOfNod (583208) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530378)

4. Australians will stick with their (possibly) slower current technology services when given the alternative of a faster, but significantly more expensive solution.

Not possible. Remember that "agreement" that the government reached with Telstra? They agreed to "sell" their customers to NBN Co. when NBN rollout is complete in an area. This means that once NBN is available in your area you will be forced to use it or use nothing, because all alternatives will be removed by law.

Re:Help! Get the Vaseline! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530412)

Or to paraphrase, "I have no idea about the NBN but the Liberals opposed it and therefore so do I so it must be crap."

1. Conjecture
2. Conjecture
3. Something better than fibre? WTF?
4. The copper network is being phased out so it's either fibre or shitty wireless for most people.
5. We have excess international capacity at the moment with extra capacity planned.
6. 93% fibre, 4% wireless, 3% satellite. Are you one of these tards that think the roll-out is crap because the Simpson desert won't be fibred up?

Re:Help! Get the Vaseline! (1)

Lotana (842533) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530422)

What is your alternative? Stay with our current infrastructure that is among the slowest in the developed world?

Re:Help! Get the Vaseline! (1)

muphin (842524) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530424)

3. The NBN will be superseded by newer technologies within its implementation timeframe, and we'll be stuck with expensive crap.

WRONG! fibre is a future-proof tech, upgrades are done at communication ports such as at exchanges, once the cable is laid, nothing really needs to be changed. (for example ALL THE DAMN CABLE ON THE SEA FLOOR) with new advances such as replacing white-light with coloured they can increase the bandwidth exponentially.

Re:Help! Get the Vaseline! (2, Funny)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530556)

We don't say "coloured." That's African-American light, thank you.

Re:Help! Get the Vaseline! (1)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530430)

Great. We're to be shafted by a massive white elephant.

Well, some people would say that Australia itself is a Great White Elephant - maybe it is looking forward to said shafting.

1. The true cost will be much greater than $43 billion. This figure - guaranteed to blow out anyway - includes no allowance for the interest and other borrowing charges that will be incurred by the project. The true cost may be greater than $200 billion.

Anybody with a keyboard can pontificate mindlessly. The fact is that the "magic 43 billion dollars" was *always* "the government are willing to spend up to", it was not a budget it was not a costing estimate it was a "we will not contribute more than". It's entirely possible it may cost more, it may cost less, but The Government said THEY will not spend more than 43B.

2. Funding sources for the project have not been defined. The Government's exposure is 20-something million in initial investment, with the remainder supposed to come from the private sector. Especially given the failure of other public-private-partnerships (Brisbane, Sydney ...) who would be foolish enough to tip billions into another government stuff-up?

You're all a pack of retards! This is an infrastructure build, it will cost more money than it directly generates as revenue. Like ROADS, RAIL, ELECTRICITY and WATER/SEWERAGE infratructure projects. However, it will NOT be worth NOT BUILDING IT (in the long term).

3. The NBN will be superseded by newer technologies within its implementation timeframe, and we'll be stuck with expensive crap.

Sure, eventually we'll have The Ansible communications, enabling real-time infinite-bandwidth communications between points many many light years apart, but not in my lifetime. *EVENTUALLY* Fibre as a communications medium will be superseeded, but not in my lifetime, not in yours, not in your great-grandchildrens.

4. Australians will stick with their (possibly) slower current technology services when given the alternative of a faster, but significantly more expensive solution.

Sure some people will. The world is full of retards and the poor. You will*never* achieve 100% market-penetration. NEVER!

5. While the projected NBN speeds look good on paper, they'll be constrained by overseas pipes for the content people REALLY want to see.

Yes, to an extent, but recently that has begun to change a lot.

6. The projected NBN speeds still won't be delivered to most of the Australian continent. City users may get high speeds, but a very large number of rural citizens will get nothing.

Most of the continent has literally zero population per square kilometer, so yes MOST of the continent (by area) will not be covered.

Re:Help! Get the Vaseline! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530788)

You need prozac dude, lots of it.

Labour winning is good and bad (1)

Joolz50 (1381499) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530344)

Good because the NBN is going ahead (Liberals broadband plan was a joke). Bad because Senator Conroy is still in a position to put in the internet filter. As a side note, and I don't have a reference right now, but I recall reading/hearing somewhere that it will be much cheaper to build (in the order or $7B or so if i recall correctly) than originally planned based on the trial performed in some suburbs. I don't know how accurate/reliable that report was though.

Re:Labour winning is good and bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530450)

I'm not so concerned about the filter, it's obviously a ruse to placate the moronic Steven Fielding and his fundamentalist christian dogma. It's actually fairly clever; by being unreasonable, difficult to implement and generally shitty, there was no hope of getting the legislation passed. We'll have heard the last of it when Fielding finally exits the senate next year.

Re:Labour winning is good and bad (1)

fabs64 (657132) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530464)

Being that you managed to misspell the name of one of the two major parties we have in this country, I take it you don't follow politics and so will help you out.

The filter is dead, both the liberals and the greens are against it so it can't get through the house or the senate.

Re:Labour winning is good and bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530572)

never underestimate the greens willingness to change their vote in order to obtain consessions that are more important to them.

Re:Labour winning is good and bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530480)

The government has a budget and that budget will mostly be used regardless if it can be done cheaper or not. That's how government departments work. If the department has $100k to do something, company A says they can do it for $80k while company B says they can do the exact same thing for $20k, company A wins. The government department either uses that money or they lose it. There is rarely a benefit for them to have it done severely under budget

Australia is where its happening (1)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530452)

With their budget surplus, handled economy, and this? I may be moving my ass there.

Re:Australia is where its happening (1)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530506)

With their budget surplus, handled economy, and this? I may be moving my ass there.

We don't want your ass here, we've already voted a pair of asses into power.

Re:Australia is where its happening (1)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530638)

That's unfortunate for me. I don't really care for the US, and Im a citizen here. I like the people, and the geography in the northwest, but our government is a joke. Its completely ruled by special interests geared at funneling as much money as possible into the hands of a few. We have no such thing as affordable health care. You may as well die rather than burden your family with medical bills if you get any terminal illness, even if its a treatable one. We live in essentially pretty close to an aristocracy. I'm not sure if Australia is much better in that regard, but I can dream.

Re:Australia is where its happening (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530528)

surplus? I am sorry you must be thinking of some other country. We have a deficit since labor came in with a projected surplus in 2 or 3 years time, but even that is dependent on geting controversial mining tax through and NBN actually staying on budget, neither is currently highly likely.

Re:Australia is where its happening (1)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530590)

I certainly would not agree with the mining tax since it affects your major export.

Re:Australia is where its happening (1)

c0lo (1497653) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530614)

I certainly would not agree with the mining tax since it affects your major export.

Pick you choice: would you agree with NBN and a huge budget deficit?

Re:Australia is where its happening (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530640)

yep it is an incredibly dangerous tax in what is currently a declining market. There is also a lot of questions around the estimated tax income considering labor seem to have claimed tax revenues on the market increasing rather than going backwards 50% + like it has been doing.

Re:Australia is where its happening (1)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530688)

I can't believe its still under consideration. I have no business commenting on your politics, but I thought it was so unpopular with Australian citizens it should have been thrown out already.

Re:Australia is where its happening (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530728)

It is unpopular with many, but there is still a large amount of the fiscally ignorant that just see mining companies, banks etc making huge profits and out of jealousy think they deserve a slice of it.

never mind the fact that most of their superannuation is tied up with it, or the fact that the mining companies did more to pull the Australian Economy through the GFC than the government ever did, or the fact that these companies are mostly owned by Australian shareholders (mums and pops) or that they employ 10's of thousands of people etc etc. When the tax was announced superannuation funds took a massive beating as the stock prices of mining companies plumetted.

Never underestimate greed and jealousy, labor appealed to these 2 emotions of many voters and it blinds them from seeing the negative consequences.

Offtopic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530812)

I tried to run for office as an honest politician, but I couldn't raise enough money to pay for my campaign.

This doesn't mean:

  • if running as a dis-honest politician, you will be more successful in rising money (non-sufficient condition implied)
  • if persisting in your attempts to run as a honest politician, you will always be failing (non-necessary condition implied)

But surely your sig is "loaded".

Re:Australia is where its happening (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530582)

With their budget surplus, handled economy, and this? I may be moving my ass there.

Hang for a while see how the mining tax will turn out - things should be sorted shortly. Without it, I reckon there won't be an NBN (and neither other fancy stuff).

Sweet! 43 Billion! (1, Insightful)

AbRASiON (589899) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530610)

That's fantastic, a country with a serious water crises in at least 3 states, with a housing price epidemic and using sweet fuck all sustainable power - but hey we can get really fast internet! Even though our international links aren't even that good and a heap of city dwelling people can get from 8 to 24mb/s now,.......

Re:Sweet! 43 Billion! (4, Insightful)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530792)

That's fantastic, a country with a serious water crises in at least 3 states,

Cant do jack against mother nature. With the ENSO event last year this has lessened somewhat. Perhaps if people stopped wasting so much water on lawns and washing their hotted up HSV we wouldn't have such a crisis.

with a housing price epidemic

Limited land, bad land releases and a few companies have a stranglehold on constructions. Do you suggest the government give land away or fix prices for private corporations (because that will go down well on SlashLibertarian). Point in short, problem is procedural and throwing cash at it wont help.

using sweet fuck all sustainable power

Every time someone utters the word "Nuclear" the NIMBYS are up in arms taking torches and pitchforks to parliament house on sixty minutes. The same NIMBYs who complain about housing prices, broadband costs and water crisies but cant stop washing their cars every second day and watering their lawns in the middle of the day (40+ C is not unusual in Australia folks).

but hey we can get really fast internet!

Which will spur economic and scientific growth and get us out of this communications dark age we are currently living in. CLUE: we are competitive with Russia for broadband, that puts us at #42 in the world. Economically we are a first world nations about #12-15 from the top.

You criticise the government for not fixing problems it can do little about by criticising the government when it does do something to fix a problem it can do something about. Jesus H Christ, Australia doesn't need any more people like you.

Lets break down the numbers, out of that 43 billion, 16 billion is being contributed by private entities. So that's 27 billion. Divide that by 11 million households and thats less then A$2500 per household. Amortise that over a 20 year lifespan (20 year minimum, 40 more likely) and its $125 per year, per household. A bloody bargain at twice the price. OTOH, lets look at the Sydney harbour bridge. That cost 60 Million to build in the 20's, we didn't pay it off for 60 years... as long as we dont count the economic benefits of the North Sydney CBD created directly as a result of the Sydney Harbour Bridge (oh and theres a bit of tourism $$$ for that iconic structure).

Re:Sweet! 43 Billion! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530826)

That's fantastic, a country with a serious water crises in at least 3 states, with a housing price epidemic and using sweet fuck all sustainable power - but hey we can get really fast internet! Even though our international links aren't even that good and a heap of city dwelling people can get from 8 to 24mb/s now,.......

.. There's been so much fucking rain that whole towns have been flooded out of existence, rivers are appearing and lakes being created .. Housing prices are in the middle of a complete free-fall .. There's so much brown coal in the ground that we don't have to worry about sustainability for years yet

See! Everything's fine.

I imagine this will go over as well as (0)

hsmith (818216) | more than 3 years ago | (#33530630)

"public airways" in the USA.

"Oh we are the family rights coalition, we have 4 people, but we will write 509128 letters to the federal regulators until stuff we dislike is censored"

and now since the Aussie Govt will own the broadband network, they can do as they please. How quaint.

BiTcth (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33530776)

result3d iN the
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...