On Friday 10 February 2017 20:34:56 David Boxall wrote: > An interesting assertion: >> “Even if we offered it for free, we see the evidence around the world that >> they wouldn’t use it anyway,” Mr Morrow said. > <http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/nbn/australians-are-not-ready-for-superfast-broadband-nbn-chief-says/news-story/2271ef7a1b9095ba21fe154a1bb0eb21>
There's an interesting tension here between the BIRRR group who want reliable, landline based, voice and basic broadband services in rural & regional areas and the proponents of high-speed (>=1Gbit/sec) availability. The key issue revolves around the human purpose of the NBN; why are we building it? Serious consideration of this has to begin by discarding political slogans like "21st century communications infrastructure" and an infatuation with technology, and instead begin by identifying the hierarchy of people's needs in city, regional, rural & remote areas around the country. The technological ways & means and the cost thereof comes after that _and_ it probably involves spending proportionally more money in the bush. It seems to me this hasn't been done. Instead NBN Co. look like a creature of government whose primary purpose is to be seen to be implementing a "national" broadband network, but one where the investment depends on the electoral return. That's how we wound up with the current rat's nest of technologies. That and too many executive long lunches, with not enough disciplined, evidence-based thinking. David L. _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
