Australia is behind the curve. Again.

Many iPhone features incompatible with Australia's networks

Not that I really care about the iPhone, but it's just another symptom of our backward goddamn internet infrastructure.

I was reading a PC magazine yesterday and there was an article in it about how the ALP is now weakening on their proposed new broadband innovations - or whatever they were called - like trying to bring this country up to speed with other developed nations. Not only are they not investing the same amount of money as they were going to, but apparently they've gone ahead with their plan to implement the ISP level filtering dealie and place the burden on ISPs to block 'unwanted' sites. According to the article, anyone who knows anything about IT will say that this will have a further negative impact on bandwidth. Not to mention costing 50 - 70 million dollars.

The article referenced some news articles, but I'm too lazy to get off my chair and find where I wrote them down right now. So if you want them, ask.

Those bastards!

Why don't they just add one of them ADSL boosters to the base of new highrise developments... i can't even remember what they're called- i do however remember Simmo and some guy who works at Optus getting quite rancid about it at Tom and Al's place.

I think i need to pay attention more often...

Glenjamin wrote:Why don't they just add one of them ADSL boosters to the base of new highrise developments... i can't even remember what they're called- i do however remember Simmo and some guy who works at Optus getting quite rancid about it at Tom and Al's place.

I think i need to pay attention more often...

ADSL booster? Do you mean a DSLAM? Stop gap solution. Fibre to the home is the solution. Fibre bandwidth doubles every 18 months. We're up to about 14TB/s on a single fibre. There's no excuse for new developments to not have fibre along with water and electricity.

Yes, I am arguing internet is a requirement for life.

What about Natural gas?

Ahh DSLAM- what does it stand for?

Fibre to the home sounds expensive...

I think Skimmo was talking about VDSL and referencing the setup in Japan.

VDSL is not bad for existing buildings. Fibre the curb basically.

Glenjamin wrote:What about Natural gas?

Ahh DSLAM- what does it stand for?

Fibre to the home sounds expensive...

DSLAM - DSL access multiplexer

Fibre optic cable is cheaper than traditional twisted pair. Erbium doped fibre amplifiers are cheaper than traditional digital repeaters. Fibre optic splitters (Bragg gratings split off a single frequency of light they're pretty amazing) are cheaper than running a twisted pair to each home from the exchange. You can basically supply a whole line of houses with a single line of fibre. Fibre to the home isn't that expensive at all, and once it's in it's basically unlimited bandwidth as long as you have the foresight to lay more than one cable. I saw optus laying some fibre in North Sydney years ago and they were laying bundles of 1024 fibres. That's 14PB/s of bandwidth.

thats hawt

The 'fibre to the home' thing does sound like it's the ticket. My question is: Why does our El stupido government not recognise this? Do you think our country's geography may make it a little more unfeasible though? Or not?

replace unfeasible with expensive

Andrew.C wrote:trying to bring this country up to speed with other developed nations.

Putting that word in bold says more than I could with any amount of rambling.

I'm not sure if that's Trebor trying to wink or if he thinks he's taking over this boat...

isn't there a problem with heat and fiber? i heard that unless they bury it you get way more interference, etc. burying cable in the city would be pretty difficult, but i do agree that new developments should be given fiber- unless there's a downside you aren't telling us about Boden?

hmmm?
coz you all know what will happen when the govt. hears about a cheaper, faster alternative to current technology...

Glenjamin wrote:coz you all know what will happen when the govt. hears about a cheaper, faster alternative to current technology...

They sit about on their hands doing nothing for years and years, denying the benefits of the new and proclaiming the benefits of the old. Then they ignore the experts and go ahead spending millions on implementing the old outdated technology, which they've ended up sparing expenses on as well, so we get ... or was this the joke you were implying?

Glenjamin wrote:I'm not sure if that's Trebor trying to wink or if he thinks he's taking over this boat...

isn't there a problem with heat and fiber? i heard that unless they bury it you get way more interference, etc. burying cable in the city would be pretty difficult, but i do agree that new developments should be given fiber- unless there's a downside you aren't telling us about Boden?

hmmm?
coz you all know what will happen when the govt. hears about a cheaper, faster alternative to current technology...

I haven't heard of any fibre and heat related interference. If it got hot enough to melt the glass that might be a problem I guess but you would probably be on fire at that point

What would be the feasibility (feasability?) of laying fibre all the way from one side of the country to the other underground? Say following the highways? I don't think that that would be completely impossible seeing as it is just diggin a friggin 5 foot deep hole with a tractor less than a metre wide along the curb of the highways to major towns and laying a pipe in them. Fuck give me a boat and a few strong men to man her and i'll do it.

There is no stack of jugs/swank big enough to save that boat.

Que?

He's saying that you and your crew will turn gay pretty quickly and no amount of straight porn can stop it.
I agree.

Can I borrow your copy of swank, Trevor?

Trizender wrote:He's saying that you and your crew will turn gay pretty quickly and no amount of straight porn can stop it.
I agree.

Andrew.C wrote:Can I borrow your copy of swank, Trevor?

Yes you can.