From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Connors Sent: Wednesday, 4 September 2013 12:13 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: [OT] NBN revisited
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Ken Schaefer <k...@adopenstatic.com<mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com>> wrote: Um, since when am I a “FTTP nutjob”? Your antipathy to the current NBN is well known. I have an antipathy for piling up money and setting it on fire. I think that’s called a “straw man” argument – no one’s advocating the mass burning of money. All you’re doing here is drawing a debateable equivalence. Since you’re been involved in enough IT projects over the last couple of decades you should also know that “all sweeping generalisations are wrong” and that the opposite of “let’s do this right” is “let’s have a hodge-podge of different things that could cripple you in the future”. Both approaches have risks – neither is the “one true path” Sorry no. If you can deliver something of benefit today for good value, then you should do it. If you have existing infrastructure that is servicing millions of people with 100mbps then you shouldn't pull it out and replace it - that's dogma. So, you’re basically advocating keeping this 100mbps kit, even if it doesn’t meet future requirements, or isn’t fit for purpose? That seems like dogma to me. Surely any decision on what to do should start with requirements, and work from there. Not start with the solution and work backwards. Cheers Ken
