John Linton For the stupidest 'article' I have seen to date (and the competition to be deemed "the stupidest" is quite fierce) about future technologies in relation to Krudd's arrant egotism which has put the Australian government back as the future monopoly supplier of data communications to Australian this piece of unreferenced nonsense currently takes the cake:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/02/09/hosing-down-the-hype-on-wireless-internet-technology/
Firstly let me say that the SOLE reason I personally think letting Krudd or any other government apparatchik make decisions on ANY type of technology is that they don't have a !@#$%^ clue about it. The inevitable huge waste of taxpayer's money is also of no concern to me in my mild opposition and ridicule of Stupid Stephen's and Ms Faustus' ongoing pork barreling misuse of your and my money.
The SOLE reason for being against government involvement in technology is that technology ALWAYS changes and government monopolies have neither the interest nor the necessity to adapt to the changes that have continually occurred in technology development in the second half of the 20th century and in the first decade of the 21st century. The ONLY reason that technology based infrastructures MUST be left in private hands is that ONLY private investment in competition with other private investment continues to deliver good results for end users. So a government monopoly of anything, let alone technology, will ALWAYS result in a constanty eroding service standard that is increasingly unsuitable and which costs more than any other version of the same service - you may remember that was the major reason for trying to disband the previous government communications monopoly.
You and I already pay a small fortune for each of us in taxes that are grotesquely misused (by all political parties) in the name of "Defence Spending" that buys ships, aircraft, tanks, APCs and even uniforms that either never work at all or never fire a shot in anger in the defence of Australia. Does anyone actually believe that Krudds other loony decision to build 12 new submarines in Australia and a slew of other ships will ever see the light of day? Of course not because that lunatic's stupidity and lack of knowledge will ensure that his stupid commitment will be quietly buried without drawing the attention of the electorate's attention to just how for gone in metal stability he must have been to come up with such a crazy concept.
So now you and I will shell out for his other 12 submarine insanity - the 'NBN2' - which you remember (or do you?) replaced the 'NBN1' infrastructure when that piece of craziness was exposed as the sheer lunacy people like me always said it was. Why is a government built and operated communications infrastructure as ludicrous as building 12 submarines? Isn't it another 'visionary 'Snowy River Hydro Scheme'? If you are inclined to that view why don't you compare the planning time frame and consultation ambit of the SRHS with the planning time frame of the 'NBN2'? If you still think the 'NBN2' was adequately researched and planned before Krudd's announcement of it then compare the other major difference - which, I would have thought, was the fact that the hydro scheme didn't have two other schemes competing with it to sell the same product to the same potential end users.
Does anyone think that Telstra and Optus are going to 'throw away' their combined $A20 billion (and counting) investments in their networks after spending the best part of 20 years building them to the point that they provide the majority of their profits? Almost certainly not. So with more than two mobile devices for every man woman and child allegedly in operation in Australia already what market(s) are Telstra and Optus relying on to continue to grow that mobile sector of their business? Hmmmm...toughie. Of course it will be broadband data in the home. Telstra and Optus have already announced new low priced 10 gb+ wireless broadband plans and that is in December 2010 - 5 years before any sort of 'national' NBN coverage is contemplated. As Verizon and AT&T in the USA already have LTE being rolled out across that huge country (and several EU members are doing the same) it is not realistic to say just what speeds any end use sector will either require or what future technology can best and most economically deliver them.
Which is the whole point of not betting the farm on any technology to provide cost effective services to 100% of all marketplaces.
Let alone introduce the absolute least cost effective way of delivering such services - a government monopoly running a single technology infrastructure solution.
It makes as much sense as Krudd's other most insane program - a 12 submarine project.
Copyright © Exetel Pty Ltd 2011
ABN 350 979 865 46
PS: Telstra results as forecast:
http://www.smh.com.au/business/telstra-posts-36-profit-drop-20110210-1anew.html