I have been mini posting for the past while for a number of reasons (exams, final papers, illness), despite a number of things I wanted to blog. But this one really got my goat, so here is the abridged version.....
Rupert Murdoch has slammed the slow broadband we have in Australia saying that we will be left behind unless our speeds are increased.
Helen Coonan has condemned his speech saying he is misinformed. She then states:
80 per cent of households able to access speeds of up to eight megabits from 19 different providers. Another 14 providers were offering speeds of up to 24 megabits to around four million households, the minister said, and Telstra's roll out of its 3G network would provide speeds of up to 40 megabits. All of which makes a lot of assumptions and imho is very incorrect. Assumptions like the lack of availability for rural and remote areas who cannot get broadband. They can. A large number of remote customers use satellite - which will not get the high speeds due to latency issues. On the other hand I can't get anything other than satellite (which is significantly better than dialup) due being on a RIM (remote integrated multiplexer) which has not been fitted with a mini-mux (cmux is a customer multiplexer which is required for DSL. A mini-mux is a miniature version designed for RIM's which are in essence miniature exchanges). So while Murdoch is right - we do have crappy broadband in Australia - he is also operating on an agenda precipitated by the failure of US Congress to pass the net neutrality laws. In effect allowing telco's and other large ISP's to create an 'information superhighway' leaving the rest of us povs (ie anyone who can't afford a gazillion dollars) with a windy dirt track - which is the equivalent to what Australia currently has. Unless broadband speeds are increased and made more reliable then his ability to increase revenue through streaming media etc is grossly impeded.
The arguments about regulations from Murdoch's side are equally valid. Telstra has been told to run like a business, but has been hamstrung by a majority shareholder who won't let them make sensible business decisions if there is a chance said decisions may harm electoral outcomes. Rock & a hard place indeed. I don't think Telstra is a shining star in the firmament; I think the situation arises from the lack of foresight from parliamentarians who want to privatise every avenue they have for making money (besides taxation but thats another post), while failing to recognise the reality of market forces in an industry where the infrastructure is almost wholly owned by one organisation.
As more ISP's and Telco's implement their own infrastructure this will become less of an issue. But regulation is a massive issue that I don't see going away anytime soon, regardless of who owns Telstra. |
I can't add to any of that.
We put.
Priorities are so strange for the 'povos' on many things.
What to do?
Where to turn?