@Shadow Minister: The NBN prices are not lower than the most competitive ASDL prices available, such as TPG.

NBN prices are lower than what TPG charges. NBN prices are $24/mo for unlimited data, TPG's is $60/mo for the same thing. Of course the NBN is wholesale, TPG is retail and we don't know what TPG will charge. That is the entire point.

@Shadow Minister: ASDL prices have been decreasing on an almost annual basis.

Not really. Did you notice that the minimum price for an ADSL link hasn't changed over the years? That is because the price the ISP's get charged for the local loop hasn't changed - probably because it is owned by a monopoly. The price drops you are seeing are for back haul data.

You are probably right the NBN charges for the local loop won't change over the next decade or so - just as the charges the copper equivalent haven't changed. But the charges for backhaul data will continue to drop.

On the subject of Labor and privatisation, did you notice Mark Lawson's article here on OLO on the most expensive government business flop in my time - the AWC? Of course you did. It must have been uncomfortable for you, it being your side who was responsible for it.

@Antiseptic: the PON approach is not using the fibre to its capacity. In 20 years, when the need for fibre is there, it will need significant upgrade.

Amazing. You manage to contradict yourself in consecutive sentences. You say (rightly) we aren't using anywhere near fibres capacity, you say earlier there is no use for this excess capacity, and now you say we will not only find a use for this excess capacity, we will exceed it and need a significant upgrade?

That aside, as you full well know to upgrade the fibre we just need to change the electronics at each end - just as we did with ADSL. It is not an expensive exercise. The expensive part of the exercise is laying the cable.

@Antiseptic: build it and they will come

Is this the fantasy you building up in your mind - the NBN will only work if it attracts new customers. Do actually read anything that is presented here? The NBN business case doesn't rely on any new customers "coming". They will make a profit with the existing customer base, which they are almost guaranteed to get.

@Antiseptic: Other advantages include: no crosstalk, no EM interference, ubiquity.If every source of artificial light is potentially a broadcast point, there is a completely immersive network.

Good lord. You have wrapped yourself up so tightly in your wireless fantasy, you can't see the obvious flaws in your visions.

Crosstalk: two leds in the same room.

EM interference: Light is Electro Magnetic Radiation. So when light is your carrier all other light is EM interference.

Immersive network: Only if every light bulb is connected to a broad band network, like the NBN say.

@Antiseptic: I have an 8Mb/s connection via ADSL.

Lucky you. They reason we are building the NBN is because most people don't.

@Antiseptic: A great deal of the Optus network was simply switched off in the early 2000s because of lack of a subscriber base.

Yes - but that was a case of build it and they will come, wasn't it? There wasn't a pay TV network before, so it really was built on hope. And in an amazing failure of private enterprise to act in their own best interests, we had two companies rolling cable down the same street, thus halving their potential customer base. The NBN may fix that little débâcle.

@Antiseptic: super-fast services by up to 5 per cent more than inflation for three decades

I imagine the ACCC won't mind this. They are asking for price flexibility in areas they do have competition. For broadcast video they are up against the HFC network, and data centres usually connect directly to the backbone. If the NBN manages to win their business - well good for them. It will have to be on a commercial basis.

It is rapidly becoming clear that the NBN co cannot be profitable at the present pricing:

"The taxpayer-owned NBN Co suggested in a recent discussion paper that it be allowed to raise prices by up to 5 per cent more than inflation for high-speed services once the network was complete early next decade. The mooted increases in wholesale prices appear to be at odds with commitments from NBN Co to reduce its prices over time."

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/nbn-push-for-rise-in-key-rates-flies-in-face-of-reduction-pledge-20110822-1j6ur.html

I think that this is now done and dusted.

rstuart:"They will make a profit with the existing customer base, which they are almost guaranteed to get."

And will probably lose as wi-fi becomes better. That's the point. It won't make a profit if there is a bleed of customers who are happy with the performance and lower cost of 4G, and it's not sure it has enough demand anyway. Do tyou ever actually read what's written before you start blathering?

rstuart:"Crosstalk: two leds in the same room."

Nope, different modulation - no crosstalk. As he said they use time-domain and power(amplitude) domain. No cross-talk. Then there's the whole use of LEDs of different frequencies in a single "white" light, that can be operating on completely different parts of the spectrum. This is already done in multi-mode fibre, but usually only with a couple of wavelengths, since it's difficult to get a reasonably optimaised fibre diameter if you've got too many fequencies and hence there are lots of lossed due to absorption, since the incident angles can't be made perfect for the wavelength. Multi-mode fibre is sort of halfway between single-mode fibre and li-fi. Li-fi would not suffer from the wave-guide absorption problem, since it's freely propagated in air. Stop me if you're finding this difficult, won't you?

rstuart:"EM interference: Light is Electro Magnetic Radiation. So when light is your carrier all other light is EM interference."

Yes, but it can be easily removed from the signal. This is trivial stuff. See "noise-cancelling" above. Have you looked that up yet? The point about EM interference, however, was that radio/microwave frequencies interact with wires to induce currents. Hence, devices using those frequencies are prohibited in aircraft and in hospitals.
[cont]

rstuart:"Immersive network: Only if every light bulb is connected to a broad band network, like the NBN say."

Well, it would be, except not like the NBN, via li-fi. I have a streetlight outside my house. There are several other streetlights in the street. There are similarly lots of streetlights on the road my street abuts. And so it goes. I'd go so far as to say that li-fi will eventually exceed the capacity of single-mode fibre eventually. The capacity to carry signals on many different parts of the spectrum, including even IR or UV, is huge.

rstuart:"data centres usually connect directly to the backbone."

You mean like PIPE's network? I thought Bevan Slattery was a dope who didn't know what he was talking about...

@Shadow Minister: It is rapidly becoming clear that the NBN co cannot be profitable at the present pricing

In other news Telstra have recently pushed up their wholesale ADSL pricing. I guess this clearly means Telstra is in danger of gong broke next year?

You are clutching at straws again Shadow. This news snippet tells us very little. By the way, Antiseptic posted the same news story earlier. I did respond to it then.

This might interest you. It is a presentation hosted by Macquarie University's Engineering department on the NBN. The speaker is the NBN's lead architect, and it is aimed at an engineering audience. Being an government employee he deliberately avoids the politics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a2ne1WKxek

There were two new bits of info in there for me. One was the expected lifetime of the fibre (at least 60 years), and the other was why they didn't choose FTTN.

@Antiseptic: And will probably lose as wi-fi becomes better.

This reminds me of a cartoon popping up recently. The caption reads "somebody on the internet is wrong .. what ya going to do about it". I don't like the implied answer, but there comes a point where it is the only sane course of action.

@Antiseptic: Stop me if you're finding this difficult, won't you?

Excellent suggestion. This conversation is getting difficult. Amazingly we recently had an OLO article on this very situation. Maybe you remember it? "The silver bullet men: Saving the planet with technology". http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12407

One piece of advice. Using big scary words like "wave guide modulation" won't always convince someone you have a clue. I think a 2 year old would understand why he can see a laser shining at the other end of a 15km piece of fibre, but not LED shining in the sunlight 15km away. In fact I would have thought it was blindingly obvious, but apparently not to a true believer like yourself.

@Antiseptic: This is trivial stuff.

I agree. Not quite blindingly obvious, but pretty simple. Sadly we have got past the stage of acknowledging the blindingly obvious.