579,

Firstly there is no conclusive studies that show that EMF is harmful, even near power lines etc, and certainly the low power from wireless will do very little.

Secondly your figures show the US limits are 3x higher than Aus, not 10 000x

Thirdly, the figures published by ARPANSA the Aus body responsible, are very different from yours.

http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rps/rps3.pdf

579: Jayb That is congestion.

Whaaal, I did know that. That's what I said to the Telstra Technician when he gave me a heap of spin about how good my Speedtest was. He was taken back a bit & I got a free month. ;-) So going by that I would say that the NBN is only going to be as good as the particular server you are on to can handle at one time. I don't have WiFi because it's just too dam slow & unreliable. Most people around here have it & it keeps fading in & out. Anything from 5 bars to 1 to 0. They are always complaining & I just laugh. WiFi is very trendy & all the trendy people have it. ;-)

Personally I don't think the NBN will affect the ordinary person at home too much, but it will make a big difference to places like Banks & Supermarkets, etc & really that's what it's all about.

579 said;
The US has a tolerance of electro magnetic radio waves 10,000 times more than AU limits.

Sounds a lot doesn't it, but in this business it is b^&erall.

I didn't realise 579 was an old wife.
Don't get into an argument about emf levels or we will be here till the cows come home.
It is a bit like the "No Mobile Phones" signs in Nth Shore Hospital.
You look out the windows on the top floors into an 8 Element stacked
array running about 1M watt pep. Duhh.

579, judging by his last couple of posts he has recruited someone
else to take up the cudgels.
Even if all the iPads or whatever were stacked up on top of one
another, the level would be well below required limits.
Once spread out around desks it would be 100s db lower.
Is this the last argument to force the NBN into the schools ?
Mind you I think the fibre is best used in such an application.
To try to use emf as an excuse just illustrates how desperate they must be.
579 said;
The US has no federal legislation regarding safe levels of EMF.

Nonsense, then in the next post says;
The current U.S. standard for radiation exposure from cell phone
towers is 580-1,000 microwatts per sq. cm. (mW/cm2), among the least
protective in the world.
Anyone for a CISPA argument ? Not me thanks ! Did all that with BPL.

I suspect that there are two different people posing as 579 or perhaps
the programmer has taken over from the 579 m/c.

However the crucial question for 579-1 has not been answered;
How will having faster connection speed up the data coming from the
remote computers ?

Exactly right Jayb, that was my experience also.
The tech was here with his little test set and lo & behold 10 Mbits.
He did not try and waffle me because he realised I was not the little
old man down the street, as we had been sorting out later version line filters and RF filters, of which I had a few.

I feel it is a good day if I can get over 1 Mbit arriving here on a
10 Mbit line. It would be the same on a 100Mbit or 1 Gbit line.
There are going to be a lot of annoyed people paying for 100 Mbit.

Where a lot of hold up is, is at the exchange. With an electronic ping test there is no conversion.
To convert from analogue to digital, up to four times before your request leaves the exchange. That is where your request is being delayed, and the same on the way back. Depending where you are it could go through several exchanges.
The NBN to your door there will be no exchanges to happen only switches.

579 said;
To convert from analogue to digital, up to four times before your request leaves the exchange.

The only conversion I know of is from tcp/ip to tcp/ip encapsulated in X25.
News to me that there is any analogue in modern exchanges.