Re:How Australia's $49B internet network came to be ridiculed
by aplummer on Thursday October 26, 2017 @11:18PM
(#15565435)
I don't even vote LNP, but you have to wonder about the efficiency of a rollout where you get faster internet driving an hour out of Melbourne than Fitzroy or a lot of the CBD. For a project originally estimated at 4.7 then 15 then 42 billion, dense paying customers early should probably have been prioritised.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:How Australia's $49B internet network came to be ridiculed
by chowell on Friday October 27, 2017 @12:28AM
(#15565713)
If your concern is just with government expenditures, sure, but you can also make the argument that prioritising rural areas could give them a head start on the growth of digital services. Taking Australia from being a market where cities have ~okay~ internet and rural areas have poor internet to one where at first everyone has okay to great connectivity and later everyone has great connectivity has its merits.
Re:How Australia's $49B internet network came to be ridiculed
by zmmmmm on Friday October 27, 2017 @02:50AM
(#15566248)
> where you get faster internet driving an hour out of Melbourne than Fitzroy or a lot of the CBD
Melbourne already had awesome internet, the need was much less there. You can disagree with the decision to rollout to internet-disadvantaged areas if you want, but don't pretend that the conscious decision to do so was bad management when it was actually an attempt at equity (ie: addressing the most needy customers first).