cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running

2u2me
Aspiring Pro
Posts: 276
Thanks: 58
Fixes: 1
Registered: 27-09-2013

The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running

19 REPLIES
Community Veteran
Posts: 13,921
Thanks: 514
Fixes: 7
Registered: 01-08-2007

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running

Meanwhile more and more people are relying on foodbanks...

What is wrong with these people?

I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Luzern
Pro
Posts: 2,836
Thanks: 218
Fixes: 2
Registered: 31-07-2007

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running

Yet wouldn't the food banks be needed even more, if the country doesn't keep pace or better with technological advances?

In the development businesses should come first with domestic premises secondary. Cries for ever greater speeds for pleasure and leisure are, IMHO, of less justification; can be somewhat selfish.

No one has to agree with my opinion, but in the time I have left a miracle would be nice.
Community Veteran
Posts: 16,834
Thanks: 1,124
Fixes: 13
Registered: 06-11-2007

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running

BT`s profits 2016   3 billion pounds

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-05-05/bt-pockets-3bn-profits-days-after-announcing-price-hikes-for-cust...

 

then put the customer prices up... 

 

now the government are paying for trial areas .... and what is BT saying the profits are for ?  ? ? 

 

as a point of interest... the OP report says that the majority of customers on "fibre" connection as far as the box a the end of the street.. then it is back to copper wire connection for the last bit..

 

the idea is for the fibre to be rolled out to the premises... so does that mean that the bit of wire from the junction box in the hall, will also be replaced with fibre  ? ? 

 

and what about those houses that need the router to be "remotely" connected by "hard wired" extensions.. will  the customer have to provide their own "fibre" connection to replac the hard wired extension ?

 

Jonpe
Seasoned Pro
Posts: 1,268
Thanks: 337
Fixes: 2
Registered: 05-09-2016

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running

Why don't we ask how the Japanese and South Koreans managed to do it years ago?

nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running

bt's profits are for the shareholders not to fund government initiatives.....

 

bt should either revert to national ownership so it does run on a more altruistic level or have open reach taken into national ownership and operated for the benefit of the nation, so all profits are plowed into new technology rollouts....

 

we don't need trials to see if a fibre network can work, we new it would back in the 1980's, it wasn't implemented because despite its connection benefits it suffers from problems when in proximity to ionising radiation which made it too unreliable for communication needs, despite over 30 years of investigation this basic problem of fibre disruption in the presence of radiation still hasn't been overcome, the  government stipulated that this being the case copper would need to remain in place..... there are lots of radioactive source materials in and around hospitals in shops and in nature, bt's work to mitigate the effects of these things hasn't been tested that's what the trials are for.... the government is insisting on the trials so its got to pay for them....

 

fttc works and it seems to work well, most homes don't need the bandwidth of a dedicated fibre pipe places like schools and hospitals and office blocks realistically do need that level of interconnect with the outside world if you want each device to have 10mbps + connection speeds, so pages don't take minutes to load as they currently do when the bandwidth is in use...

 

thing is nobody will ever allow BTOR to go back to national ownership, because it was so badly mismanaged in the past, never mind that private business tends to innovate far better than national owned ones do, maybe if it became a nationally owned and tasked business (a bit like the BBC) that operated in an isolated capacity day to day it wouldn't be so bad but honestly I have no faith in the political system not to appoint some useless hack to the top spot who would do even worse at the job than bt's bloated mess has done for the last decade ....

just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
rongtw
Seasoned Hero
Posts: 6,325
Thanks: 1,154
Fixes: 11
Registered: 01-12-2010

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running

FTTH or full fibre Huh   Virgin media have done it for years so why dont BT ask mr Virgin .

Good idea we can get rid of the need for a landline to take BB , thats why BT are dragging their heels to do this thay will lose loads of landine cash

Asus ROG Hero Vii Z97 , Intel i5 4690k ,ROG Asus Strix 1070,
samsung 850evo 250gig , WD black 2 TB . Asus Phoebus sound ,
16 gig Avexir ram 2400 , water cooling Corsair H100i gtx ,
Corsair 750HXI Psu , Phanteks Enthoo pro case .
DaveyH
Pro
Posts: 1,291
Thanks: 177
Fixes: 7
Registered: 15-11-2012

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running


shutter wrote:

BT`s profits 2016   3 billion pounds

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-05-05/bt-pockets-3bn-profits-days-after-announcing-price-hikes-for-cust...

then put the customer prices up... 

now the government are paying for trial areas .... and what is BT saying the profits are for ?  ? ? 

 

Where in the story in the OP does it say BT are involved in these trials?

 

 

DaveyH
Pro
Posts: 1,291
Thanks: 177
Fixes: 7
Registered: 15-11-2012

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running


rongtw wrote:

FTTH or full fibre Huh   Virgin media have done it for years so why dont BT ask mr Virgin .


 

No they haven't. 

Virgin's network is a hybrid too(fibre to the cabinet, then delivered over the same coax as the TV to the property). 

 

It's only really now with the project lightning expansion that they're deploying full fibre and then only in completely new areas, infill areas are just being tacked onto to the existing HFC network. And project lightning isn't going so well for Virgin either

DaveyH
Pro
Posts: 1,291
Thanks: 177
Fixes: 7
Registered: 15-11-2012

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running


nanotm wrote:

 

we don't need trials to see if a fibre network can work, we new it would back in the 1980's, it wasn't implemented because despite its connection benefits it suffers from problems when in proximity to ionising radiation which made it too unreliable for communication needs, despite over 30 years of investigation this basic problem of fibre disruption in the presence of radiation still hasn't been overcome, the  government stipulated that this being the case copper would need to remain in place..... 


http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/how-the-uk-lost-the-broadband-race-in-1990-1224784

nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running

the original decision in 1981 not to look into wide scale roll out of fibre was down to known problems with fibre optics, a problem that revolutionised the way safety systems worked for nuclear power plants and other places that play with ionising radiation, you run fibre optic loops around the place and send a bit of light down them when the sensor at the other end stops working or detects a change in the light level coming through you know you've got problems ... a problem that despite more than 30 years of investigation still hasn't been overcome although the new pressure filled armoured sleeves do mitigate it to a degree...

that original decision hasn't ever been changed, in 1990 the EU existed, it would not have allowed BT to roll out a monopoly system.... thatchers misguided decision not to permit the rollout on the grounds of monopoly position wasn't correct (it was already the monopoly, all it would do was change the medium of data transmission) but it didn't change her original positon that fibre wasn't good enough either..... 

we as a nation should never have privatise BT in the first place, doing so was a massive mistake just as it was with the railways and the post office and just as it will be with the NHS, but the people in charge never learn they just see a quick way to make a fire sale on assets to cover some of the deficit, of course that it was also part of the harmonisation process for the EUSSR superstate has guided thinking in that direction for decades (and its wrong in its assertion of looking after the people better through pure capitalism and protected markets, all that does is provide captive consumers to be gouged at free of competition from outside) 

 

if brexit ever happens maybe we can get some of the past glory back being leading innovators and implementers through national industries, but its unlikely to be the case firstly because the only people who would renationalise those service providers and innovators are the commies like corbyn and indoctrinated state slaves don't innovate so it will just leave in its wake an even worse system than it took over from....  and secondly because were so far behind the curve catching up would be an amazing feat never mind outstripping the competition.

it also doesn't help the nation that they keep letting loud mouthed buffoons be ministers in charge of such things instead of folks who are at least marginally intelligent, and allow decisions to be made by committees full of folks that get given luxury breaks by concerned parties to pass or block measures based on what they think will be best for their bottom line with impunity.... it would be far better if one person was accountable and their every decision hung over them like the sword of Damocles any corruption would be obvious and punishable... we might start seeing the country run for the good of the nation rather than to fill certain peoples wallets/

 

just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Community Veteran
Posts: 13,921
Thanks: 514
Fixes: 7
Registered: 01-08-2007

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running


Luzern wrote:

Yet wouldn't the food banks be needed even more, if the country doesn't keep pace or better with technological advances?


Until Cameron started his trashing of the poor we didn't really even know what they were did we.

Like it or not, we are still ahead of many parts of the world tech wise. Sure we've slipped to China and Japan but we're still leaders in some aspects. All this "they all have 100mbit connections in europe" is utter nonsense. Sure the rich might but the average joes out there are still like the rest of us.

If we can afford £10million for this but are screwing the poor as hard as possible via benefit cuts etc then there is something wrong.

I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,321
Thanks: 467
Fixes: 1
Registered: 21-03-2011

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running


nanotm wrote:

bt's profits are for the shareholders not to fund government initiatives.....

 

...bt should either revert to national ownership...

 

Be careful what you wish for.

I remember the days when the GPO ran the telecomms system and it was publicly owned. It was atrocious. Months or years wait for a phone line. When you reached to top of the queue you'd find you were sharing the line with other houses. The STD system took forever to be rolled out.

Now Zen, but a +Net residue.
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running


7up wrote:Until Cameron started his trashing of the poor we didn't really even know what they were did we.

If we can afford £10million for this but are screwing the poor as hard as possible via benefit cuts etc then there is something wrong.


 really your naivety is showing through again, the assult on the poor started with introducing tax credits, implementing the minimum wage and uncontrolled immigration, one disincentivised you from seeking employment and the other two ensured that the wages weren't enough to live on all 3 together ensured that you were a kept poor and b dependant on the state for your income 

 

Cameron's major crime was being a dolt who implemented ham-fisted attempts to incentivise folks into work, and failing to stop the assault on the infirm labour introduced though ESA and their co-conspirators at ATOS

 

of course its not possible to undo the damage at this juncture, we cant close off the problem of mass immigration that's causing wage compression at the bottom end so in turn we cant get rid of economically suicidal minimum wage laws which means we cant start to undo the horrendous crimes against the nation inflicted by the "workers party"  indeed if we dont manage to get out of Europe (which isn't looking likely) then we will be forever in a downward spiral of economic hardship at the bottom end of society... indeed as the minimum wage goes up ever more employers are switching to automatons to do the menial jobs and pushing more people out of work .... our economy has been circling the drain for over a decade because certain folks decided it would be political suicide to see the law upheld and devalue house prices back to sensible levels after the grafters became millionaires.... so we will have a financial crash  wither we leave the EU or not 

 

and some pocket change being invested in a fibre optic project might indeed make all the difference as to how well we recover afterwards, after all infrastructure spending is one of the few ways in which you drag a nations economy out of recession that will have a lasting effect, of course if we do exit the EU then renationalising open reach before starting the spending would be the best route, and at that point in time having a successful project will be a boon for the nation as a whole, not to mention the fact that all those people out of work will be able to enjoy faster internet to watch cat videos on youtube et al and as a national company it wont be trying to make a profit at every turn so services might even be half the current price .....

 

 

 

 

 

 

just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: The government will spend about £10m getting the pilots up and running


AlaricAdair wrote:

nanotm wrote:

bt's profits are for the shareholders not to fund government initiatives.....

 

...bt should either revert to national ownership...

 

Be careful what you wish for.

I remember the days when the GPO ran the telecomms system and it was publicly owned. It was atrocious. Months or years wait for a phone line. When you reached to top of the queue you'd find you were sharing the line with other houses. The STD system took forever to be rolled out.


if you need a new line laying now it takes months for bt to get it installed, and that's providing there are no nimbys to challenge the works proposal, if there are it can take years, 

 

 

just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you