[Gllug] To LLU or Not to LLU?

[Christopher Hunter]

On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 23:06 +0000, Nix wrote:

> Easy: their infrastructure is newer. 

Yes.  They bothered to spend a bit of money.

> We too could have 100Mb/s
> connectivity to the door: all we'd have to do is pay for digging up
> every road in England and laying fibre to the door, ripping out the old
> copper cabling afterwards.

I have fibre to my house in Finland, and can get 1000 Mb/s, and there's
more bandwidth available for other services.
> 
> Now who do you imagine is going to pay for that?
> 
> Right, BT.

There was a national plan to fibre the whole place back in the early
90s, but it was cancelled by this clueless and corrupt "government".  It
would have been done out of the "public purse" and telecoms operators
would have rented space on it.

> > who is stopping innovation and competition?

This "government".

> Nobody. Laying cable is *expensive*.

Cable, yes.  Fibre's really cheap, and often doesn't require any digging
at all.  One comms company in France (for example) ran fibres down water
supply pipes, effectively using the pipework as ducting.  A little
creative thought could get the job done effectively and cheaply.

However, the last thing (other than effective education) that this
"government" wants is a properly connected populace.  There were even
suggestions some years ago to ban domestic internet connection as they
saw the ease with which French radicals communicated amongst themselves
using their early Minitel system!

Chris

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug