Is the NBN a good thing for tech heads like me?

Ipad-Right-Tool-For-The-Job-2According to Dave Stevens of Brennan IT, probably not. In his opinion column in The Australian IT section he compares the NBN to the government providing each household with a Rolls Royce… and as much as I am enjoying my own fast broadband at home (only 100mbps – yowee!) I think I he has a point.

Not wanting to be political, but the full capacity of my 100mbps connection is practically untouched and my real broadband needs are much more mobile oriented than fixed line.

My brother cannot even get broadband at his place in Cranbourne, Victoria and he operated entirely from Telstra NextG. For a few years my own Telstra NextG connection on my Tablet PC was equivalent if not faster than the slow ADSL 2 speeds that I could get at home.

I hate to say it, but implementing better wireless technology like 4G makes a lot more sense than Fibre To The Home… After all, why should we be confined to fixed lines to do what we need to do. Notebooks, Netbooks, Smart Phones, iPads, iPhones and Tablet PCs are not the future, they are very much here and now. They would all benefit much more from better wireless coverage than fixed line broadband.

Update: Judging by the plethora of idiots people commenting on stories on the major news websites, it appears that the NBN represents the politics of distraction.

Punters and politicians are getting wound up about technical things that way out of their depth. They are throwing around billions when none of them have a clue what they are talking about (i.e. they wouldn’t know an ST fibre connector from an SC) , and I guess that was the gambit… What did I expect?

Written by brettg in: Technology | Tags: , , , , ,

No right, no wrong, no evolution, no creation

Picture 001 It has been hard to bite my tongue about the Darwin debate that is popular news fodder at the moment due to Darwin’s 200th birthday.

In Darwinian and biological terms, Evolution means the natural selection and genetic drift towards traits that are beneficial for survival of the fittest.

Some might consider that the refinement of something like the theory of evolution over time, in itself is a process of evolution, but it is not evolution in Darwinian terms.

Whilst this popular usage of the term evolution might be understood to mean creative refinement, too many people equate that with the biological theory of evolution.

Take for Alex Zaharov-Reutt of IT wire. Yesterday he wrote that advancement in IT was evidence of Darwinian evolution*.

This of course spawns the usual stupid debate. There are only two sides to the debate in most media forums:

Was human and animal created in 7 literal days only 10,000 years ago?


Did life evolve over millions of years?

This brings me to my point. It is a stupid debate.

It is based on I’m right and you’re wrong thinking. Our sausage factory school system pumps out millions of adults every year who were tested and graded to the point that they think that there is only one answer, even when there cannot possibly be one.

The frustration for me is that the drones who think this way do not acknowledge that there possibly could be another way. For convenience and sensationalism, the media always lumps everyone in with one of the above arguments.

For example, the scientists who are advocates of intelligent design are lumped in with religion by the media (and many in the right / wrong minded science community).

Clearly, there are many more positions (read beliefs) that you can take up in this question. I for one believe that there is an intelligent creator. I don’t suppose to know exactly what process he used to bring about life. Maybe evolution was it’s creative process, maybe not.


Do I believe that God created the earth and the people in 7 x 24 hours days?

Not on your life**.

Do I believe that live evolved directed only by natural selection?

Nope. I think it’s unlikely.

I also know plenty of others who feel the same way.

What I do know for sure is that you cannot physically prove any theory of how we came to be here using today’s materialistic science methods, because you weren’t there***.

So here I am, stuck in this position where there is no wrong, no right. There is no evolution in Darwinian terms, no creation in the traditionally accepted religious sense.

So I bit my tongue and thought of this saying:

Q. What do you get when you argue with an idiot?

A. Two idiots!

*It’s strange to me that, the very existence of the theory of evolution is actually the product of a

creative process. It did not evolve in Darwinian terms. It did not direct itself, it was created and directed by intelligence.

** I also believe that this is not a valid biblical interpretation of creation.

*** So called evidence is always directed by assumptions. If you set out to find evidence for any side of the argument, you will find it. So basically, don’t tell me that “overwhelming evidence” exists for what ever you believe in, because overwhelming evidence does not represent fact.

Written by brettg in: Education | Tags: , ,

Theme: Themes for WordPress | Cheap Web Hosting compared, Camping