On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 23:27:00 +0000, 7 wrote:
UK politicians should only ask for Symmetric Fibre Internet on behalf of
Politicians in UK with shiite education will always call for "broadband
because they have no idea what it means.
UK politicians should only ask for "symmetric fibre internet" because it
is 20 times lower cost to provision, 20 times more cheaper than
and 20 times quicker to provision than "broadband internet".
Don't be a Micheal Gove landing in shiite speaking things he know
nothing of and getting exposed like a prick or start parroting the rot
inside the government spearheaded by offcum selling "broadband internet"
when they should be selling 20x cheaper "Symmetric Fibre Internet" for
Micheal Gove a complete thiick shiiite MP
Micheal Gove is a complete thiickshiiite of an MP and made right asss of
it, himself and his stuuupid persona all in one shiiting apparently.
Firstly, he/government(s) should NEVER ask for broadband.
He should only ask for gigabit symmetric fibre internet.
The difference is like asking for a £100 bucket of shiite instead of £5
bucket of gold.
Broadband is 20x times costlier to provision than gigabit symmetric
fibre internet so why does the troll even think of mentioning broadband
when he could just as well have got himself an education and called for
20x cheaper gigabit symmetric fibre internet?
1 Gigabit symmetric is cheaper to provision than broadband at ANY price.
The likes of B4RN is provisioning it at £30 per month in rural areas and
make a handsome profit on it.
While broadband requires payment of telephone line rental before you got
internet. Since telephone line rental must legally be added to the
broadband internet fee,
there isn't anything out there at 1gbit for £30 per month to beat fibre
by any broadband any time soon.
So there is no point in calling for broadband for UK plc.
You have to be a thiick shhiiite as a Micheal Gove to even breath the
The only thing you can call for is gigabit symmetric fibre internet
Micheal Gove for UK plc, and do it with absolute clarity.
The second point about countryside not getting internet is down to
thiiick land owners stitching it up for themselves and for everybody by
asking for more money for internet compared to water and electricity -
which is now illegal.
So government, how about telling the farmers and land owners in the
countryside to fsck off and sort out some maps for the countryside
showing safe and free passage for fibre?
Then they can have mobile masts installed and cabled up,
and gigabit fibre internet like the ones already rolled out by B4RN.
The third point is that symmetric fibre internet is 20 times faster to
roll out in UK cities and countryside than broadband which requires
copper wires and electrical power with brick lined ducts everywhere to
prevent water ingress and 20x more expensive equipment to provision the
This means money is tied up in equipment purchases and slow roll out.
Unlike fibre where a small pipe is all you need and a narrow trench to
get the 100+ core fibre in for under $2 per meter. The SFP modems are
$14 for gigabit, and fibre routers start at around $600 these days which
means the bulk of the cost is the fibre laying process. This is 20x less
and costs £150 per household to provision compared to around £800 per
house if using Openroach and BT (British Telecum).
i wonder how adaptive these corporat bots are to exaggerating other
reminds me of the alan partridge christmas special where his chum phones
up on the 'call-in' section and forgets to ask tony hares for a new
20m-30bit for all plebs first!