Woz Applying For Australian Citizenship Because of the NBN 385
An anonymous reader writes "It's a well known fact that Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak is a fan of Australia and now we know why. He supports a national broadband network — a scheme being rolled out by the Australian government to provide fibre 'for everyone' — so much he's applying for citizenship, the Australian Financial Review reports. You can be assured that he's not giving up his American citizenship though, he told Brisbane radio."
And for U.S. citizens: "Despite his status as a technology icon, Mr Wozniak said he was not connected to a broadband service in his home in California, classing the options available to him as a 'monopoly.' 'There’s only one set of wires to be on and I’m not going to pull strings to get them to do something special for me,' he said .... 'I've sat with our FCC commissioner and told him that story in his office, but it’s not going to happen. We just don’t have the political idea to bring broadband to all the people who are 1 kilometer too far away.'"
That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or iiNet/Internode, who have actively worked to thwart bad internet regulations on behalf of their customers.
Re: (Score:2)
Or iiNet/Internode, who have actively worked to thwart bad internet regulations on behalf of their customers.
Just to be pedantic, Internode is now iinet. So it's just iinet, Adam and a few others.
Re:That's like applying to be Awesome... (Score:3)
+1, mod parent up in an anti-clockwise direction.
Welcome to Team Awesome Woz!
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:5, Informative)
To elaborate,
(1) When I migrated to Australia in 1987, the typical procedure was to apply through an Australian Consulate for a migrant visa, which after a qualifying period, was upgraded to permanent resident status. Only after a period of two years was it possible to apply for Australian citizenship. I am given to understand that conditions for such an application are now much stricter and more onerous.
(2) The NBN (although IMO a very nice idea) is being implemented very patchily, and has never enjoyed the support of the opposition party in Federal Parliament, so may well end up being shitcanned after the next election, leaving the majority of households to fight for whatever best connection they can find, exactly as before. If Woz chooses to live close to a metropolitan area, he is likely to find a good ADSL2 connection from one or other of the major players such as Internode or iiNet, but that might be as good as he'll get.
The NBN is trying to win over the regions instead (Score:3)
He undoubtedly has shitloads of cash so the business migration scheme applies and it's effectively a done deal. He doesn't hit the barriers deliberately put in the way of anyone that comes to Australia expecting to work for a living.
As for point two, the libs are opposing any and all infrastructure spending at this time but once they are in control the NBN may be seen as popular pork.
Re: (Score:3)
Seems to me like Woz is making a very public political statement - and it seems to be generating discussion and thought.
I imagine he's getting just what he wants out of this move.
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd wonder if having a net worth of around 100 million dollars would help the process?
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:5, Informative)
To accelerate the process there is actually a not well publicised side route. First step choose your state, Honestly for Steve Wonzniak I would recommend South Australia and Adelaide, as the ideal choice, his sort of speed and environment. Once state choice is made, you look for state sponsored immigration ie employment roles the state needs fulfilled for accelerated immigration. In Steve's case, not so much the employee but as an employer would very likely see his immigration accelerated weeks versus months or years (yep for the unskilled and un-needed, years).
Should he choose a metropolitan life style in the centre centre he can very likely hook up to broadband, http://www.internode.on.net/residential/fibre_to_the_home/estates/ [on.net]. This is where the search starts.
So money alone is not the answer, knowing the accelerated means of immigration are. State employment opportunities, employer sponsored opportunities, family based and as always the marriage route. I was often surprised when dealing with foreign corporations, they would bring in a foreign expert for a few months and you would work through the project. The next thing you know a few months after the project ends, the foreign expert contacts you from different company, you find out they used that temporary employment visa to extend into permanent migration and quit their original company because there were no permanent positions available. The weather gets them, snow is great for holidays but living in it can be a pain.
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:4, Informative)
P.S. I forgot to mention that SA is an on the spot fine for possession of cannabis whether harvested or not, with limits on quantities, not knowing Steve's inclinations with regard to recreational substances, this might or might not swing his decision or anyone else's out there. SA is considered pretty laid back, Australia's biggest country town, for a reason ;).
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:4, Funny)
...Steve's inclinations with regard to recreational substances
From photos of Steve, I would guess pizza is his recreational substance of choice.
Re: (Score:3)
...Steve's inclinations with regard to recreational substances
From photos of Steve, I would guess pizza is his recreational substance of choice.
Secondary effect.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:4, Insightful)
You goof, the Hot Chicks, are the Deadly Creatures... leave it to a Slashdotter.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, the deadly creatures and the super hot chicks are a package deal. ;)
I can cope with the drop-bears and other creatures, it's just the deadly hot chicks you have to watch out for... :-)
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:5, Funny)
>Er, wait... did you guys do anything about all those deadly creatures crawling around your city streets?
What, Bogans? They only think that they're dangerous.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sooo... all those super hot Australian chicks have a thing for North Americans?
We call those hooker's, but good news, they're legal here in Oz.
Re: (Score:3)
We throw the dogs into the water first before we send the kids in.
You won't find Crocs in a city centre anywhere south of Rockhampton (right on the tropic of Capricorn, and right on a river so there are crocs sometimes found on the bank right in the centre of the city, but it's not something that happens every year). Snakes are not really a problem if you make enough noise, and everyone's grandmother ha
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:4, Funny)
Do not take this advice!!! Breeding Nerds would threaten the integrity of the Space Time Continuum... go back to reading "Onan the Barbarian" and pretend you never saw this.
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:5, Informative)
But seriously, fuck Australia's beaches. Blue bottles, box jellies, Portuguese man o wars, shark central and crocks.
Dude, you forgot the blue-ringed octopus, stonefish, sea-snakes and cone snails (yes folks, there are even fuckin' snails that can kill ya!).
Welcome to Australia!
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd argue that Canada and Australia, despite their vast physical separation, and despite variations in detail (eg: they love rugby and we love hockey - but we both love "our" sports) are remarkably similar in general. We share many themes (commonwealth, beer, sports, left/liberal/egalitarian society, native/aboriginal influences, native/aboriginal issues, sense of humour, cultural inferiority complex, etc) for being so very different in specifics. We're a sort of mirror image of each other, and there's almost a natural fit between the two nations as a result.
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:4, Interesting)
"left/liberal/egalitarian society" ...and borderline far right governments.
How exactly does that happen? why are two such liberal left leaning countries currently sat with governments that lean so far to the right?
I never really got why over the last decades the people of both Canada and Australia have seemingly had governments that are at such odds to their national mindset.
I have a theory, judging by Canada's experience at least, that it's because the government that represented them got so complacent that it became corrupt and so there ended up no choice but to vote for the guys on the right. Is that the case in Australia too?
Houses for votes (Score:3)
Houses for votes was a scandal in England a decade or two ago at the end of the Tatcher debacle. Conservaties would sell council houses to turn labour renters into conservative house owners.
People have two objectives when voting. Their wallet and their ideals and the wallet overrules their ideals every time during the actual election.
That is why right-wingers love privatization, it means they can score some quick cash to give handouts, buying votes and then when it comes time to pay the price for collapsed
Re: (Score:3)
"I never really got why over the last decades the people of both Canada and Australia have seemingly had governments that are at such odds to their national mindset."
Perhaps that's because a simple "left/liberal/egalitarian" "national mindset" is a figment of the state media's imagination.
Re: (Score:3)
That's a little harsh. Labor has only drifted to the centre-right (which is a distinct improvement to the relatively far-right - and moving further - Liberals). They're a long way from their centre-left roots, however.
The really interesting thing is how the Nationals - agrarian socialist rednecks - have teamed up with the Liberal party because they both hate the gays.
Re: (Score:3)
The provinces are responsible for healthcare according to the Constitution Act, yes, but in practice they delegate a lot of that duty to the federal government. The nice part about the arrangement is that the scheme is voluntary for the provinces, but I wouldn't say that they really run it all by themselves.
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:4, Informative)
Uh no.
There's nothing in the constitution act that dictates healthcare. Technically the CA predates minus small revisons the CHA. You might want to go read the Canada Health Act. [hc-sc.gc.ca] which is what defines who is responsible. The provinces, not the feds. Unless the a 3rd party determines that the province is grossly negligent to the point where the federal government is required to take over under the CHA.
Re:That's like applying to be Canadian... (Score:5, Insightful)
Step 1 STOP calling it obama care. It is Romney Care. Mitt Romney is the one who designed it. What Obama wanted was a single payer system like Canada has. The republicans wanted Romney's idea. Guess what we got.
It's romney care, I wanted Obama care, but the rich here hate the poor so much we are not allowed to have a single payer system that was to be a copy of the Canadian system.
Re: (Score:3)
Government monopolies are not inherently bad. Sometimes you want The People to be in charge of the only implementation. Not treating telecom lines like roads has in fact been a huge source of strife leading to harm to consumers here in the USA. Today, with long runs being replaced with fiber, it's actually reasonable to have multiple companies' signals on the same line, but it would have equally made sense to have the government own every pair of copper.
It works for the roads, and the obvious advantage of p
With all due respect to the Woz (Score:2)
The National Broadband Network does not seem to be a plural.
Re:With all due respect to the Woz (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
NBN is merely the physical infrastructure and cabling - a layer 2 network. It's open access. Anyone can sell retail services over it ... except NBN themselves, who are restricted by law to remaining purely as the guys maintaining and building the physical infrastructure.
Want fiber (Score:5, Funny)
This sucks, in Tokyo they've have fiber for years. I can illegally download a movie in a minute instead of like three minutes.
Just pull strings Woz... (Score:2)
Australian citizenship. (Score:5, Informative)
This "well known fact" is news to me.
I have not applied for Australian citizenship but have taken some first steps towards it. I would very gladly be a devoted and loyal Australian. This has nothing to do with the NBN, which I do praise in concept, regardless of whether it even exists. I would love to be an Australian even with lower bandwidth like I have today in the States. I do applaud any attempts toward inclusion of all. For things as important as broadband, we should deal with our fellows as family and take care of those who just live in the wrong place. That's my personal opinion but it has nothing to do with why I would love to reside in Australia.
Cheers, mates
Re: (Score:2)
For things as important as broadband, we should deal with our fellows as family and take care of those who just live in the wrong place.
:) I don't know about your family, but in mine we don't force everybody to help less fortunate country dwellers get broadband where they live, especially since they don't help us, city dwellers, pay our rent and other higher costs of living. There are pros and cons to living in the middle of nowhere, and yet for some reason
First of all, hi Woz if that's really you
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OK so basically the article was a bunch of baloney. Thought so - a lot of stuff about it didn't add up.
For instance, you can't just "apply" for Australian citizenship because you feel like it ... you need to have lived here for 4 years and/or meet other requirements first, I don't think they'll bypass those requirements just because you're famous (though getting a visa/permanent residence is a lot easier if you have fame/money ... there's visa classes for business investment and cultural contributions etc.)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, look. You can't just waltz in here and correct an article like that. We all know that primary sources (esp. if they are the person the article itself is about) are just not as reliable as good secondary sources. After all, you could go around you founded Apple or something if we didn't insist on good secondary sources.
Be a good fellow and actually get an journo to write a correction or something, and then we'll use that article as the source. Though I'm still a bit sceptical about some of the things y
NBN Snooping (Score:2)
Choose: 1. Freedom and ADSL2+ or 2. the NBN
I pick 1.
Re: (Score:2)
A Hero Falls (Score:2)
Yeah, so about that 'National' Broadband Network.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Wish I could get 10 Mbit ADSL2. 4 km from the CBD of Canberra and the most I can get is ~5 Mbps (crappy long line!). I AM on the NBN three-year rollout though :) (Early 2014)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Being a good citizen means fighting tooth and nail for what you want for your country. It doesnt mean jumping ship because it doesn't have this one thing you want. There is a lot not to like about America but to simply move to a whole different country after just some talks with local government? Seems like an overreaction.
America won't have 100Mb/s broadband until the cable and telcos have finished squeezing ever last cent they can out of copper. (Or until someone comes along and starts taking their future profits away by building it now.)
Re:Thats no way to be a good citizen (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
What's wrong with pledging allegiance to the Queen? She's pretty cool and chill.
Would you rather pledge allegiance to 350 million random other people?
Democracy is overrated. Monarchies are always better.
Re:Thats no way to be a good citizen (Score:4, Insightful)
The same in Australia, but really it's just words. The Queen is a figurehead and a symbol of historical ties. She has no real role in the running of either Canada or Australia from a practical standpoint. And having an apolitical and arms-length head of state is actually a good thing from a governance perspective (note - head of State, not head of Government ... the two roles are the same guy in America, but separate people in Parliamentary systems).
Re: (Score:2)
Who knows?...
I'll claim a surplus of ignorance about many specifics, but wouldn't:
1. An X/s optical connection be more consistent regarding speed?
2. Downloading a DVD in 7 minutes isn't really necessary... but it's nice.
3. If everyone/majority has Jigabytes of speed... how would that change the internet, what would become possible/everyday because of it?
4. Wouldn't it be... at least slightly... less prone to acts of God and his daggers of electrical wrath, waves of mutilation, pee... and such?
Probably less
Re: (Score:3)
Who knows, but it would most probably be a waste of Goules of power
Re:Thats no way to be a good citizen (Score:4, Insightful)
Australia is a nation built on immigration and welcomes those who aspire to the Australian way of life, in the same way as the Puritans, Unitarians, Amish and other religious folks left Europe for the American Colonies all those centuries ago, rather than fighting tooth and nail for religious freedom in the countries of their birth. Conversely, guys like Rupert Murdoch and Mel Gibson are also welcome to fuck off at their own pleasure.
American born Australians are welcome to participate and integrate fully into Australian public life, we even had an American born Premier of New South Wales recently.
Re:Thats no way to be a good citizen (Score:5, Funny)
Australia is a nation built on immigration and welcomes those who aspire to the Australian way of life, in the same way as the Puritans, Unitarians, Amish and other religious folks left Europe for the American Colonies all those centuries ago, rather than fighting tooth and nail for religious freedom in the countries of their birth. Conversely, guys like Rupert Murdoch and Mel Gibson are also welcome to fuck off at their own pleasure.
American born Australians are welcome to participate and integrate fully into Australian public life, we even had an American born Premier of New South Wales recently.
This is the Australia of the past, where the displaced Greeks and Itailians came in droves after the war, the 10 pound poms after them seeking a better life on our fair shores. All this started turning around in the 80s as demonstrated in the documentary Romper Stomper.
The Australia of today is a very different place where immigrants are treated with disgust and suspicion, the evil brown people are accused of turking jerbs, you're told to Fit In or Fuck Off, because all the immigrants need to Fuck Off Were Full, or so the stickers on the back of chevrodores keep telling us. I mean how can the Bogan have 3 kids and if we're that full. How can the Bogan afford his jet ski and McMansion if the Abbos keep taking all his tax money, after deduction he's already taxed at 20% which barely pays for the money the government gives him for child care.
How is the Bogan supposed to drink a bottle of Jimmy and threaten to "smash" everyone on his stumble home if this keeps happening. Wont someone think of the Bogan?
Re: (Score:3)
Ah yes, I remember that one. It's worth mentioning that one of the participants of that documentary (Russell Crowe) was a host on another documentary entitled "Fightin' Around the World with Russell Crowe". It was very educational. I remember this altercation:
Man: Oh my God! It's Russell Crowe!
Russell Crowe: (taunting) Oh my God, it's Russell Crowe! Oh my blah blah blah blah blah! (normal) Why don't you mind your ow
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Thats no way to be a good citizen (Score:5, Interesting)
In the US we have our "Red Necks" which come in assorted flavors including "Shit Kickers", "Skin Heads", "Hill Billies" and "Hard Hats". We here actually have a bit of a warm spot for our Protohominid brethren, and though "Red Neck" is a pejorative, its usually said with a smile. For example there is the entire catalog of Red Neck jokes to be enjoyed by our country's favorite Red Neck Comedian, Jeff Foxworthy [youtu.be].
Our bigotry has a long and illustrious history. It seems we had many episodes if racial discrimination in our past as well. The most commonly pointed to are obviously Black Slaves, and Slaughtered Native Americans, but even the Irish had their day. During the Potato Famine, the Irish fled to America by the Millions. They were not welcome when they got here. They were put to tasks that you wouldn't humanely put animals to. They were used to drain the swamps of New Orleans, which were infested with mosquitoes carrying malaria and yellow fever. They wouldn't use slaves to do this work because slaves were valuable live stock, whereas Irish men were considered gun fodder. Along the same lines Chinese were used to build be cross continental railroad, and thousand died along some of the more challenging sections, and then upon completion, we deported them back to China. As much as we dislike Irishmen, we despised brown people (and today we bomb them for fun and profit.)
So I guess that makes us alike in one more way, we have our Bogans too.
Re: (Score:3)
So are you proposing a return to the good old days of the White Australia Policy? Or just back a little to letting the wogs in, but letting them know they are wogs at very opportunity?
Or maybe the past isn't quite as rosy as you remember?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Thats no way to be a good citizen (Score:5, Informative)
Its actually WAY funnier than that. So the Puritans were this completely bug-fsck religious sect, they honestly believed that as a Christian your life should be a miserable lot so along that thinking they outlawed music, dancing and singing. So to express their love for their maker they proceeded by smashing the church organs in England and cutting ears off people who dared to enjoy music. The English people, most of whom were sane at the time made it clear to the King, its us or them, so there were asked to leave England with extreme prejudice. They traveled and made friends wherever the went... not. They landed in the Netherlands, the most accepting and accommodating people in Western Europe in that day, and after just a few years wore out their welcome big time. Where to go... Of course the New World, where they could practice their religion without persecution (which would be truly odd because almost from the get, practicing their religion involved persecuting someone, somewhere.)
And so they went to the New World. Here's the really funny part. The few Puritan Communities that survived were vicious nasty places and as a general practice they slaughtered Native Americas who helped them and showed pity on them when they first came to the New Land. The really funny part is that many of the first colonies vanished. Well not completely. It seems that when confronted with the idiocy of their beliefs and the natives with plenty of food, happy children and healthy lives, they said screw it and joined the local tribes. So from just about any angle you slice this, there wasn't a lot pure about the Puritans. Most of what get's taught in our elementary schools is just plain crap. Now we have states that are actually codifying religious crap they want to teach children instead of science and just physical reality in general. I realize teaching children the truth, and at an early age fostering the notion of questioning authority would make life for the Plutocrats almost unbearable, but it would sure make a more interesting civilization.
Re: (Score:3)
They landed in the Netherlands, the most accepting and accommodating people in Western Europe in that day, and after just a few years wore out their welcome big time.
You missed one of the juciest bits. They weren't kicked out from Netherlands - they decided to leave, because it was too open-minded for them, and they were afraid that they couldn't keep the kids sufficiently brainwashed.
Re:Thats no way to be a good citizen (Score:4, Insightful)
Fortunately for you, some British citizens - among them men named Jefferson, Franklin, Paine, Franklin, Adams, and Washington - decided once upon a time that jumping ship was preferable to being "good citizens".
Re: (Score:3)
They were subjects of His Majesty the King.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I thought Australian immigration requires anyone to be of at least 1 or 2 years (depending on few factors) as a permanent resident before they can apply to become a citizen, and becoming a PR in itself takes a while. Maybe easier to get the PR status for him due to his status and wealth, but citizenship is entirely different, I think? Possibly also requires certain amount of stay in the country to earn it. Would appreciate if any /.er has better detail on immigration requirements.
Because otherwise this just sounds like a really early non-news. Good on him for coming over to this side of the oceans though.
Well, the downside is they'll censor everything he likes about the internet. That's the major problem with the Aussie government, they don't feel like people should have rights.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, the downside is they'll censor everything he likes about the internet. That's the major problem with the Aussie government, they don't feel like people should have rights.
There are certainly people who have proposed to do that, as others have in the US and every other country, but so far it isn't in practice. If Woz really does become an Oz, then I'm sure he would be an activist on preventing this.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, they definitely believe that people have rights.
They just believe that these rights should be determined and redefined by the federal and state legislatures pretty much whenever they feel like it.
I think it scares the crap out of pretty much everyone but the sitting government, but it is marginally less scary than the second amendment and the constitution does guarantee the right to pick a new bunch of oppressors every 3 years.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know what's better, a government that determines and redefines your rights at their leisure or a government that defines your rights, and then passes secret and not-so-secret laws that supersede and suspend your rights for the government's convenience.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know what's better, a government that determines and redefines your rights at their leisure or a government that defines your rights, and then passes secret and not-so-secret laws that supersede and suspend your rights for the government's convenience.
The net effect is equivalent; therefore, I prefer the former because it is less hypocritical.
As an American I've become so cynical and frustrated by my government's deliberate evisceration of the Constitution that I wish we didn't have one. The countries of the former British Empire seem to get by with unwritten constitutions. They don't have to pretend they are adhering to. a written Constitutiom while violating it egregiously, which is so much more honest.
America's slippery slope really accelerated once the Progressives seized power in the early 20th century. Wickard v. Filburn was farcical, but it laid the foundation for the insanity of the Raich decision and later upholding Obamacare.
Basically, because of twisted, specious legal sophistry, simply being alive is tantamount to interstate commerce (or the lack interstate commerce, which is *also* interstate commerce thanks to Wickard v. Filburn), and therefore is the complete jurisdiction of the federal government. Because, you know, that's what the Founders meant when they proposed the Constitution.
I kinda get what you meant except many [wikipedia.org] former [wikipedia.org] British [wikipedia.org] colonies [wikipedia.org] have [wikipedia.org] written [wikipedia.org] constitutions [wikipedia.org]. Ironically it is Britian itself that is notable [wikipedia.org] in not having a single document as a written constitution (although there may be other examples).
Re: (Score:2)
The government indeed wanted to do that, but the internet filter proposal died. Never even got introduced into Parliament, let alone passed. They can try again, of course, but I don't think there's an appetite for this in the short to medium term. The net's still uncensored for now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe there are shortcuts, especially for rich people. Even if there aren't this is Steve Wozniak we're talking about. The prestige he brings with him is major in any case, and the suggestion that Australia network infrastructure is superior to American doesn't exactly work against him.
Legal roadblocks? You pass a private bill [wikipedia.org] creating a loophole.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah weird huh? The requirements to become an Australian citizen (which I'm well versed in, as my American wife has just obtained her Australian citizenship a few months ago) are:
- You have lived lawfully in Australia for at least 4 years; and
- You have lived in Australia for at least 12 months as a permanent resident
(OR ... you were born in Australia or used to have citizenship but lost it for whatever reason)
My wife moved here after we were married and lived here for 4 years. The first two she was a tempo
Re:"Not giving up his American Citizenship" (Score:5, Informative)
You could Google dual citizenship and check the first result: http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html
Re:"Not giving up his American Citizenship" (Score:5, Informative)
Wouldn't have taken much research to find out this is no longer the case. First hit on Google:
http://www.citizenship.gov.au/current/dual_citizenship/ [citizenship.gov.au]
Basically prior to April 2002, you are correct - Australian citizenship was lost if you acquired a different citizenship. But for the last 10 years, that has not been true - dual citizenship is recognised and perfectly OK now.
Re:"Not giving up his American Citizenship" (Score:5, Informative)
no, it's not a rule at all. your information is about 45 years out of date.
http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html [state.gov]
http://www.richw.org/dualcit/faq.html#noway [richw.org]
Re:"Not giving up his American Citizenship" (Score:5, Informative)
AC is correct (I'm also a dual US-Aussie citizen). Australia recognises both and regards both as valid. The US doesn't disallow you getting another citizenship ... but basically ignores its existence and will treat you the same as if you were simply any other US citizen.
Incidentally if you are an Australian citizen you should always enter Australia on your Australian passport, even if you could technically enter on the other one. Less trouble for you, and it allows you indefinite entry, whereas for the other passport you'd need a visa or electronic travel authority etc. set up. Plus it screws their 'is the person in or out of the country at the moment' system up if you leave and enter on different passports (which matters if there's an emergency in a place overseas and they need to know if any Australian citizens might be there).
Re: (Score:3)
For a lot of essential services, you may as well take out the middle-man.
Or, require there to be more than one provider. I wonder how much Woz has looked into DSL, in that one may still have to get one's line from the local phone company, but one can steer one's account to a network of a different provider. Once that's done it's not a whole lot different that dialing i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, like this. [dangerouscreation.com]
Re:'monopoly' (Score:4, Insightful)
A private company isn't bound by the Bill of Rights, and it can refuse to serve you if it wants. Only one ISP in your area.... and they choose to refuse service to you? Too fucking bad, you're SOL. That is the cornerstone of the free market. That doesn't make them a government organization, and anyone who thinks that's what it means is a fucking idiot.
If you really hate governments so much, move to a country where what little government there is has no power... like Somalia. There you can bitch and complain that the local "monopoly" on rules and regulations, AKA: private criminal organization, will shove their AK's up your ass if you don't do what they say. At least you won't have a "government" to protect your basic rights.
Government isn't a company. It can't be run as a company, and works in a role pretty much opposite of what a business does.
You have not been coerced into using roadways, breathing clean air, drinking clean water, eating safe food, using safe products, or the myriad of other services you use EVERY SINGLE DAY that are provided BY THE GOVERNMENT; but you are expected to help pay for those.
The problem is: there too many idiots who have their heads stuck up their ideologies asses in this country.
Re:'monopoly' (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
NBNCo wholesale charges will be the biggest single cost to RSPs. RSPs will have no alternative but to pay. NBNCo have in their wisdom chosen to charge a sliding scale for speed (AVC) and for data (CVC). The effect of this is that we are going to have fibre capable of 1Gbps to which half the country connect at 12/1Mbps (NBNCo Corporate Plan). I can appreciate the need to charge for data, because that is what places the load on the network, but if you are restricting consumption through data there is no need to restrict speed.
Woz is wise in moving to Australia, because the rich will have their fast 1Gbps connections (at least $250/month) subsidised by the poor with their 12/1Mbps connections ($50/month). If it wasn't a national roll out, then it would be too expensive to roll out just for those prepared to pay for a 100Mbps or faster connection. A similar situation exists with electricity infrastructure where transmission lines have been upgraded to support MacMansions with multiple air-conditioners. The cost of the infrastructure upgrades are then shared across the network, including those too poor to pay the running expenses for an air-con.
Wait, wait, what?
Firstly, big electricity consumers get big electricity usage bills. They pay more money so the company can perform the infrastructure work to support them. At least, that's how it works where I live. We don't pay for a connection to the power grid and then electricity is free.
Secondly, it's a false comparison. The NBN isn't an existing network where we're performing upgrades to support heavy users, it's running brand new cabling everywhere for everybody. The single biggest cost in the rollo
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying you would prefer competition at the last-mile infrastructure level?
Doing that you will either end up with many small regional monopolies with no incentive to offer the best service because of their captive audience AND lose efficiencies of scale.
- OR -
You will have multiple sets of last-mile infrastructure which are horrendously expensive to build and maintain, which means that you will end up higher prices and/or longer payback times on your capital expenditure.
NBNCo is only p
Re: (Score:2)
The NBN is not the government per se. It's a publicly-funded-but-privately-run, open access layer 2 network that any company can choose to provide access on. So it's only a monopoly in terms of the physical infrastructure (much like power lines and phone lines and sewerage) ... but not in terms of the actual end-user services that can be provided over it (layer 3 or otherwise).
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have any idea what the NBN is?
Perhaps if you were to Google it before worrying about "granting monopolies, you could have avoided looking very foolish. The NBN is an INFRASTRUCTURE project, along the lines of a replacement for the existing copper wires.
There will be many ISPs offering plans on the NBN backbone. No government granted monopolies.
Re:Dumb (Score:5, Informative)
As someone who is currently watching Telstra upgrade the infrastructure (pits etc) on my street in preparation for the NBN roll-out in my area, I can say that the NBN is most definatly NOT a fail (not compared to the Liberal alternative of fiber-to-the-node or the current situation of ADSL if you are lucky, overpriced 3G if you are not)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm all pro-internet and stuff, obviously, but before a government gets fiber to everyone in a country, maybe they should get everyone an emergency kit, ...
Yeah, because governments can only do one thing at a time. They only have one department that can either provide health care or internet, but not both.
The reason NBN is a priority is that it is expected to boost economic productivity. If it works out, it will help finance all the other things on your list. Worst case, it will boost the technology sector and give some people jobs laying fibre at least. the investment is relatively small compared to universal health care, defence, education, roads ...
Re:stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
they haven't solved all the other problems
They never will. So we shouldn't try to solve any problems at all. Just give up because perfection is impossible.
Re:stupid (Score:5, Informative)
Emergency Kit = Australia has extremely good emergency response (SES, Fire Services, Police, Ambulance Services) for everyone.
Basic Medical Care = Medicare. Quality health care for anyone all billed directly to the government.
Place to Live = Low homeless rate and good quality government housing.
Proper Nutritional Assistance = Covered under Medicare
Bomb Shelter = We aren't paranoid.
Gun = Don't want em.
Efficient Car = Some excellent cars available if people want them, but many still drive SUVs or low efficient cars through choice.
Water Filtration System = We have excellent tap water in most cities. One exception, and they have alternatives in place.
Money off their taxes = We have a AAA economy still.
Vote that actually counts = Compulsory voting and our representatives will generally talk to us if we need them to.
Additional Insulation = Been there, was a waste of money.
Own surveillance and security system = What now? See point 1.
Money = AAA economy. Strong dollar.
Food talks = We produce most of our own food and export almost as much again.
Looks like we covered your bases. Time to build us an Internet that's better.
Re: (Score:3)
That sounds suspiciously like "This software works pretty well, time to add a feature."
Re: (Score:2)
The Government is paying for the NBN by borrowing money. The NBN will make a whole heap of money and that profit will be used to pay back the debt.
This will not cost the taxpayers of Australia $0.01. In fact, once the debt is paid off it will start returning a very tidy profit to the Government in either annual profit or from a sale of the NBN to private (hopefully the former).
This whole project is a once in a century (or more) infrastructure upgrade that will bring massive benifits to both people and busi
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why not Europe instead? (Score:4, Funny)
... nasty wildlife ...
We have kangaroos jumping down our main streets that would kick you in the guts as soon as hug you. Then, there's drop bears...
Re: (Score:2)
It's a 10+ year plan, yes, but once complete, it will cover the whole population - 94% with fibre, the remainder with fast fixed wireless (WiMax or similar) or dedicated satellite (which will be a significant upgrade from the current sat services available).
I don't get it within the next 3-year window either, but that doesn't mean I don't believe it's coming. It's a huge project and they are picking the low-hanging fruit first in terms of where it's most efficient to roll out. My parents ARE within the 3 ye
Re: (Score:2)
It's not censored at all (unless you choose an ISP that offers a filter as a 'feature')?
I suspect you are thinking of that mandatory internet filter proposal from a few years ago, but didn't keep up to date on it. It never got off the ground - wasn't even introduced into Parliament, let alone passed. Very unlikely to get 're-proposed' anytime soon either, given the current political situation and likely outcome of the next election.
Government is more interested in pushing a data retention scheme now, rather
Re: (Score:2)
No.
Filtering: proposal from a few years ago never got past the 'discussion' stages and died. Was never introduced into Parliament and is unlikely to be reintroduced any time soon.
Monitored: not currently. Data retention laws are currently being considered, which would make Australia compliant with the EU Data Retention directives that have been in place for quite a few years. No guarantee these will pass either, but even if they do, it'd only bring Australia into line with the current status quo in most of
Re:High speed download of whatever you're allowed. (Score:4, Informative)
What on earth are you going on about? The internet filter proposal was dropped and is unlikely to be reintroduced for a long time, as it's politically untenable. The net is currently no more censored here than in any other country.
Also, Australia has an absolutely massive online gambling industry ... so much so that some of the biggest online betting agencies have actually moved from other countries, to base themselves here. Again - not sure where your comments came from.