"faith based filtering" = ?? Julia & Conroy are offering us censorship, did you miss the debate on this topic?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/web-filter-to-block-internet-nasties-will-compromise-nbn-say-providers/story-e6frg6nf-1225811143407
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/07/2893687.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/04/21/2879345.htm

"all they did was stall adsl2, milk the international interconnects, keep exchanges difficult to access, charge use up and down by the mb and muddy any NBN press."

Telstra was the product of both Labor & coalition governments spread across several terms. The Monopoly that was changed into the system we have today is less than perfect. The reality is we now have other private companies investing in infrastructure and providing competitive service. For example - TPG have invested in exchanges and sell monopoly access to their infrastructure. No security of investment results in no investment.

Creating a new monopoly (NBN) will result in a repeat of the original Telecom problems. Any investment in infrastructure will demand a return on investment. Any politician/government that fails to subject to accountability will be accused of vote buying (pork barreling their electorate).

I'm all for open debate. Please justify & expand on your claim "Tony is offering Australia more of the worst of a US Bell system".

some critical commentry from an ABC reporter.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2983739.htm
I had hoped someone would pick up on my comment about net neutrality and the censorship issue that many feel strongly about.

some extracts from the abc reporter

"There has been no detailed cost-benefit analysis published by Treasury on why the NBN is the best possible use of up to $43 billion of taxpayer's cash. There has been no independent Productivity Commission Inquiry determining the amount of money that the nation should use to subsidise high-speed broadband, and whether, in fact, comparable technology, such as WiMax or ADSL2+, could be supplied at no additional cost to taxpayers via the private sector."

Upgrading a design plan is easy, building it costs money. I expect these election promises to be costed properly, you should also.

"this choice does not need to be binary; all or nothing. We can support the private sector in the development of better broadband technology. We just don't need to make a very risky $43 billion punt on one specific solution. "

"it's much easier to upgrade a design plan"
a design plan that hasn't been proven to be costed properly.
Lets not forget Abbott isn't proposing to do away with fibre. He is arguing private enterprise be given a fair go to expand their networks. The monopoly that started as a government owned telecoms we now call Telstra has proven to be an inefficient business model. The difference between the two proposals has been railroaded by each promising speeds that more than will not satisfy everybody.
Last time I looked giving people freedom to choose which business supplier they wanted prompted multiple businesses to offer competing products and let the average consumer choose their preferred product. All other factors equal this has worked well. The missing debate issue is net neutrality.
Tony is offering us a free market choice. Julia is telling us she will use taxpayers dollars to build a superhighway where her faceless minders say so, plus censor what we are allowed to see.

I've always believed a truer rape statistic would be the number of instances reported to the police, not relying on convictions. As a cyclist & motorcyclist that has been hit by vehicles on three separate occasions, all reported to Police, none resulted in conviction (or attempts at prosecution by Police for that matter). Any person who believes crime reports are factually accurate is ignorant. Politicians never like to have a higher crime rate on their watch than their opponents.

too late.

Given the culture of some residential colleges, I'd suggest the recruited anti pirate move off campus. If you thought hazing at some colleges was bad, imagine the consequences of busting your professor for pirating on your assignment and exam grades. Not all college professors follow official university ethics standards, hence the official ethics standards existence.

"The problem is not that this would be wrong for the child (just assuming for the moment that there wouldn't be nasty unintended side-effects). The problem is the impact on society as a whole. Rich people can afford to extend their lifespans, make themselves beautiful, smarter, and so on. The elite become physically different from birth: physically, mentally, perhaps even morally superior. Imagine a society in which the rich lived twice as long. Do you think this would be just? Do you think freedom and stability could exist under these circumstances?"

Is it really different to imposing Jail terms (shortening effective free lifespan) on persons who commit acts society had deemed unacceptable? (as opposed to giving $ to people who commit acts society seems valuable). Religions would have us believe the perfect being is immortal.

I've always marveled at how natural phenomena will inspire poets, scientists, theologians and activists to wax lyrical about the spiritual/cosmic/scientific significance of a volcano, glacial canyon or earthquake. It seems that if man builds something then it must be evil and punished. Natural phenomena spew crude oil into the oceans, animals became extinct before mankind and we are debating how legislation designed to protect the environment can lead to politically unpalatable industries being exported to countries prepared to compromise their own safety & environment. I'd be interested to see more details on the 'background' levels. My limited experience with EPA (non US) has seen negotiated programs covering the project lifetime. Witty activists will look at an operating site (or proposed project) and bemoan the rampant pollution they see and ignore the long term programs funding research, conservation programs and site rehabilitation. 'Waste' from the refining process is dirt & rock taken from one place, processed and stacked in another place. Is that really much different to termite mounds?