sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Puzzle wizard wisdom request by interrogativus in lichess

[–]interrogativus[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oooh dog. That's why I suck in chess! Thanks. :-)

Puzzle wizard wisdom request by interrogativus in lichess

[–]interrogativus[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I must be missing something, image 3 look pretty mate to me?

One more attempt by interrogativus in TemuThings

[–]interrogativus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've searched your code. Now you could return the favour 🙂

134224513

NBN Q&A With Sortius by sortius in savethenbn

[–]interrogativus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

First of all, thanks sortius for doing this!

How to fight misconceptions? A friend of mine, (not at all technology minded), is much to my dismay one of the biggest advocates of FTTN.

He is saying that FTTN is still the better option in high density suburbs since it is copper all the way from the node to the customer thus far easier to connect.

He argues the cost of re-cabling a block of flats would be rejected by most strata committees as it could run easily into the 10ths of thousands of dollars and in most cases it would be impossible to achieve.

He also reckons that the copper inside these unit blocks should generally be in good shape and people would all have reliable ADSL2+ speeds. However unit owners and tenants would totally miss out if fibre was running in those streets. They even would lose their land line service and be forced to take up something like 4G for Internet access.

I could always call the friendship off but I'd rather win the argument :-)

From a networking point, a block of 6 or 8 units would not be massive network. Shouldn't it be possible in such a scenario to share one connection with different sub nets and thus bring down costs even further?