Slashdot Mirror
Japan Subsidizes Linux Development, Considers Switch
TheAB writes "Japan is betting 50 million yen ($450k US) that the next-generation of high-tech products and computer networks will rely on open-source software. The money is to develop an 'operating system for consumer electronics goods'."
Err... putting Japan and China in the same bag is akin to saying the U.S., Mexico and surrounding areas are all alike.
Besides, if you read the story, the entities mentioned are Ministries and two _very_ big corporations (Sony and Matsushita) - highly unlikely to be pirating software.
--Moo
At the risk of being obvious...
Linux is a stupendous 'operating system for consumer electronics goods' -- as an engineer who's developed embedded systems, I think that Linux is great for this purpose. For example, Tivo, which is Linux-based, is the greatest consumer electronic item of all time.
But $450k? Gee, what a commitment! That's like 2-3 full time people if you include overhead.
Japan is betting...that the next-generation of high-tech products and computer networks will rely on open-source software.
The next generation?
As far as networks: The Internet is the most important network that I can think of, and what does it run on? Apache is the main Web server; I run a mail server with Qpopper and sendmail, of which the former is open source and the latter is at least free (is it open source? I don't even know); for the FTP part of serving, you can choose from Pure-FTPd, Pro-FTPd, wu-ftpd, or whatever else. "High-tech computer networks" of this generation already run on OSS.
As for products: There's a little more room for improvement here, but my PowerMac G4 is pretty damned high-tech, and while the GUI is closed, the core OS, Darwin, is open-source. And unlike Linux nerds who will say they have such-and-such a high tech system that's running OSS, mine came like this--right out of the box--and is a product targeted at, and sold mainly to, non-nerd consumers.
It used to be that I used very little software I paid for because I pirated everything; now I use very little software I paid for because it's free anyway, and for a substantial part of that software the source is available if I want it. Open source isn't a bet pertaining to the next generation, it's here already.
I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
And people do the same thing with the concept of "God"... even though the details vary drastically, most cultures have a mythology that posits a source of universal intention: something or someone that controls natural events (weather, harvest, childbirth, astronomical bodies, etc.) and interacts with individual human lives (by providing comfort, discipline, special powers, spirtual growth, second chances, forgiveness, condemation, tests and trials, equalizing opportunities, purpose and meaning, spouse and family, absolute morality, eternal security, etc.). The fact that these things are (or will be) explainable through the lenses of natural and cognitive science hasn't done much to convince people that there's no God mediating their reality. It's as if we have to attribute agency (in the AI sense of the term) to events that are personally significant. All these uncontrolled externals are wrapped up into "God".
But, to reply to the parent post, there are more practical reasons for making the "complex entity"==>"person" simplification. When we say "France opposses war with Iraq", it's pretty accurate, because we get the impression that (1) the official government posture and (2) the general sentiment of the French population do not want to see a war. We have no way of characterizing it in a finer manner than that... we don't have a list of x million French who oppose war and the y million French who endorse it, so we use the label "France" to tag the relevant input (in this case, the relevant input is "political pressure", but if we were watching a news broadcast about organized protest against the rapid expansion of metropolitan Paris, than we might categorize the input as "environmentalist").
I'm sure there are a thousand interesting AI and cogsci theories for explaining or expressing this... the human brain is truly incredible, but it make broad, obvious machine-like mistakes too.
-1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction