Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 185 posts

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#121

Post by einarfd »

losteverything wrote: post #108

Help me bound things. # times in a year a Deere requires repair? My point of reference is my car. I can go several cars and not have to get a "repair" as long as I trade in about yr 4 or 5. Is Deere the Yugo of tractors wrt visits to the shop?

The number of hours a normal person puts on his car in a year is minuscule compared to what a average farmer would put on his tractor. Tractors are made to be used every day all day for years and years. If you did something similar with a car, you would quickly wear it out. The tractor we had on my parents farm when I grew up is still running and used, and it has to be at least 30 years old. It isn't used as much as when I was a kid but it is still in use. It has broken down a few times during that time, but nothing that couldn't be fixed. The cars we had at the same time are all worn out scraped a long time ago. I don't follow what happens in the farm field as much as when I lived on one, but John Deer is and was one of the popular brands, and afaik. it hasn't a worse or better reputation than any of the other brands.

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#122

Post by weberc2 »

whalesalad wrote: post #115
neuromancer2701 wrote: post #80

Has this hurt John Deere's sales? It is not like they are the only game in town and the quality of their product has diminished over the last couple of decades compared to alternatives. We don't need right to mod legislation we need all companies to know that if you do this we will not buy your products.

They are mostly the only game in town. There are a handful of very large competitors (CLAAS, CASE + New Holland -- which are both Fiat) but the market is very heavily swayed in the direction of Deere. Also, at least in the field of telematic connectivity (having your tractor 'online' to sync field operations, harvest data, etc...) Deere is leading the pack.

Being the market leader isn't the same as having a monopoly. It seems like you're faulting Deere for out-innovating it's competitors. For what it's worth, I would like to see John Deere become a more open company.

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#123

Post by tyingq »

desdiv wrote: post #48
tyingq wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand this doesn't affect EPA laws, but most US states exempt farm vehicles, even things like pickup​ trucks (that can legally drive on roads even) from state emissions testing. They also allow exemptions to use untaxed fuel in them, etc. Basically, there's a sort of exemption ecosystem that might have farmers thinking they are free to do whatever they want around fuel and emissions. Which is only partially tr…

OP's post contained the phrase "Tier IV emissions", which I never heard before, so I googled it and got me to this page[0]. Turns out it specifically governs nonroad engine emissions i.e. that of farm vehicles. [0] https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/nonroad.php#tier4

Yes, but enforcement is aimed at the manufacturer...that new models rolling off the line meet the requirement. I don't believe there's any enforcement locally, for the buyer of the tractor. As mentioned, US states are very lax about farm vehicles.

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#124

Post by nommm-nommm »

laurent123456 wrote: post #101

The hypocrisy of John Deer is amazing. On one hand, they forbid modifying the software because it "can endanger machine performance" and on the other hand they accept no responsibility for "crop loss, lost profits, loss of goodwill, loss of use of equipment... arising from the performance or non-performance of any aspect of the software". So what's the point of not hacking their software if the farmers get no benefit…

I don't think it's not so much hypocrisy as much as they want to protect their reputation.

They can't control what third party software does so they don't want people loading third party software that negatively effects their products thus negatively affects their reputation.

I don't agree with it but I can see their angle.

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#125

Post by awqrre »

moonbug wrote: post #106
webbrahmin wrote: post #76

The way I see it, if a corporation sells me something it is upto me how I use it.

Dude, not all sales go to private individuals. Consumer protection laws aren't going to apply if the purchaser's a business entity.

"Corporations are people, and they have more rights than you."

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#126

Post by weberc2 »

avmich wrote: post #120
weberc2 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not following. At which scale does John Deere have a monopoly? Anyway, There's nothing nefarious about protecting your profits by avoiding liability. You seem to want Deere to be this evil corporation, which simply doesn't resonate with my experience in any way.

The problem which bothers many is that JD gives no warranty and at the same time forbids analyzing and modifying the firmware. It's perceived as a conflict - just like avoiding liability in this case is viewed as a way to increase profits.

JD does warrantee their equipment. I understand the perceived conflict, and I personally think JD should become more open. I'm only saying that this article is obviously sensationalized (no surprise coming from Vice).

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#127

Post by hwillis »

throw_away wrote: post #30
hwillis wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great point. This isn't like biodiesel or ethanol, where the co2 would end up in the air anyway. A methane generator actively creates a carbon form that is significantly worse for the environment.

Are we sure that the anaerobic digester is a net carbon producer? What would have happened to the hog waste otherwise? This article would imply that there are other environmental factors to consider: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/10/141028-hog-f... Steve Wing, the UNC-Chapel Hill epidemiologist, says hog operations give off ammonia, methane—a potent greenhouse gas—and hydrogen sulfide, which causes hea…

Anaerobic digestion causes the production of (more) methane rather than co2. Methane is a 100x more potent greenhouse gas than co2 over the short term. Over hundreds of years it breaks down but even a century from now it's 30x worse.

Anaerobic digestion is great as long as leaks are kept below 1%. Doing so is tricky.

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#128

Post by MaysonL »

nommm-nommm wrote: post #124
laurent123456 wrote: post #101

The hypocrisy of John Deer is amazing. On one hand, they forbid modifying the software because it "can endanger machine performance" and on the other hand they accept no responsibility for "crop loss, lost profits, loss of goodwill, loss of use of equipment... arising from the performance or non-performance of any aspect of the software". So what's the point of not hacking their software if the farmers get no benefit…

I don't think it's not so much hypocrisy as much as they want to protect their reputation. They can't control what third party software does so they don't want people loading third party software that negatively effects their products thus negatively affects their reputation. I don't agree with it but I can see their angle.

As opposed to what their first-party software does to the farmer's pocketbook (and their reputation). I think they're more interested in their service revenues.

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#129

Post by hwillis »

fastbeef wrote: post #44
hwillis wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great point. This isn't like biodiesel or ethanol, where the co2 would end up in the air anyway. A methane generator actively creates a carbon form that is significantly worse for the environment.

No. This process is 100% carbon neutral. It recycles the carbon already in the pig manure as opposed to natural gas which is a fossil fuel and adds to the carbon cycle.

Any lost methane is significantly worse than the equivalent amount of CO2. Even though it's carbon neutral, the intermediate step converts it to a much more potent greenhouse gas that is very easy to lose to atmosphere. Without a digester, the biomass will be converted to co2 instead. Energy that could have been stored as methane is converted to heat. The best case scenario is to skip biology entirely and throw it into the incinerator, where it can be used to produce heat for power and almost only co2, skipping over methane entirely.

Done right, a digester extracts a little bit more chemical energy from biomass that simply leaving it on the ground. Done wrong it weaponizes the carbon.

Re: The thriving black market of John Deere tractor hacking

#130

Post by whalesalad »

weberc2 wrote: post #122
whalesalad wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are mostly the only game in town. There are a handful of very large competitors (CLAAS, CASE + New Holland -- which are both Fiat) but the market is very heavily swayed in the direction of Deere. Also, at least in the field of telematic connectivity (having your tractor 'online' to sync field operations, harvest data, etc...) Deere is leading the pack.

Being the market leader isn't the same as having a monopoly. It seems like you're faulting Deere for out-innovating it's competitors. For what it's worth, I would like to see John Deere become a more open company.

I agree completely.
Post reply on HN