Live data from Hacker News

Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

wsj.com

71–80 of 229 posts

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#71
They'll provide "tools and manuals". If this includes service software that is good. Also I wonder what kind of detail is there in those service manuals. For the mechanical components I would at least expect drawings of each assembly showing every gear, every seal, every clip with spec. For electronics I would expect at least board view files if not schematics. Do I believe this will happen before it is law to publish it? Not really.

When finally those laws get proposed I fully expect manufacturers to claim "security and IP theft" exceptions and politicians will fold. I still have electronic equipment made in the 80's that had not just schematics in its manual, but pcb layout drawings so you could remake a pcb if it got destroyed... And somehow we didn't have clones of this equipment appear.

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#72

Actual MOU from BBC's coverage[1]: https://www.fb.org/files/AFBF_John_Deere_MOU.pdf What's interesting is this appears to be driven by Right to Repair legislation that's been making it's way through various states. There's an explicit ask that AFBF not support any Right to Repair legislation: "AFBF agrees to encourage state Farm Bureau organizations to recognize the commitments made in this MOU and refrain from intro…

Clearly intended as a threat.

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another MBA'ed company. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4VBqTViEx4

Short term profit at the expense of everything else. At some point there will be a reckoning on all the damage this cult has done to society, but I don't expect it to happen any time soon.

> Short term profit at the expense of everything else. At some point there will be a reckoning on all the damage this cult has done to society, but I don't expect it to happen any time soon.

I can't see how, the same people pushing for WTO/NAFTA are those who profited immensely from outsourcing in the 80s-90s are now the same one who likely stand to benefit the most from either supply chain disruptions, and war.

The truth is that JD is just another monopoly ([0] over 50% market share of tractors) that represents the underlying aspects of crony capitalism writ large. This is just another example how the mantra that 'tech should be in everything' needs to die, and how pervasive these horrible practices can become for the small sector of humans (less than 1% of the Human population feeds the other 99%) who grow the food everyone eats.

MBAs making supply chains inherently fragile and over who valued BS things like JIT are just reflecting what is most rewarded in the corpo culture: quick profits are the way to get fat bonuses and stock options in order to bail out when even the slightest hint of head-winds occur. This is just a symptom, not the cause and a reason why US manufacturing will likely take some time before it can get off it's addiction to the garbage made in China.

0: https://www.economicliberties.us/our-work/cheat-to-win-the-j...

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Short term profit at the expense of everything else. At some point there will be a reckoning on all the damage this cult has done to society, but I don't expect it to happen any time soon.

The damage is already done. MBAs had no long-term vision, so in each company they infested, they made poor strategic decisions such as moving manufacturing overseas, which then forced other companies to move their manufacturing overseas. The countries they chose have zero respect for intellectual property. So now what's left are zombie companies milking their cash cows dry as international competitors arise and take…

>MBAs had no long-term vision, so in each company they infested, they made poor strategic decisions such as moving manufacturing overseas, which then forced other companies to move their manufacturing overseas.

The economic basis for that appeared way before the first MBA got a job.

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#75
post #13

Deere’s position on right to repair is heartbreaking to me. I paid for books (and beer) in college as a truck driver and mechanic for a custom harvest operation. We ran Deere 6602 combines from the 1970s, in the early 2000s. Deere’s tagline was “nothing runs like a Deere” but in my experience it was more like “nothing can be made to run like a Deere”. We spent a lot of time on maintenance but very little on repairs.…

Here's my analysis of what's going to happen if this goes through.

First, quote from the MOU [1]:

> AFBF agrees to encourage state Farm Bureau organizations to recognize the commitments made in this MOU and refrain from introducing, promoting, or supporting federal or state "Right to Repair" legislation that imposes obligations beyond the commitments in this MOU. In the event any state or federal legislation or regulation relating to issues covered by this MOU and/or "Right to Repair" is enacted, each of AFBF and Manufacturer reserve the right, upon fifteen (15) days written notice, to withdraw from this MOU.

It might play out like this:

1. Deere starts a half hearted parts process. They will provide some parts, there will be year long delays in roll out, it will be annoying to use, documentation will be made incomplete on purpose by leaving out random pages or drawings and there will be no way to get them to fix it.

2. Farmers are now locked into using this service for their existing deere equipment because anything else will bankrupt them. Those machines will remain in service for a good 10-20 years which is an important time frame, because

3. Deere will spin off a subsidiary or buy a competitor which will sell what used to be Deere branded technology, "under license". This "new company" will keep all the anti-repair technology in place. New products will primarily come from this company going forward, and the products will be priced so that actual Deere-branded products are not competitive any more, especially second-hand ones.

4. It is now 2028. The MOU cannot be broken because farmers still need parts for their "old" Deere products. Deere anti right to repair lives on in the artificial competitor, which now retains 90% market ownership. Farmers cannot argue for right to repair any more. They've been sold out. Everything has gone back to normal for at least the next 25 years, as far as Deere is concerned.

[1] https://www.fb.org/files/AFBF_John_Deere_MOU.pdf

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well arguments like these are of course all about the statistical tendency because outliers are, by definition, not that important. But I notice you didn't actually give an example of an outlier MBA that did not behave this way and contributed positively to the company they ran?

I assumed in 2023 we're beyond simply applying negative stereotypes to people based on perceptions of a group, but apparently you aren't

Erm no, if there is a group of hooligans, than I will still assume that they are up for violence and if there is a bunch of MBAs taking over companies, I will assume that they are there for short term profit.

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to imagine this working, even in a perfect world. Set aside regulatory capture and corruption and politicking and pretend that everybody does a genuine best-effort attempt to be honest. It's extremely hard to know ahead of time which products will ultimately be reliable and which will be flaky. Most flaky components weren't designed with that in mind -- there are some exceptions, but maintenance headaches are no…

It’s already the case that you have to do this for certain groups of products in France under the AGEC laws. Take for example this dishwasher: https://www.ikea.com/fr/fr/p/diskad-lave-vaisselle-encastrab... . It has an “indice de répairabilité” of 7.4, generated from a bunch of different factors such as ease of disassembly, availability of spare parts and documentation, and the ability to factory-reset it. The data s…

Do you have any personal experience or opinion if this law/metric is helpful for consumers in praxis?

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#78
post #71

They'll provide "tools and manuals". If this includes service software that is good. Also I wonder what kind of detail is there in those service manuals. For the mechanical components I would at least expect drawings of each assembly showing every gear, every seal, every clip with spec. For electronics I would expect at least board view files if not schematics. Do I believe this will happen before it is law to publis…

While I agree with you that companies should provide sufficient information to enable consumers to repair their products, I think considering the complexity that goes into manufacturing mechanical components and fabricating circuit boards, it would be a long shot for many consumers to repair equipment on their own.

Hobbyists/industrial outfits would be a different story as they would have in-house expertise....

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#79

" allow farmers to repair their own equipment" - What a terrible state of affairs if this is an exception rather than the norm. :(

> "allow farmers to repair their own equipment" - What a terrible state of affairs if this is an exception rather than the norm. :(

Blame your fellow 'I'm just making money' loose ethics type programmer, they could just as easily be making drones used to destroy entire apartment buildings or the privacy-intruding facial recognition with that type reasoning, but instead they choose to deny farmers from making the food that you eat instead.

Re: Deere to allow farmers to repair their own equipment

#80
I cant read TFA but i think if John Deere wants to maintain control over the way machines are repaired they should simply stop selling them as retail and move to a "machine as a service" model.

Where they create a network of rental hubs.

I think a lot of farming machinery has moved this way already where you dont pay to own a machine that you may only need a limited number of days/year.

Post reply on HN