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

We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 405 posts

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#51

Post by dboyd »

fsloth wrote: post #23

Funny, when DRM first came on the radar over a decade ago enlightened individuals noted that the same principles of deny-of-ownership could be extended to physical objects ... precisely in the way described on this article.

This was my first thought as well. Why is it that people have no issue with your laptop vendor "claiming ownership" of your laptop, but are so alarmed when the same principle is applied to a larger machine?

Yes, I realize that this is not an entirely fair comparison. However, the parallels between this article and the "war on general purpose computing" seem relevant...

http://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#53

Post by themartorana »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #27
Loughla wrote: post #12

The people who have the money to buy the mega-tractors you see in the article don't care. That's why, unless someone outside the industry makes a stink, nothing will happen. These are giga-corporations who are 'family owned' in name only. If they don't rent, they operate that machine for a few years, play the tax game, and trade it even-money for a new one. To them, ownership doesn't matter. Their service contracts w…

Lots of family farms own tractors worth more than $200K, and combines worth more than $500K. They're paying significant interest to the bank for the privilege, but owning equipment that can cover twice the land in a day is a lot cheaper than buying and maintaining two smaller tractors (and accompaning accessories) and hiring a farmhand.

Like my family.

Also, small farmers buy a lot of tractors second, third, fourth-hand. Many are still running 50 years later. This is as much an attempt to kill the secondary market and the right to resell.

Without being able to buy and fix up used farm parts/equipment, many (including my family) would be fiscally unable to farm - full stop.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#54

Post by tomswartz07 »

I'm not a lawyer, and I have a fairly pedestrian grasp of the DMCA.

My understanding is that the law, created in the Internet's infancy, is meant to protect and prevent direct copyright infringment.

Can anyone explain why they're allowed to (seemingly) abuse this act? They're not selling pirated copies of the tractor control software?

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#55

Post by pdxgene »

MrZongle2 wrote: post #6
pragone wrote: post #2

Very interesting. I did not know this issue extended all the way to farming equipment. At the same time, I can't say I'm terribly surprised given the state of things currently. Thread hijack: Am I the only one who finds Wired's... "unique"... styling of links absolutely obnoxious?

In support of your hijacking: no, you're not. I find it annoying. It has the stink of "we've got to do something different but we don't know what...let's mess with something that isn't broken!" As abhorrent as I find John Deere's anti-ownership approach, I say let them continue down that road. It will provide another entrepreneur the opportunity to create and sell a more easily maintainable, you-bought-it-so-you-own-…

I'm in violent agreement with you here -- the notion of a smart home platform, for example, that allows me to customize it via an API, or, if I choose, by tinkering with its basic software, sounds awesome to me.

But I'm a programmer, and a tinkerer.

In order for this to be a viable mainstream reality, some enterprising company will need to establish a platform or system of consumer-grade components that bridges the gap between "general population computer literacy" and "ability to tweak one's electronic things".

In reality, that may be (for now) an unbridgeable gap. Maybe the only route to digital freedom is deeper digital literacy on the part of the average consumer.

But one thing is for sure -- as long as laws like the DMCA are in place, the deck is stacked against evolution towards DIY utopia.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#56

Post by maxerickson »

jasonlotito wrote: post #20
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #10

Huh. So, like an iPhone, you don't get to see or modify the software on a tractor. What's new about that? Its the same with my desktop computer, come to think of it.

Are you saying you can't install the software you want on your computer? You can't replace the OS? Are you suggesting that this should be acceptable?

I don't think people should accept it, but I'm not hugely convinced that it should be enforced by the government.

Assume that John Deere has good analytics about the things that impact the TCO of these super tractors. Assume that some sensors are very effective at lowering that TCO. Assume that John Deere puts interlocks into the vehicle and prices it competitively based on the calculated assumption that those interlocks will lower their warranty costs.

Why should I have to pay extra so that you can have the freedom to hack your tractor?

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#57

Post by Shivetya »

sologoub wrote: post #35

An earlier article did a much better job layout why this is a huge problem for independent farmers: "The family farmer who owns this tractor is a friend of mine. He just wanted a better way to fix a minor hydraulic sensor. Every time the sensor blew, the onboard computer would shut the tractor down. It takes a technician at least two days to order the part, get out to the farm, and swap out the sensor. So for two day…

People have been doing this years with lawn mowers, both push and riding, for as long as I can remember. The complexity of work require to skirt the system increases but the reasons never really change.

If the system is so unreliable there are many other farm tractor manufacturers who can step in and likely are already exploiting the issues John Deere has.

If anything, perhaps lemon laws could be applied to farm machinery and written to be as X number of days across a calendar year. the nice thing about farming today is your likely to have online resources, places where word of this problem can travel fast enough to make a manufacture take notice

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#58

Post by brudgers »

6stringmerc wrote: post #22
skywhopper wrote: post #7

If Deere and GM prevail, then we need to change the laws to recognize that these vehicles aren't being purchased, but leased. There are accounting and tax implications for the lessor and the lessee that need to be resolved.

Also, due to the notion that is being put forward that the reason for this distinction is for safety then all maintenance liabilities for the life-span of the vehicle should rest with the manufacturer. That means all fluids, wipers, brake pads, tires, emissions equipment...I'd like to see that condition tacked on.

Triple Net leases in real estate are an example of well established precedent contrary to the belief you are expressing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_net_lease

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#59

Post by jimmytucson »

sologoub wrote: post #35

An earlier article did a much better job layout why this is a huge problem for independent farmers: "The family farmer who owns this tractor is a friend of mine. He just wanted a better way to fix a minor hydraulic sensor. Every time the sensor blew, the onboard computer would shut the tractor down. It takes a technician at least two days to order the part, get out to the farm, and swap out the sensor. So for two day…

Why doesn't the market handle this?

If John Deere is only willing to sell lifetime licenses to operate their vehicles, thus putting the farmer at risk in ways like you described, why do farmers still buy these "licenses"?

Naively, they must represent some advantage (despite their shortcomings), otherwise John Deere wouldn't be able to sell these things.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#60

Post by acveilleux »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #41
briantakita wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perennial polyculture food forests reduces the advantage of high tech equipment. Nature does the work of growing. Replanting is rare. Harvesting is more of a manual process.

Polyculture farming may be the next big thing in farming, enabled by machine vision automated systems. A typical small farmer in Saskatchewan can harvest 100-200 acres of wheat by himself on a single day using a modern combine harvester. Manual harvesting is not an option.

I don't think people outside of the prairies understand the scale of some of these farms.

The average Sask farm was 1668 acres as of 2011.

Post reply on HN