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

91–100 of 405 posts

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

#91

Post by PythonicAlpha »

briantakita wrote: post #73
PythonicAlpha wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the game is to make monetary profit & control the market What you describe, basically is monopolism. It is well known, that monopolies are killing a free market. > They are just being good Capitalists. When this is true, than something is very wrong with Capitalism itself.

> It is well known, that monopolies are killing a free market. In ecology, there's a concept call Ecological Succession. Likewise, in Capitalism, the free market is a stage in a succession toward monopoly. Capital tends to pool, leading to monopolies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_succession

Applying concepts from one scientific discipline to other disciplines does seldom fit. I think it is more a sign of pseudo-scientific trickery to back the own thinking, that is most often used in unsound economical theories.

It is a fact, that while monopolies are good for the monopolists, it is bad for societies at large. And no "ecological" concepts can convince me from the opposite. One example: While bigger banks are good for the bankers, because countries have to rescue them, it is very bad for those countries, as everybody (except politicians) can see since 2008.

With your "ecological" theory, someone also could argue, that dinosaurs are better than mammals.

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

#92

Post by jackreichert »

fsloth wrote: post #33

Open source answer is: http://opensourceecology.org/gvcs/ (I'm not saying it's a viable answer at this point but the work they are doing is intrguing.)

It's really just a matter of time until such manufacturing has a viable open source mainstream alternative. Then we can look forward to small dev shops building affordable custom robots for everyday use.

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

#93

Post by protomyth »

hharnisch wrote: post #39
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…

Disagree. The family owned farmers care too. For the big equipment, like combines, there's a handful of people everyone pays to have their fields harvested. This person get's compensation in the form of money and other services (someone else will plow their field for instance). People own their own tractors and share time to get things done, otherwise you'd have to own all of the equipment (which is only justified wh…

It is still a thing for people to take their combines down south and work their way back to the north. My Dad and some of my coworkers did that in summer as youths. Pay is pretty good for someone with no degree and you don't get anytime to spend the money. Nicer now than back in the day since the cabs have all sorts of extras like satellite radio, air conditioning, and GPS.

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

#94

Post by TheCoelacanth »

cylinder wrote: post #63
sanderjd wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always wonder whether the legal framework for software has ended up different than other things because of its fundamental differences, or whether it's because it was invented in a different era. Is it software that is different or is it the modern legal structure that is different?

Nothing has changed, licenses have always been in the law.

Always? I don't think so. Copyright is a few hundred years old at most.

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

#95

Post by Vraxx »

jimmytucson wrote: post #59
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.

That still leaves all the people who currently own licenses to tractors instead of tractors with poor prospects. Suddenly they are forced with the decision of putting up with John Deere's BS or investing in a whole new tractor. And that is if this wonderful market solution were to spring up tomorrow.

That goes without saying that this issue is bigger than the tractor market. Car manufacturers are hopping on board and there are even fewer options for cars without protected computers in them. This issue is only getting more pressing as more daily objects become integrated with computer systems.

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

#96

Post by roel_v »

jimmytucson wrote: post #59
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.

The market handles this just fine, and shows us that in practice, this is not the problem armchair-lawyer nerds are making it out to be.

The whole OP is disingenuous - the issue is not who 'owns' the tractor. The issue is with the licence of the software that runs it. That doesn't change anything about the ownership of the tractor. Shoddy reporting, designed to appeal to the prejudices of their audience.

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

#97

Post by skwirl »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #5

Why can't we simply ask if this could be done for 'mechanical programming' and apply the same logic. You don't own that full mechanical engine's construction, you just have a license to use it for the lifetime of the vehicle. If that wouldn't stand, then how is it any different than code except that code is on a much smaller and and more detailed level. At the end of the day, it is still physical components following…

Logic isn't applied, law is applied. The DMCA and associated copyright law distinguishes between these cases and puts these specific restrictions on one case and not the other. Just because something is analogous to another thing in some way doesn't mean both must be either legal or illegal together. You can put whatever you want into a law, so long as it is constitutional, and the Constitution explicitly provides Congress with the ability to enact copyright laws, even dumb ones.

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

#98

Post by andrepd »

apricot wrote: post #48

Richard Stallman spent the last 30 years telling us this would happen. As soon as books become computer files, you don't buy them anymore, you lease usage rights. As soon as tractors contain computer code, you don't own them anymore, you are granted a license to use them. When will it stop? More and more everyday objects are incorporating software and firmware in many different forms. I remember reading Stallman's sh…

Alarming is the proper way to describe it. I remember how I thought it would never happen that I would buy a book and have it deleted remotely from my device when it so pleased the bookstore. But it happened. Then I thought absurd how anyone could seriously believe that the NSA was massively spying on its citizens and performing surveillance "carpet bombing". But then lo, Snowden happened.

Time and time again it happened. And invariably, Stallman was right all along.

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

#99

Post by jellicle »

sker wrote: post #83
apricot wrote: post #48

Richard Stallman spent the last 30 years telling us this would happen. As soon as books become computer files, you don't buy them anymore, you lease usage rights. As soon as tractors contain computer code, you don't own them anymore, you are granted a license to use them. When will it stop? More and more everyday objects are incorporating software and firmware in many different forms. I remember reading Stallman's sh…

What happens when we have computers implanted in our brains? Do I no longer own my brain?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1053424/

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

#100

Post by emodendroket »

jimmytucson wrote: post #59
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.

The benefits are not relevant to small farmers, who do not have enough economic power to really matter.
Post reply on HN