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

211–220 of 405 posts

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

#211

Post by mathattack »

What's really wrong with this? As a provider of goods or services, I should have the right to say, "I'm only renting you this, not selling it to you. If you want to buy it, go see someone else."

If I build a house, I should be able to rent it out, and not sell it if I want to keep it. If the market demands builders to sell it, some will find a way. There's no intrinsic right to forcing people to have an option to buy.

If I make something that requires tedious upkeep, and will hurt my reputation if it breaks down, shouldn't it be ok for me to say, "I'm only going to rent this to you, and will take care of the upkeep myself."? (Example: A piece of machinery in a factory)

Uber is selling rides. Should they be forced to sell cars too? (ok, that may be a little stretch, but it's along the same line of thought)

If enough people want to fully own cars and trucks, they'll go somewhere else and drive JD and GM out of business.

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

#212

Post by randomdata »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #118
acveilleux wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And that 1668 acre farm is not a corporate farm, it's a family farm run by a single operator without hired hands.

May still be corporate, because corporations are a way of structuring a business, not an indication of how large or how many people are involved with the business. I expect most family farms are also corporations or even multiple corporations.

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

#213

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

betenoire wrote: post #78
Shivetya wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 mach…

grew up urban, married a farmer... learned everything I know (not much) about fixing things with spit tape and wire from them. what you say makes sense, but meanwhile Dave is still standing in his field with a useless machine and lots of work to do.

This is exactly the point. If your car is a lemon and always in the shop, at least it's trivial to get a rental, even if you're out of pocket the cash. Any number of car rental companies will drive a car out to your house or the shop where it is.

If your tractor is broken down and you need to bale that hay that's been drying in the fields today before the rain comes tomorrow and ruins it, you're screwed unless you can find a nearby farmer to help.

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

#214

Post by redblacktree »

Kluny wrote: post #170
MRSallee wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sort of is. The Wired article mentions that some farmers are preferring to buy old tractors without the electronics. This demand increases the value for the used market and should depress the value of new tractors. There will likely be a growth in the business of maintaining old tractors and, potentially, enough public awareness of the benefits of tractors without electronics that another manufacturer can step in.…

Maybe tractor hacking will become a thing, too. I know lots of guys who circumvent the computers in their cars with pirated software, to make them racier. Might be a career in it for some of them.

I've recently become interested in this, since I bought a 2015 vehicle with a computer in the console. Do you have any advice/resources for a budding car hacker?

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

#215

Post by rhino369 »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #69
vonmoltke wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Article is just wrong. One does not own software on device he buys. Software ownership means that one can issue new licenses, which is clearly not a case here. One can not just start selling Windows, because he bought laptop where they are installed. You just get license to use software. This idea needs to die. Copyright ownership means that one can make and distribute copies of software. Software ownership means y…

Exactly. If I buy a book, I can write on the pages. I can fold, spindle, and mutilate. I can rip out a page. I own that book. I can't sell a copy, though - not even a copy of my modified, ripped up version. Not without a license from the author/publisher of the original.

John Deere would say that you can reflash, smash, or replace the eeeprom if you want. But you can't create a new piece of software based on the old one.

I think you should be able too, because what is the harm, but I don't think the book analogy holds.

You aren't allowed to rewrite a book, even if you keep the copy yourself.

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

#216

Post by muuh-gnu »

BuildTheRobots wrote: post #183
mikegerwitz wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He does not get paid by the FSF, nor does he accept speaking fees (insofar as I am aware; I'm not sure if there are certain sponsors, but he insists that those be donated to the FSF, not himself); his time is donated. He received a MacArthur grant a while back, while he is able to live off of.

After a quick google, it seems he was granted $500,000 (paid over 5 years) in 1990. [1] This seemed like quite a lot until I divided it by the 25 years he's been living on it. £20k/year doesn't actually strike me as that much. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacArthur_Fellows_Program

> £20k/year doesn't actually strike me as that much.

You should learn about investing.

If he invested the initial amount without spending it, a moderate dividend yield of 3% would make him $15000 a year. Add 25 years of dividend growth, and he is probably receiving $50000-$100000 today, or even more if he reinvseted some of the dividends.

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

#217

Post by redblacktree »

mathattack wrote: post #211

What's really wrong with this? As a provider of goods or services, I should have the right to say, "I'm only renting you this, not selling it to you. If you want to buy it, go see someone else." If I build a house, I should be able to rent it out, and not sell it if I want to keep it. If the market demands builders to sell it, some will find a way. There's no intrinsic right to forcing people to have an option to buy…

I think the problem with this line of thinking is that most people think they're buying a car (including on board software). If it were clear to everyone that you are in fact only leasing the software, it might be better.

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

#218

Post by dublinben »

Retric wrote: post #147
api wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is getting meta and no longer directly responsive to the article, which I don't wholly disagree with. A tractor and a book are different situations. Books are hard to copy, while files are easy to copy. Writers have to get paid, and people are cheap and don't want to pay them... even while they will pay the same for a fancy cup of coffee. Hence a scramble for some way to set up a toll booth that is hard to circu…

There is little wrong with DRM as a concept, "But" just because you call something DRM does not mean it should be able to do anything. IMO, a DRM bill of rights needs to exist to qualify for government protection. Data needs to be transferable FOR FREE to a new user. You can't shut down your DRM servers without first removing the DRM. You can't remotely change anything on a user’s system. Source code must be freely a…

There is little wrong with DRM except everything about DRM. None of the exceptions you've called for would even be an issue without DRM.

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

#219

Post by BrainInAJar »

ploxiln wrote: post #176
api wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is getting meta and no longer directly responsive to the article, which I don't wholly disagree with. A tractor and a book are different situations. Books are hard to copy, while files are easy to copy. Writers have to get paid, and people are cheap and don't want to pay them... even while they will pay the same for a fancy cup of coffee. Hence a scramble for some way to set up a toll booth that is hard to circu…

Many people who try to make a living making music or writing are unable to do so, even if the music or the writing is pretty good, and that's due to obscurity, not piracy. Historically, even fewer people were able to. Pages and even chapters of books have been copied by photocopiers (found in many libraries!) for decades. The only limit to the copying was how many quarters you had. You need to give up the idea that p…

Historically creators didn't starve either, they worked on patronage assignments to pay the bills, and did whatever for the love of art once that was taken care of. Michaelangelo hated painting, but was commissioned for the Sistine chapel, one of the world's greatest works of art, because he was hungry.

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

#220

Post by dublinben »

redblacktree wrote: post #214
Kluny wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe tractor hacking will become a thing, too. I know lots of guys who circumvent the computers in their cars with pirated software, to make them racier. Might be a career in it for some of them.

I've recently become interested in this, since I bought a 2015 vehicle with a computer in the console. Do you have any advice/resources for a budding car hacker?

The best way to start is to not buy a vehicle with a hundred proprietary computers in it.
Post reply on HN