A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple • Hacker News Board

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#21

Post by imglorp » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 6:58 PM UTC

BEEdwards wrote: post #13

AckSyn wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think legally requiring the producer supply OEM parts is a bit of a stretch I don't think it's a stretch at all. If they've already manufactured the parts, requiring them to sell replacement parts to customers really should be a thing. Holding them back because of shitty IP laws and strangling their ability to get things running is bad form and anti consumer

I agree with the sentiment, but they may be doing JIT production and literally only have parts to build however many units they build for a day. Allowing third parties to make the parts is the way to go.

They also need to keep the authorized service chain supplied as well. This is why you can walk into your car dealer and they should sell you anything in the fiche. This is what keeps your corner mechanic in business too.

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#22

Post by zardo » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 6:59 PM UTC

revelation wrote: post #12

zardo wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well... the EPA might not weigh in this time. They require 'tamper resistant' emission control systems. Making it easy for customers to change the software could put you in a bad situation. Essentially, the same one VW is in, a $35,000 per vehicle fine.

Given the "coal rolling" trucks, those big fines still have yet to hit their target?

There is no EPA highway patrol, so they can only go after large violators. The companies making the 'chip kits' do get taken to the wall occasionally.

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#23

Post by hanselot » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 7:00 PM UTC

How many more Volkswagen emission scandals are hiding behind this ruse of patent protection. Certainly on every market we will find a proportional example, and if not then why so adamantly defend it? Surely this is just an opportunity for more companies to say to their customers: "hey guys. We are going to stand against fucking you for profit."

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#24

Post by krzyk » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 7:22 PM UTC

droopyEyelids wrote: post #2

Wish there was a way to do ensure the Right to Repair without throwing Apple's "Activation Lock" in the garbage. Activation Lock greatly reduced the amount of thievery associated with Apple devices, and I think it's been a tremendous boon to -humanity- (how? by reducing the whole ecosystem of shit that grows around theft. Without Apple products, it's a less viable 'career' for the disadvantaged, and the scum who feed…

If Activation Lock prohibits right-to-repair and right-to-modify it should be removed.

I personally encounter more frequently state when I want to repair or modify my hardware then when I get is stolen.

More over petty thiefs don't distinguish between one phone or the other. If they do, they will more likely steal iPhone, if they are even more clever and know that it is hard to crack an iPhone, then it is such minority that you can ignore them almost altogether (and they are more likely to know how to really crack it - it is not impossible).

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#25

Post by prodmerc » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 7:25 PM UTC

droopyEyelids wrote: post #2

Wish there was a way to do ensure the Right to Repair without throwing Apple's "Activation Lock" in the garbage. Activation Lock greatly reduced the amount of thievery associated with Apple devices, and I think it's been a tremendous boon to -humanity- (how? by reducing the whole ecosystem of shit that grows around theft. Without Apple products, it's a less viable 'career' for the disadvantaged, and the scum who feed…

Oh please, Apple devices still get stolen left and right.

Being able to modify and fix your own hardware as you want is a boon to humanity.

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#26

Post by 0xfeba » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 7:29 PM UTC

zardo wrote: post #8

wheelerwj wrote: post #3

this topic has been beaten to death to the point that there isn't a lot to comment on anymore. But it's still a critical issue (even in 2017). so, this is me, upvoting for visibility. also, id go so far as to say that while we should have the right to repair/hack our own devices, I think legally requiring the producer supply OEM parts is a bit of a stretch. Should I be able to fix my tractor, absolutely. But I don't…

Well... the EPA might not weigh in this time. They require 'tamper resistant' emission control systems. Making it easy for customers to change the software could put you in a bad situation. Essentially, the same one VW is in, a $35,000 per vehicle fine.

I've never heard of an individual being fined for removing/disabling emissions equipment, only businesses. Have you?

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#27

Post by DashRattlesnake » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 7:31 PM UTC

AckSyn wrote: post #9

wheelerwj wrote: post #3

this topic has been beaten to death to the point that there isn't a lot to comment on anymore. But it's still a critical issue (even in 2017). so, this is me, upvoting for visibility. also, id go so far as to say that while we should have the right to repair/hack our own devices, I think legally requiring the producer supply OEM parts is a bit of a stretch. Should I be able to fix my tractor, absolutely. But I don't…

> I think legally requiring the producer supply OEM parts is a bit of a stretch I don't think it's a stretch at all. If they've already manufactured the parts, requiring them to sell replacement parts to customers really should be a thing. Holding them back because of shitty IP laws and strangling their ability to get things running is bad form and anti consumer

Aren't there some jurisdictions that already legally require car manufacturers to disclose their repair manuals, to facilitate 3rd party repair?

I believe Tesla games this by charging ridiculous amounts for short-term online repair manual subscriptions, but most manufacturers just sell copies of the manuals. I think access to that information is a good idea, so Tesla should be swatted down.

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#28

Post by Steko » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 8:01 PM UTC

wheelerwj wrote: post #3

this topic has been beaten to death to the point that there isn't a lot to comment on anymore. But it's still a critical issue (even in 2017). so, this is me, upvoting for visibility. also, id go so far as to say that while we should have the right to repair/hack our own devices, I think legally requiring the producer supply OEM parts is a bit of a stretch. Should I be able to fix my tractor, absolutely. But I don't…

> we should have the right to repair/hack our own devices

No people should demand the devices they buy be repairable and if enough people care that's where the market would follow. When it comes to rights I think companies should have the right to sell devices that are not user repairable. I also think consumers have the right not to be ripped off on first party repairs but that's a problem with multiple solutions e.g. audits and penalties.

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#29

Post by tbrownaw » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 8:05 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #17

zardo wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well... the EPA might not weigh in this time. They require 'tamper resistant' emission control systems. Making it easy for customers to change the software could put you in a bad situation. Essentially, the same one VW is in, a $35,000 per vehicle fine.

The EPA can say "tamper resistant," but I call it "repair resistant". I object to the word "tamper" because implies that even though I am the owner of the car I somehow require authorization to work on it.

Eh, if it's strictly limited to regulatory compliance requirements that might make sense. Make sure it takes significant effort to turn off the public-safety features that cost you a bit of efficiency but also stop you giving all your neighbors cancer and all that.

Re: A right to repair: Why Nebraska farmers are taking on John Deere and Apple

#30

Post by chadgeidel » Mon, Mar 06, 2017, 8:14 PM UTC

sqeaky wrote: post #18

mustacheemperor wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume the poster is not referring to remote wipe, but the fact that it is literally impossible to crack into an iPhone associated to an Apple account you can't authenticate. If an iDevice is iCloud locked and you don't have that password, it's a brick.

It is not literally impossible, it is just beyond the grasp of petty thieves at the moment. Wait until one guy releases a walkthrough on the the two pins you cross or the steps to remove some chip and add a new (or worst case blast some part of an SOC with a laser), then all the geek friends of those pretty criminals will take a stab at it. Its not like the criminals themselves are doing much with phones and laptops…

I think it's slightly more complicated than you make it out. The FBI presumably has the resources to create the "two pins you cross or steps to remove some chip" and yet it still has to ask Apple for device access on newer iPhones.

Either this ability exists, and the FBI is hiding it via creating large numbers of device requests of Apple, or Apple is telling us the truth and the iPhone is not easily hacked.