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

John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 320 posts

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#271

Post by gbacon »

moffkalast wrote: post #262
gbacon wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The purpose of a system is what it does.”

Yeah the outlook of a crook who only sees laws as quid pro quo vehicles for enriching those in the know. I don't think VW and a few others trying to cheat the system to improve their bottom line makes it some kind of made up law that's supposed to be optics only and nothing in practice. It's just the typical corporate response to having to do something that's for the commons for once instead of tragedizing them.

I understand that imposing the restrictions may have involved great amounts of wishful thinking as to the outcome. Even this is not so certain because certain politicians were able claim a victory for having Done Something by writing words on pieces of paper. It may even be against their interest — and they are self-interested actors despite claims to being detached public servants — to solve an issue that is evidently so effective at getting people so worked up.

Vendors’ compliance is not disputed, and you have produced no credible evidence of cheating. If there were demand for the smaller, more efficient engines that you’re fantasizing about, someone would already be building them with no legislative restrictions necessary. Under capitalism, any valid complaint can be rephrased as a business plan. You may not like how they complied with the law, but that’s a you problem. If you can’t bear to see it that way, then take it up with the inept authors of the restrictions. The purpose of a system is what it does.

Stating a broader principle in order to apply it to this instance, we in the U.S. are not obligated to go out of our way to pay more in taxes: “The legal right of a taxpayer to decrease the amount of what otherwise would be his taxes, or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted” (Gregory v. Helvering, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/293/465/). Similarly, the law requires manufacturers to meet the restrictions and does not require them to go out of their way to incur the enormous costs of design, certification, building and tooling up new factories, testing, hiring, training, etc., etc., etc. to produce entirely new engines. Anyone who seriously proposed such a rigamarole would have been accused of over-engineering or Rube Goldberging. Executives who put such a plan in place would have been sued and likely lost their jobs.

Intertemporal effects matter, but they are so frequently left out of what passes for economic analysis.

Are you able to read minds to know what someone else’s outlook is? Your interpretation cannot be the most charitable one. https://ethics.org.au/ethics-explainer-the-principle-of-char...

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#272

Post by gbacon »

mothballed wrote: post #269
gbacon wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is essentially the situation in the general aviation market for certificated aircraft, and it sucks. Costs are triple or more compared to the experimental market. Finding a decent mechanic is a serious chore. Repairs take forever.

Is there any reason not to buy experimental for non-commercial daylight VFR flights for personal use?

If that’s your mission and especially if you’re mechanically inclined, experimental is highly compelling.

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#273

Post by sleight42 »

darknavi wrote: post #254
tzs wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Right to repair is a normal freedom Right to try to repair is a normal freedom.

Right to watch five YouTube videos on how to fix my horrid soldering job. I wouldn't trade it for the world though, we need more tinkering.

Me trying to fix our living room couch. Yeah. I fell ya, man.

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#274

Post by hobo123 »

jimnotgym wrote: post #170
hobo123 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is there a few German or Japanese competitors in the market as well. And buying American is all well and good until you can get a better machine for less somewhere else.

One day there will be a Chinese competitor to wipe them all out

True. One more reason for Western companies to get their s..t together and stop enshittification.

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#275

Post by bumby »

Manuel_D wrote: post #243
9dev wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure what you mean when you say John Deere was cheating the system. Instead of selling tractors with more powerful, but limited motors, they should have sold tractors with less powerful motors and no screw. There is no need to do any of this in software. They were purposefully avoiding the regulation by telling farmers, "do not loosen that screw, or you'll break the law, wink-wink!"

I'm no mechanical engineer, but can't any motor be run with greater power if the fuel mixture settings are remapped? Is it possible to design a motor that runs at 25 horsepower at leaner emissions-compliant settings, but can't run at higher power if a user changes the fueling settings to a richer mixture? I'm skeptical if it's even possible to design an engine that runs at 25 horsepower when complying with emissions…

I think your general point is reasonable, but far too centered on emissions. There are other reasons to limit modifications beyond just emissions. As an example, most turbocharged vehicles are de-tuned to a much lower psi of boost. The can run at much higher HP but also reduce emissions (depending on what type of emissions you're concerned with. Sometimes decreasing one type corresponds to an increase in another). They often force consumers to a lower psi rating for reliability reasons. So should a user be forced into higher reliability by a manufacturer? That seems like a much less clear answer than being forced into lower emissions.

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#276

Post by bumby »

gbacon wrote: post #271
moffkalast wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the outlook of a crook who only sees laws as quid pro quo vehicles for enriching those in the know. I don't think VW and a few others trying to cheat the system to improve their bottom line makes it some kind of made up law that's supposed to be optics only and nothing in practice. It's just the typical corporate response to having to do something that's for the commons for once instead of tragedizing them.

I understand that imposing the restrictions may have involved great amounts of wishful thinking as to the outcome. Even this is not so certain because certain politicians were able claim a victory for having Done Something by writing words on pieces of paper. It may even be against their interest — and they are self-interested actors despite claims to being detached public servants — to solve an issue that is evident…

>Vendors’ compliance is not disputed, and you have produced no credible evidence of cheating. If there were demand for the smaller, more efficient engines that you’re fantasizing about, someone would already be building them with no legislative restrictions necessary.

Maybe I'm missing your point, but the vendors non-compliance is documented fact in a court of law. Multiple individuals were indicted and the company itself pleaded guilty to multiple felonies (including fraud). Further, as with most collective action problems of this type, relying on individual choice to correct the problem all but ensures it won't be corrected. This is one area where the extreme libertarian mindset (which seems to be overrepresented on HN) tends to miss its mark.

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#277

Post by nitwit005 »

j2kun wrote: post #96
esseph wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two different groups: the hackers, and the money people.

I heard someone say recently that one reason tech sucks is because the sociopathic narcissists domesticated the hackers.

The sociopaths tend to rise to the top in any industry, unfortunately.

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#278

Post by SideQuark »

syntaxing wrote: post #75
SideQuark wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last year was 5b net profit on 44b revenue. Attributing more than a tiny fraction of profit to the right to repair stuff is wild dreams, given the amount of physical goods they sell. Nothing in their SEC filings shows anything mentionable about such claims. It does break out actual profit by company sectors.

Admittedly I have never worked in the agriculture industry, but I have been a mechanical engineer for multiple industries before I became a software engineer (a good 5 years I was in a position where I quoted customers). You really cannot imagine that out of the 44B gross revenue and 5B net, that a "non tiny fraction" was not related to right the repair? Collections of receivables + Proceeds from sales of equipment o…

I looked over their financials. You conjectured out of feelings and ignorance. Calling my evidence naive, when you are simply making things up, is ludicrous.

Go do some legwork, get some actual data, not make believe feel good fairy dust.

The fed suit had exact numbers, which they blacked out for public. The fed suit settled for a dollar amount. If they thought they’d get a better amount, they’d go to trial. So likely the proceeds are on order of the settlement, else they’d likely win more by trial. The feds are not idiots.

But some people are.

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#279

Post by SideQuark »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #149
SideQuark wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last year was 5b net profit on 44b revenue. Attributing more than a tiny fraction of profit to the right to repair stuff is wild dreams, given the amount of physical goods they sell. Nothing in their SEC filings shows anything mentionable about such claims. It does break out actual profit by company sectors.

Why would it be a "tiny fraction" of profit in particular? If they broke even, would we say they couldn't have made any money off of these practices? Even a tiny fraction of revenue , on the other hand, could easily reach $10B. 4% of ~40B times 12 years = $19B.

Go pull their financials, stop pulling nonsense out of thin air.

Re: John Deere owners will get the right to repair equipment under FTC settlement

#280

Post by Dylan16807 »

SideQuark wrote: post #279
Dylan16807 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it be a "tiny fraction" of profit in particular? If they broke even, would we say they couldn't have made any money off of these practices? Even a tiny fraction of revenue , on the other hand, could easily reach $10B. 4% of ~40B times 12 years = $19B.

Go pull their financials, stop pulling nonsense out of thin air.

...nonsense?

Their average revenue for the last dozen years is reasonably close to 40 billion.

4% is a tiny fraction.

Those are the only numbers I used.

Post reply on HN