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

Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 359 posts

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#291

Post by weberc2 »

nottorp wrote: post #193

I don't get why all this chat is about software, licensing and software safety. The way I read it, a farmer can't change even, say, a brake pad (or whatever tractors use) without authorization from John Deere. I very strongly doubt that they want to mess with the software, they just want to perform minor maintenance themselves.

Some farmers want to change engine curve profiles to get more power out of their engines, likely at the expense of Tier IV emissions regulations and possibly damaging the drivetrain. I don't believe this is the normal case, but I have heard this expressed in the past.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#292

Post by kodfodrasz »

criddell wrote: post #288
kodfodrasz wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may be related to farmers not taking the tractors to repair shops. The automotive component I worked on was firmware updated every time the customer took the car to a service for eg. to change oil, and an update was necessary. The tools needed for this were pretty expensive though, and needed some expertise, as the process was somewhat complicated. I understand why this is not trusted to owners.

> The tools needed for this were pretty expensive though, and needed some expertise, as the process was somewhat complicated. There's a pretty good chance that was done intentionally.

Yes, but not in the sense you suggest. Ironically to save costs for the consumers, and improve reliability. Making the system suitable for safe updates without proper disconnecting and partial disassembly and tolerant to untrustad (also in electrical not only in software sense) peripherials would have added a lot to the piecewise cost. (think: more I/O protection electronics, more testing of upgradeability testing with untrusted tools with many failure modes, durable upgrade connectors fitting the size and other constraints).

Still no user could and should upgrade that software, as any complication or untrusted software would be a safety hazard, and lengthy official regulatory evaluation and approval process is needed needed for every new version. (think: Road Permission Level revalidation may be needed (overseen by authorities) to allow a firmware to take part in traffic)

The repair shops can save lots of cost compared to end users, as these tools are not cheap, but compatible with most manufacturers, so are needed anyway.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#293

Post by randomdata »

anjc wrote: post #239
randomdata wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll gladly pay the cost of a John Deere mechanic from time to time before I go back to the purely mechanical tractors we used to have on the farm. When I hear this kind of comment I have to wonder if: 1. The person has never spent time in a tractor. 2. Has never spent time in a modern tractor. 3. Has never spent time in an old tractor.

What're the benefits of newer models in terms of daily usage?

Comfort. In the grain business my tractors don't get anywhere near daily usage, but when their window of usefulness opens, the days are long and the longer you can handle keeping the machine rolling the better.

Not all of the advancements are directly related to computers, but they sort of come part and parcel at this point.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#294

Post by pavel_lishin »

criddell wrote: post #255
keyme wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is interoperability. At the very least this is a gray area.

This seems exactly like the type of situation for which the Librarian of Congress would carve out a DMCA exemption.

Huh, I did not know that Librarian of Congress was actually a title/position.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#295

Post by pavel_lishin »

gerbilly wrote: post #268
jaclaz wrote: post #227

I have the feeling that somehow the actual need has been put aside for phylosophical (or Open Source, etc.) reasonings (nice but not the original issue). More or less what the good farmers are asking for (which is not about the code, the kernel or whatever, they are not "hackers" as much as the authorized JD technicians are not computer experts or programmers or software engineers) is just access to the "database" of…

>The farmers do not want the source code, they don't want to modify it, they don't want to "hack" anything, they simply want to be able to replace a part and have the thingy work. One way to fix this would be for a farmer to sue the manufacturer for business interruption for millions of dollars. When planting or harvesting, especially when bad weather is coming in, you are on a tight deadline. Inability to replace a…

> One way to fix this would be for a farmer to sue the manufacturer for business interruption for millions of dollars.

But you'd need to find a farmer who's willing to take a risk and spend a lot of money that they may not have while their crop rots in a field.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#296

Post by Cyph0n »

zanny wrote: post #168
Cyph0n wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But would the innovation that led to the creation of 3D printers have taken place if patent law didn't exist? And since the open source movement is based entirely on those patents (as I understand), would cheap 3D printers exist if the 1980s tech was never developed? I think these are the questions you should be thinking about when arguing against IP protection laws. Edit : One thing you failed to mention is that the…

There are two research incentives. The incentive of potential profit, and the incentive of wanting an end product. People would have wanted, and invested in, the development of 3D printers for just the personal desire part. This is how the most valuable R&D works right now - the vast majority of cancer and major life debilitating disease research is being done not by big pharma (who are instead just researching more…

Believe it or not, the ideal you are talking about doesn't really exist anymore unfortunately. Even university research nowadays is primarily funded by external sources (government and industry). The more affluent universities have internal funding setup which is typically quite competitive and needs some sort of deliverable anyways. Case in point: the most desirable skill in a university professor is figuring out how to convince others to fund your work, while also giving them something in return. The exception of course is government. NSF and similar government programs are the only funding sources for pure basic research as far as I know.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#297

Post by randomdata »

weberc2 wrote: post #291
nottorp wrote: post #193

I don't get why all this chat is about software, licensing and software safety. The way I read it, a farmer can't change even, say, a brake pad (or whatever tractors use) without authorization from John Deere. I very strongly doubt that they want to mess with the software, they just want to perform minor maintenance themselves.

Some farmers want to change engine curve profiles to get more power out of their engines, likely at the expense of Tier IV emissions regulations and possibly damaging the drivetrain. I don't believe this is the normal case, but I have heard this expressed in the past.

This does seems to be John Deere's primary motivation. They make the exact same mechanical machine to serve many different market segments, and then assign each model's capabilities, like horsepower, in software. Of course, the consumer soon figures out that by flipping a couple of bits they can buy the less expensive machine and upgrade it at little to no cost.

Thus ensues the debate of who owns the tractor.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#298

Post by Gracana »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #265
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #26

I think we'd all be better off if basically everything was open source, by way of eliminating intellectual property protections provided by governments. As an alternate solution, those of us with engineering skills can work to create an open source economy with open source factories, computers, and products. This would never be a problem nor would it be likely to happen if genuinely competitive options existed for fa…

If the software was open source, it would be modified and tuned to maximize power output, and would belch huge plumes of particulates, CO, and NOx. How do you balance openness against the public good of controlling this pollution? These are, perhaps, the primary reasons that engine control software is so complicated these days, on diesels and gas engines.

I think high risks and catastrophic consequences would prevent most farmers from hot-rodding their tractors. You buy a tractor of a certain size, which is designed to run the implements that attach to it, and you run it and maintain it on a predictable schedule. If you modify it to make more power... the benefits are questionable, and you risk unpredictable downtime which jeopordizes your ability to cultivate your crops properly.

Imagine your employer spent a million dollars on a server that runs everything critical to their operation. You can overclock it easily. Do you?

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#299

Post by Nilzor »

tzs wrote: post #185
Nilzor wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what kind of repairs are that? As a software developer I don't understand what equipment is failure needs software change. Software don't wear and tear. Hardware does.

From a different article on this subject [1]: > "If a farmer bought the tractor, he should be able to do whatever he wants with it," Kevin Kenney, a farmer and right-to-repair advocate in Nebraska, told me. "You want to replace a transmission and you take it to an independent mechanic—he can put in the new transmission but the tractor can't drive out of the shop. Deere charges $230, plus $130 an hour for a technician…

Thanks. This was the kind of answer I feared

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#300

Post by [deleted] »

tzs wrote: post #185
Nilzor wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what kind of repairs are that? As a software developer I don't understand what equipment is failure needs software change. Software don't wear and tear. Hardware does.

From a different article on this subject [1]: > "If a farmer bought the tractor, he should be able to do whatever he wants with it," Kevin Kenney, a farmer and right-to-repair advocate in Nebraska, told me. "You want to replace a transmission and you take it to an independent mechanic—he can put in the new transmission but the tractor can't drive out of the shop. Deere charges $230, plus $130 an hour for a technician…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN