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

91–100 of 359 posts

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#91

Post by TaylorAlexander »

Cyph0n wrote: post #52
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear this constantly but it doesn't ring true to me. Look at the 3D printer inventors from the 1980's who rested on their laurels selling $30,000 3D printers until their patents expired and the open source community started producing them for under $1000. Ten years after the patents expired, you can get a 3D printer for $199 that genuinely rivals the quality of a $30,000 printer just 10 years ago. There are all man…

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…

I am referring to commercial 3D printers which were $30k in 2010, compared to off the shelf printers sold today for $200. The cost of a microprocessor board of sufficient capability hasn't particularly changed between now and then.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#92

Post by throwaway_jddev »

Hey all, I worked on software for John Deere. This is a throwaway account for obvious reasons. Opinions expressed here are MY OWN. I no longer work for John Deere or am associated with them in any way.

I was part of one of the many teams that work on this software. Specifically I was part of John Deere's ISG division also known as the Intelligent Solutions Group. The ISG division (was at the time) responsible for tying together various software built by OEM's, for building the central UI within the cabin, and for building various debugging and build tools. The team I was on, consisted of about 8 very senior engineers, and I think there were around 20 total engineers working for ISG at the time (though I saw, and knew only a handful of them). Now, when I say OEM integration, I mean suppliers and other John Deere divisions with their own teams mirroring ours. All told, I would estimate that John Deere has somewhere between 150-300 engineers working full-time on their codebase for their tractors.

Let me disabuse you of any myths. I have worked in software for 20 years. I have worked in large enterprises, and scrappy startups. This software is by FAR the largest, most complex codebase I have ever interacted with. Submission of any new code was seriously considered and reviewed before it entered production (sometimes to a pedantic degree), after which JD put all new code through 10s of thousands of hours of testing on production equipment. Production and release cycles take on the order of months to ensure that we don't kill people.

These are not riding lawnmowers. They are 30-ton combines, and 20 ton tractors tilling fields, with massive horsepower behind them. They have a real potential to end peoples lives in the event of failure, and these tractors do (in testing) fail in spectacular ways. If a team of hundred of engineers struggle with their codebase internally, Joe Farmer isn't going to have a fucking clue how to repair their software correctly.

Now should you, in theory, have the right to modify equipment you own? Sure. Absolutely. Hell, John Deere tractors run on open source software. But trust me on this, locking this down is a very good idea.

If you have the drive to make open source tractor software AND can make absolutely certain no-one ever dies from code you write, then go do it. Just keep in mind that the engineers that work on this shit really care about keeping people safe.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#93

Post by TeMPOraL »

itchyjunk wrote: post #6

"farmers could damage the machines, like bypassing pollution emissions controls to get more horsepower." Isn't this the problem with warranties? People could try to mod it, end up damaging it and try to get it replaced with warranties. I also don't fully understand this software. Is it just completely vendor locked? That sounds really unreasonable. It should allow for at least basic debugging and trouble shooting. Is…

Environmental concerns is one of the two big reasons I would accept non-user-servisable hardware/software, second reason being safety of others (think people modding self-driving software in cars).

Because the minute an easily applicable patch that makes tractors do more for less, but with more pollution becomes available, a lot of people will apply it. Diesel cars already have this problem with particle filters.

It's not just companies that are greedy and want to profit off externalities; so are many (most?) people, especially when incentivized by financial pressures.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#94

Post by userbinator »

mikekchar wrote: post #80
TylerE wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That will just lead to the Chinesium-ization of all things. No real innovation will occur...just churning out commodity designs in the Far East.

I always find comments like these amusing because it's exactly what people said of the Japanese in the 60's and 70's. And in exactly the same way, the Chinese (and other up and coming players) are innovating: just not in the areas that some people are looking. It starts with undercutting the market with low labour rates, but as times move on and the populace has higher expectations in terms of living conditions, the…

The Chinese model of innovation is very different, precisely because they have a very different notion of IP too:

https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=284

https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=4297

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#95

Post by randomdata »

douche wrote: post #9

There's going to be a huge market in used pre-DRM heavy machinery. The purely mechanical/hydraulic versions of this stuff is virtually indestructible, with a little maintenance.

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.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#96

Post by viggity »

itchyjunk wrote: post #6

"farmers could damage the machines, like bypassing pollution emissions controls to get more horsepower." Isn't this the problem with warranties? People could try to mod it, end up damaging it and try to get it replaced with warranties. I also don't fully understand this software. Is it just completely vendor locked? That sounds really unreasonable. It should allow for at least basic debugging and trouble shooting. Is…

forget damage the [million dollar] machine". an incorrectly modded component could, rather easily, kill or maim the operator. John Deere may not have authorized the component/root cause of the death, but you know they're gonna get dragged to court anyway

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#97

Post by TaylorAlexander »

bitwize wrote: post #57
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Companies like Microsoft would vanish" Heaven forbid! :-D I go around telling people what I think of copyright all the time, and this argument is one that I hear a lot. But I don't buy it. The body of open source content available today is proof that your argument is at the very least incomplete. Plenty of people do give their time away for free to make better things available to people without monetary benefit. A k…

Try making friends with a musician. Make sure they're a local act or play in a local band. Often they have mouths to feed and mortgages to pay, and would love to do so with their art but can't because the economics don't support it. Almost invariably, they talk about how it used to be better, back when people bought physical phonograph albums; among the musicians I know the politics are uniform: strong copyright help…

I am explicitly considering people totally unlike me, and I seriously think the musicians of the world would be better off without copyright too. Aside from the major rockstars, most artists I imagine are concerned with putting food on their tables, maintaining shelter over their heads, and keeping clothes on their backs.

I claim that without intellectual property the average person would have significantly more material wealth, the cost of living would be lower, and it would be much easier to maintain a living off of patronage than it is today.

My personal long term life goal is to understand how to reduce the marginal cost of supporting a human life to zero, so "we can have socialism for free" as I sometimes say. This necessarily requires that we eliminate artificially inflated costs, which is what intellectual property is. It requires other things, including more automation, but that will come. The issue is that more automation WITH intellectual property law means the wealthy of today will maintain their power over the poor tomorrow, continuing to artificially inflate prices for their own profits at the expense of average people. I believe that would be much more difficult to do if there were no intellectual property protections.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#98

Post by ksk »

olewhalehunter wrote: post #37
Pyxl101 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Everything open source" would take away the incentive for people to create essentially all media professionally: software, music, TVs/movies, podcasts, journalism, and more. Many industries would be destroyed if they didn't have the right to sell their creations (if anyone could copy them and give them away). I personally enjoy the media created by many organizations such as NPR, which made the article we're reading…

because good music, games, journalism, and useful algorithms didn't arrive in humanity until the invention of (EDIT) intellectual property law

They didn't.

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#99

Post by swampthinker »

Sytten wrote: post #85

My dad is a farmer and I can assure you that this is a real problem. Every piece of equipment now as its own proprietary, closed-source and, most of the time, incompatible software. Plus, many of them don't get any update after the product launch. When you are in rush to plant or harvest you just can`t afford to wait for an authorized dealer. And if they fail, good luck trying to find a replacement that is not 100x o…

Sounds like an opportunity...

Re: Farmers look for ways to circumvent tractor software locks

#100

Post by TeMPOraL »

elgenie wrote: post #32
notliketherest wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The result of a free market is that the better products will always win out. By your logic your statement could just have easily as been "to start a car company" or "to start a rocket company" or "to start a computer company". These are all examples of industries whose existing players were supplanted by a better idea with smart, passionate and dedicated entrepreneurs.

The result of a free market is that the better products will always win out. Then if the firms behind those products are well-run, they will use the dominant market position their products have granted them to try to raise barriers to entry and smother upstart competitors in their crib. "Car company" and "rocket company" are interesting examples, since the "smart, passionate and dedicated entrepreneurs" in those area…

Tesla (the "car company") and SpaceX (the "rocket company") should be forever banned from discussions about the awesomeness of free market, because they're outliers. They're driven by a person with clear goals for the actual change of the world conditions, and companies themselves are used only as best available tools to achieve those goals. This is as far from your typical companies and entrepreneurs as one can get.
Post reply on HN