A DRM exception for farmers? Why them and not the rest of us?
Farmers are the classic American go-to for everything politics. Be it guns, corn in Coke, pollution standards, healthcare, immigration ... everyone is ready to pity the poor farmer. I understand the rational. Farmers make the food we eat. They also embody an American fantasy harkening back to the old west. But this is also who I see red flags whenever I hear farmers brought up in reference to a law.
Farmers are the purchasers of equipment used in their business. Why give them a pass to bypass DRM but not the fishermen? Fishermen make food. Maritime law affords them special treatment in a similar manner as land use laws treat farmers. Surely fishermen have an equal tradition of self-sufficiency and are also deserving of an exception. And then come the taxi companies who have long maintained their own fleets. Soldiers? Surely we first need an exemption for the armed forces.
I cannot think of any profession without a tradition of maintaining its own equipment. That's probably because DRM is new tech. So it's impossible for anyone to have a tradition of accommodating and obeying DRM. As we all suffer it, we should all be free of it. No exemptions.
Let us instead pity the poor metal worker whose CNC machine cannot be moved across the shop floor without triggering its GPS-dependant DRM.
I totally agree on your assessment of the weird politics around farmers. But I also thought that the article was a good illustration of the general issues around DRM. Sometimes it takes a compelling example to illustrate a general principle. Until now I wasn't particularly opposed to DRM (at least when it used technical, rather than legal, mechanisms). But this article shows how locking people out of equipment they own has a tendency to be used in an economically inefficient way. In this case, milking people for repair costs that they don't fully consider when judging the purchase price.
I guess the counterargument is that DRM protects people from themselves (in this case, making repairs that would be better done by a professional). But the article made a good case for a lot farmers really wanting to be able to repair their own equipment.
> Let us instead pity the poor metal worker whose CNC machine cannot be moved across the shop floor without triggering its GPS-dependant DRM.
There's more to it than that. Machines in the sub .0001 precision class are so sensitive to being moved around that it can take weeks of careful calibration to get them to operate within spec. That 'gps-lockdown' is to make sure the machine doesn't get moved around just for the heck of it taking it out of spec and then having the manufacturer turn up after a bunch of complaining.
I'm not saying that that isn't being abused in this particular case but there actually can be good reasons for this. Ostensibly another reason is that some guy in Iran could set up a shop in the US as a front, buy a bunch of these machines and then ship them to evade an embargo so that's why they are locked to location.
In the case of high precision milling machines sometimes they have the machine make it's own calibrated clamp down area to compensate for any deformation suffered during a move. With lathes the situation is even more complex.
The calibration gear costs a multiple of what the machine itself costs, usually works on the laser-interferometry principle and is removed off-site after the initial calibration (it takes a totally different set of knowledge to operate than the knowledge required to operate the machine). So you can't just pick that machine up, move it 10', move it back and expect it to still produce acceptable work.
The original food pyramid differentiated red meat, evidence was already raising flags. Farmers protested, had it changed, and the senator working on it didn't get re-elected. Even today, our "food plate" doesn't call out red meat. It's entertaining to see USDA skirt the issue: none of their protein pictures are steak [1].
Compare and contrast against an evidence based model from Harvard [2].
The poor dietary recommendations provided by the USDA historically may have a lot to do with our obesity epidemic.
It's not a matter of pity or romanticism. Becoming dependent on imports for food is a national security concern. That's why farmers get subsidies and special treatment.
Where I work now, I'm basically paid to break into this stuff for a living. Its nothing but a mountain of 10-20 year old "protected" protocols. All of which are now unsupported, obsolete, or completely forgotten by long out of business companies.
If the farmers think its bad now, just wait a few years. DRM hurts everyone. Its like toxic waste. A huge externalized cost that lets a company eke out a small short term extra profit at the expense of society at large. We need "clean air act" level legislation to fix it. We've actively done the opposite.
I'm working for a precision ag company that has done work reverse engineering hydraulic systems, as well as building variable rate tech. I'd be keen to have a chat, if your interested in discussing your experiences. fanquake @ google mail
The other issue I think will be longevity. I grew up on a farm, and every piece of machinery that we used was older then I was by about 10 years, at least. Farmer's expect to purchase a tractor, and then run that piece of equipment for the entire life of the FARMER.
It feels like the tractor manufactures today are catering to the mega farms, not the smaller farms that make up a larger portion of our farming infrastructure. And the small farms only buy a new tractor every 10 - 20 years. Not every 3 - 5 years for a tax break.
That is the great thing about that old equipment, especially the really mass-produced models. Everything is mechanical, and most of it is built out of heavy duty steel, so between wire, duct tape, a stick welder, and a hammer, you can fix 90% of breakages. If something goes that isn't that easy, there are after-market manufacturers, or you can take something that isn't quite the right part and modify it to work, or find a salvage job on craigslist to scrounge from pretty easily.
I've got a John Deere M that is nearly 75 years old and still gets the job done.
That second comment nails it. Family farms are going the way of the dinosaur, and large outfits want a machine they can use for three seasons, depreciate and eliminate for both a tax write-off and upgrade.
I legitimately believe we'll see the death of true family farms in my lifetime (I'm in my 30's). What we'll see are family farms in name only, with a multi-million dollar, multi-national backend.
> the smaller farms that make up a larger portion of our farming infrastructure
Really? Do you have a citation for this?
All the data I have seen says that small farmers are basically nil in terms of production, profitability, and land area relative to the big mega farms.
I worked on a farm in high school in the 90s... They were a dairy and hay operation. The "new" tractor that ran the bakers and equipment was a 1950s Ford. They had serial ancient Farmalls from the 1930s that hauled wagons and pulled rakes. I don't recall ever having a serious breakdown.
I feel the same way about new automobiles. I look at a new car and I think "I wonder how many Computers, and Emission sensors that vechicle has?". "Will it be a pain in the ass
to work on?" (Don't get me wrong I like Emission standards, and performance, but engineers have gone Overboard!)
Repair is not as simple as hooking up a scanner to the ALDL
and replacing the faulty part. I had a newish Dodge truck
that had that was stalling(periodically). It was actually
owned and loved by a 70 plus relative, and loved this particular truck. I went to automotive school, so I have always worked on the family vechicles. Well I checked the
truck's computers with two different scanners--no faults.
I checked individual components with a DVOM--in spec's. Took
it to the Dealer--they couldn't find anything wrong. Well
it got worse over the years, and owner decided to bring it to another Dealer, after doing all my on diagnostics again. I
thought they might find the one sensor I missed. Well this is what they did; They literally replaced every sensor near,
or within a few feet of the Throttle Body---still didn't quite work, so they reflashed the computer--runs, but idles too high. They charged family member close to 3 grand. So
the only autos I actually get excited about are pre 1972, and
I don't feel good about it because they pollute.(exception--certain small engine cars like Toyota's from any year). While I'm on it--Motor Emission manuals are filled with errors. If your car fails smog, especially the visual, take it to a shop that has access to Online5(Mitchell manuals).
And No--1988 toyoya trucks(naturally aspirated) trucks were
not required to have a MIL light. The editors at Motor Publications didn't know the difference between naturally aspirated, and FI. I was beyond shocked!
Moral of story--practical use of technology--fine. Three computers, 5 02 sensors, literally a sensor wire going to
coffee cup holder--Fuffing Rediculious. (I have never seen
a sensor to coffee cup, but I wouldn't put it past them)
What sort of machinery did farmers use "back then." (not sure how old you are)
I ask, because some of these mega-tractors have a lot of functionality (more complexity seems to just cause more points of failure), but you can still buy a good old general purpose tractor that will last a lot longer.
*not a farmer, but really into homesteading and getting a small self sustaining farm going at some point.
If you're interested in heavy equipment we will be hiring for a full-time developer position(s) soon. Shoot me an email regardless and I'd love to chat: josh [at] dirtjockey.com.
Wired (and iFixit) are getting activist about DMCA exceptions. This is great. A couple weeks ago Kyle Weins wrote[1]:
"No one has yet been prosecuted for hacking their own car, but they could. And as locks become more prevalent, the EFF and iFixit are willing to bet that, eventually, some carmaker will bring the DMCA hammer down on a hobbyist's head. So we're are taking a stand now."
"Want to speak out in support of this DMCA exemption? Tell the Copyright Office that car owners should be able to repair and modify their own automobiles. You've got until February 6 to make your voice heard."
The most recent iteration is no match for the big commercial farm equipment, but it does have the notable advantage that being able to build it yourself necessarily means that you can diagnose its problems and repair it on the same terms.
Modern EPA requirements mean that it is impossible to design a compliant off highway commercial vehicle without relying on advanced electronic process controls. Your grandfather's tractor might be repairable with baling wire, but it also releases a ton more diesel particulates.
There's no incentive for companies to publish information on their vehicle bus interfaces, since it would basically give away trade secrets to competitors.
It sounds like there is a market for either a. Tractors with very limited electronics, but easily repairable, or b. Hi-tech tractors that are completely open systems.
What you have here is an industry ripe for disruption. John Deere makes enormous amounts of money on farm capital expenditure but also operational expenditure. But their service is crap (two days for a sensor to be fitted? Someone tell the weather not to rain or disrupt harvest, John Deere's equipment needs time to be repaired!).
In a market economy, one would think that someone would see an opportunity and, you know, compete.
Um, exactly what is your annual market for tractors when the average tractor is 10 years old?
Call it 20,000 tractors? Now, how much of that market are you going to pick off? And can you make a business of it?
This lack of volume is exactly why A) the companies are locking things down and B) the service calls take too much time. I'd bet that practically ALL the service calls occur right before spring planting and right before fall harvest. Thus, your service people are incredibly busy exactly twice a year and totally idle the rest.
This is also a case that pits different parts of the agricultural industry against each other. DRM might be great for the equipment manufacturer, but only if it doesn't hurt farmers interest in modern equipment.
Monsanto sells something they call FieldScripts: Based on weather databases, detailed soil information and topography, a big computer cluster calculates what should be the most profitable seeds that the company sells for each small patch of ground, and what seed density to use. Sometimes an area needs less density, or a seed that works better in wetter conditions, or a bunch of other little factors.
Well, to follow a script like that is not something you can do by hand, as it's way too much work. What you need to even use them is a machine that is modern enough that it can hold multiple different kinds of seed, and can be programmed to change what it's planting, and how it's planting it, as it goes. So you can't even do this with most traditional machines.
So if farmers do not want to buy those machines because of DRM issues, then Monsanto can either bin their product, as few people would ever use it, or use their lobbying pressure towards open standards in agricultural software and hardware, all while trying to keep seed technology as protected as the mouse's big round ears. It'd be pretty funny, if you ask me.
In reality giants like John Deere have such chokeholds on the market that they can either buy out "disrupters" or bankrupt them.
Hardware is so costly and slow moving compared to software that the swiftness of startups compared to incumbents isn't enough.
Tesla for example is basically a charity project where the automotive industry is being given the technology in order to encourage them to adopt it. If Tesla was being run for purely economical purposes the incumbents would have moved to buy it or crush it.
Allow me to play devil's advocate here. I used to work for a company that produces measurement equipment for professional technicians. It's big, complicated, dangerous, and expensive equipment that is comparable in cost to the tractors discussed in this article. The products employ a number of measures to prevent end-users from tampering with things that shouldn't be tampered with (especially the firmware). Partly this is to discourage piracy. But mainly this is done because the equipment is quite complicated and there are not many people in the world who understand the technology well enough to make repairs on their own. It's very easy to cause unintentional errors that can cause much more serious damage than the original minor problem. And when the failure of your equipment can cause serious property damage, injury, or death are you going to make it easy for people to modify your product's firmware?
Considering literally anything can be used to harm, kill, or maim (I actually have a friend who was severely injured by a pineapple) if used incorrectly, I say it's better to have open-source knowledge so we learn how to properly use something rather than sit in proprietary ignorance and hope nothing bad happens.
Besides, knives, cars, guns, indoor plumbing, house wiring, etc., are all just as if not more dangerous than farming equipment. Just slap a good ol' MIT license agreement somewhere on your product so that it's clear to the user "if you do X, you void the warranty and you're solely responsible for whatever damage you might cause."
Make it open. Then add warnings and void the warranty. If someone has a legitimate need to modify it they should be able. If it's that dangerous one would hope the care used in operating goes goes tenfold for any modifications.
If it is big and complicated, your users probably don't want to modify it for fear of causing damage. If they do, the risk is on them. If someone wants to modify it they will. Wouldn't you rather they have all the information rather than trying to obscure it?
>But mainly this is done because the equipment is quite complicated
Magic!
>And when the failure of your equipment can cause serious property damage, injury, or death are you going to make it easy for people to modify your product's firmware?
Yes. Everyone has a disclaimer "not to be used on life-support systems, you're responsible when you screw the pooch".
>are you going to make it easy for people to modify your product's firmware?
It's not always about customizing someone's OEM product; sometimes it's about getting two pieces of equipment to work together.
ie: John Deere tractor + implement that John Deere doesn't even make, or customized implement, or even, customized JD tractor for a special purpose.
There are alternatives to making your machine unmaintainable (which has it's own risks) after your company goes bust, like monitoring it and adequately documenting it.
Repair-ability is often underestimated. SMT was going to be the end of repairable electronics, for example.
Provide the entirety of the source for free yet lock down the machine from modifications. If the user wants to modify their machine they can contact you for an unlock code at the cost of their warranty.
I was under the impression that farms increasingly rely on the "Tractor as a Service" business model, i.e. they pay someone who has a fleet of the latest tractors (incl operators) to harvest their fields etc.
This sounds like the same experience people have with their out-of-warranty german cars. Either take it to the stealership or buy diagnostic system made by non-VW guys. Even if you have the diagnostic system to read codes from ECU, you are left wih testing many sensors: whether the sensor needs to be replaced or cleaned. But one has to know the details of resistance etc to test the said sensor.
And these sensors are not cheap. They cost more than a tire!!
I actually find new electronic automotive systems to be easier than the "old way" (tracing wires, probing with a multimeter, etc.): oftentimes the issue will have diagnosed itself, and, if not, the ECU diagnostic tool will have an actual value display and a list of actuators you can hit to see if the sensor responds appropriately. I've never seen a sensor that's more than about $150, but I'm sure they're out there.
The frustrating part (which is indeed common to German cars and high-end tractors) is that the diagnostic systems are all loaded with unnecessary and ridiculous manufacturer protectionism. You can't even clear the "Change Oil" light on a new Porsche without a Porsche diagnostic system or the reverse-engineered clone tool (Durametric). And even once you've found a broken sensor or component, it's often pointlessly "coded" (its serial number written into an EEPROM) such that the factory diagnostics tool needs to bless its replacement.
"But under modern copyright laws, that kind of “repairing” is legally questionable."
Questionable? If it becomes politically unpopular enough, they will certainly jail people for it. It's explicitly illegal but those laws are not evenly enforced. They seem to acknowledge the DMCA but then fall back to the "questionable" position saying it's "entirely possible" the farmer becomes a criminal. This is video game console modding, they are even using pirated proprietary software.
INAL, am I misunderstanding the state of things? Is there some reason, besides the political weakness created by going after farmers, that this is "questionable"?
Let me play devil's advocate here and suggest a few reasons why bypassing this "minor hydraulic sensor" might not be the smartest move.
1) Someone might get hurt.
2) Some really expensive part of the machine might get damaged.
It is within the realm of possibility that the engineers who designed this system knew what they were doing when they decided to shut down an entire machine when a single "minor hydraulic sensor" goes bad.
It's also entirely plausible that shutting down everything is the default behavior when a problem is detected. It's much simpler from an engineering standpoint, and safer for the manufacturer.
Farm boys have been taking their lives into their own hands since time began by fixing their own equipment. Somehow, I doubt that those (completely plausible) reasons are enough to justify curtailing a basic freedom of owning one's own capital.
Not being able to fix things yourself is bad for the environment. Things that you use and throw is by design bad.
DRM also means not being able to improve on the product created by the corporate entity.
As hackers we need to be able to tinker and repair the things we have bought. Components that we by need to be recycled. Your old cell phone and laptop needs to be converted to a new one not thrown on the junk yard as trash or end up at tash dumps in Africa or China.
This is the classic, unfortunate reality - the disconnect between what is legal and what is right. Yes, the companies are well within their rights to restrict access to the internals of products they sell. But by doing that, they are just being total assholes. In this case we have companies literally providing negative value (relative to older, non-DRMed equipment) and charging more.
The problem is the pervasiveness of our new business models that depend on perpetual dependence and licensing. It is rather ironic that in the country most obnoxious about freedom and personal property, we never really own anything; we are a culture that has been groomed on dependence on the corporate matrix.
The same issue exists, on a larger scale, for cars. Manufacturers have a motivation to lock you into dealer maintenance and DRM on the electronics is a great tool for this. We need to be the ones to educate consumers that its good when thing are hackable.
[+] [-] sandworm|11 years ago|reply
Farmers are the classic American go-to for everything politics. Be it guns, corn in Coke, pollution standards, healthcare, immigration ... everyone is ready to pity the poor farmer. I understand the rational. Farmers make the food we eat. They also embody an American fantasy harkening back to the old west. But this is also who I see red flags whenever I hear farmers brought up in reference to a law.
Farmers are the purchasers of equipment used in their business. Why give them a pass to bypass DRM but not the fishermen? Fishermen make food. Maritime law affords them special treatment in a similar manner as land use laws treat farmers. Surely fishermen have an equal tradition of self-sufficiency and are also deserving of an exception. And then come the taxi companies who have long maintained their own fleets. Soldiers? Surely we first need an exemption for the armed forces.
I cannot think of any profession without a tradition of maintaining its own equipment. That's probably because DRM is new tech. So it's impossible for anyone to have a tradition of accommodating and obeying DRM. As we all suffer it, we should all be free of it. No exemptions.
Let us instead pity the poor metal worker whose CNC machine cannot be moved across the shop floor without triggering its GPS-dependant DRM.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140109/03060325817/lates...
[+] [-] swatow|11 years ago|reply
I guess the counterargument is that DRM protects people from themselves (in this case, making repairs that would be better done by a professional). But the article made a good case for a lot farmers really wanting to be able to repair their own equipment.
[+] [-] jacquesm|11 years ago|reply
There's more to it than that. Machines in the sub .0001 precision class are so sensitive to being moved around that it can take weeks of careful calibration to get them to operate within spec. That 'gps-lockdown' is to make sure the machine doesn't get moved around just for the heck of it taking it out of spec and then having the manufacturer turn up after a bunch of complaining.
I'm not saying that that isn't being abused in this particular case but there actually can be good reasons for this. Ostensibly another reason is that some guy in Iran could set up a shop in the US as a front, buy a bunch of these machines and then ship them to evade an embargo so that's why they are locked to location.
In the case of high precision milling machines sometimes they have the machine make it's own calibrated clamp down area to compensate for any deformation suffered during a move. With lathes the situation is even more complex.
The calibration gear costs a multiple of what the machine itself costs, usually works on the laser-interferometry principle and is removed off-site after the initial calibration (it takes a totally different set of knowledge to operate than the knowledge required to operate the machine). So you can't just pick that machine up, move it 10', move it back and expect it to still produce acceptable work.
[+] [-] abandonliberty|11 years ago|reply
Compare and contrast against an evidence based model from Harvard [2].
The poor dietary recommendations provided by the USDA historically may have a lot to do with our obesity epidemic.
Don't mess with farmers.
[1] http://www.choosemyplate.gov/food-groups/protein-foods-tips.... [2] http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-p...
[+] [-] LLWM|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] noonespecial|11 years ago|reply
If the farmers think its bad now, just wait a few years. DRM hurts everyone. Its like toxic waste. A huge externalized cost that lets a company eke out a small short term extra profit at the expense of society at large. We need "clean air act" level legislation to fix it. We've actively done the opposite.
[+] [-] jonathantm|11 years ago|reply
Yes! The depleted plutonium of technical debt.
[+] [-] joshmlewis|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mey|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fanquake|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raverbashing|11 years ago|reply
See how any DRM of old software is more easily breakable today than at that time.
(Still is a pain, though)
[+] [-] Trisell|11 years ago|reply
It feels like the tractor manufactures today are catering to the mega farms, not the smaller farms that make up a larger portion of our farming infrastructure. And the small farms only buy a new tractor every 10 - 20 years. Not every 3 - 5 years for a tax break.
[+] [-] megaman22|11 years ago|reply
I've got a John Deere M that is nearly 75 years old and still gets the job done.
[+] [-] Loughla|11 years ago|reply
I legitimately believe we'll see the death of true family farms in my lifetime (I'm in my 30's). What we'll see are family farms in name only, with a multi-million dollar, multi-national backend.
[+] [-] bsder|11 years ago|reply
Really? Do you have a citation for this?
All the data I have seen says that small farmers are basically nil in terms of production, profitability, and land area relative to the big mega farms.
[+] [-] Spooky23|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] digi_owl|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] marincounty|11 years ago|reply
Repair is not as simple as hooking up a scanner to the ALDL and replacing the faulty part. I had a newish Dodge truck that had that was stalling(periodically). It was actually owned and loved by a 70 plus relative, and loved this particular truck. I went to automotive school, so I have always worked on the family vechicles. Well I checked the truck's computers with two different scanners--no faults. I checked individual components with a DVOM--in spec's. Took it to the Dealer--they couldn't find anything wrong. Well it got worse over the years, and owner decided to bring it to another Dealer, after doing all my on diagnostics again. I thought they might find the one sensor I missed. Well this is what they did; They literally replaced every sensor near, or within a few feet of the Throttle Body---still didn't quite work, so they reflashed the computer--runs, but idles too high. They charged family member close to 3 grand. So the only autos I actually get excited about are pre 1972, and I don't feel good about it because they pollute.(exception--certain small engine cars like Toyota's from any year). While I'm on it--Motor Emission manuals are filled with errors. If your car fails smog, especially the visual, take it to a shop that has access to Online5(Mitchell manuals).
And No--1988 toyoya trucks(naturally aspirated) trucks were not required to have a MIL light. The editors at Motor Publications didn't know the difference between naturally aspirated, and FI. I was beyond shocked!
Moral of story--practical use of technology--fine. Three computers, 5 02 sensors, literally a sensor wire going to coffee cup holder--Fuffing Rediculious. (I have never seen a sensor to coffee cup, but I wouldn't put it past them)
[+] [-] will_work4tears|11 years ago|reply
I ask, because some of these mega-tractors have a lot of functionality (more complexity seems to just cause more points of failure), but you can still buy a good old general purpose tractor that will last a lot longer.
*not a farmer, but really into homesteading and getting a small self sustaining farm going at some point.
[+] [-] joshmlewis|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tormeh|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jonah|11 years ago|reply
"No one has yet been prosecuted for hacking their own car, but they could. And as locks become more prevalent, the EFF and iFixit are willing to bet that, eventually, some carmaker will bring the DMCA hammer down on a hobbyist's head. So we're are taking a stand now."
"Want to speak out in support of this DMCA exemption? Tell the Copyright Office that car owners should be able to repair and modify their own automobiles. You've got until February 6 to make your voice heard."
HN discussed that article too.[2]
[1] http://www.wired.com/2015/01/let-us-hack-our-cars/
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8936382
[+] [-] logfromblammo|11 years ago|reply
The most recent iteration is no match for the big commercial farm equipment, but it does have the notable advantage that being able to build it yourself necessarily means that you can diagnose its problems and repair it on the same terms.
[+] [-] agoetz|11 years ago|reply
http://www.deere.com/en_US/ProductCatalog/FR/media/pdf/8r_se...
There's no incentive for companies to publish information on their vehicle bus interfaces, since it would basically give away trade secrets to competitors.
[+] [-] chris_wot|11 years ago|reply
What you have here is an industry ripe for disruption. John Deere makes enormous amounts of money on farm capital expenditure but also operational expenditure. But their service is crap (two days for a sensor to be fitted? Someone tell the weather not to rain or disrupt harvest, John Deere's equipment needs time to be repaired!).
In a market economy, one would think that someone would see an opportunity and, you know, compete.
[+] [-] bsder|11 years ago|reply
Call it 20,000 tractors? Now, how much of that market are you going to pick off? And can you make a business of it?
This lack of volume is exactly why A) the companies are locking things down and B) the service calls take too much time. I'd bet that practically ALL the service calls occur right before spring planting and right before fall harvest. Thus, your service people are incredibly busy exactly twice a year and totally idle the rest.
(My estimations look about right: http://www.farmersguardian.com/home/machinery/machinery-news... "John Deere has retained its tractor market share of about 30 per cent in 2010, putting it top of the table again with 4,427 units sold."
[+] [-] hibikir|11 years ago|reply
Monsanto sells something they call FieldScripts: Based on weather databases, detailed soil information and topography, a big computer cluster calculates what should be the most profitable seeds that the company sells for each small patch of ground, and what seed density to use. Sometimes an area needs less density, or a seed that works better in wetter conditions, or a bunch of other little factors.
Well, to follow a script like that is not something you can do by hand, as it's way too much work. What you need to even use them is a machine that is modern enough that it can hold multiple different kinds of seed, and can be programmed to change what it's planting, and how it's planting it, as it goes. So you can't even do this with most traditional machines.
So if farmers do not want to buy those machines because of DRM issues, then Monsanto can either bin their product, as few people would ever use it, or use their lobbying pressure towards open standards in agricultural software and hardware, all while trying to keep seed technology as protected as the mouse's big round ears. It'd be pretty funny, if you ask me.
[+] [-] Perdition|11 years ago|reply
Hardware is so costly and slow moving compared to software that the swiftness of startups compared to incumbents isn't enough.
Tesla for example is basically a charity project where the automotive industry is being given the technology in order to encourage them to adopt it. If Tesla was being run for purely economical purposes the incumbents would have moved to buy it or crush it.
[+] [-] rjdagost|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ffn|11 years ago|reply
Besides, knives, cars, guns, indoor plumbing, house wiring, etc., are all just as if not more dangerous than farming equipment. Just slap a good ol' MIT license agreement somewhere on your product so that it's clear to the user "if you do X, you void the warranty and you're solely responsible for whatever damage you might cause."
[+] [-] Xorlev|11 years ago|reply
If it is big and complicated, your users probably don't want to modify it for fear of causing damage. If they do, the risk is on them. If someone wants to modify it they will. Wouldn't you rather they have all the information rather than trying to obscure it?
[+] [-] fnordfnordfnord|11 years ago|reply
Magic!
>And when the failure of your equipment can cause serious property damage, injury, or death are you going to make it easy for people to modify your product's firmware?
Yes. Everyone has a disclaimer "not to be used on life-support systems, you're responsible when you screw the pooch".
>are you going to make it easy for people to modify your product's firmware?
It's not always about customizing someone's OEM product; sometimes it's about getting two pieces of equipment to work together.
ie: John Deere tractor + implement that John Deere doesn't even make, or customized implement, or even, customized JD tractor for a special purpose.
[+] [-] Zigurd|11 years ago|reply
Repair-ability is often underestimated. SMT was going to be the end of repairable electronics, for example.
[+] [-] Igglyboo|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ejain|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Spooky23|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raincom|11 years ago|reply
And these sensors are not cheap. They cost more than a tire!!
[+] [-] bri3d|11 years ago|reply
The frustrating part (which is indeed common to German cars and high-end tractors) is that the diagnostic systems are all loaded with unnecessary and ridiculous manufacturer protectionism. You can't even clear the "Change Oil" light on a new Porsche without a Porsche diagnostic system or the reverse-engineered clone tool (Durametric). And even once you've found a broken sensor or component, it's often pointlessly "coded" (its serial number written into an EEPROM) such that the factory diagnostics tool needs to bless its replacement.
[+] [-] freshhawk|11 years ago|reply
Questionable? If it becomes politically unpopular enough, they will certainly jail people for it. It's explicitly illegal but those laws are not evenly enforced. They seem to acknowledge the DMCA but then fall back to the "questionable" position saying it's "entirely possible" the farmer becomes a criminal. This is video game console modding, they are even using pirated proprietary software.
INAL, am I misunderstanding the state of things? Is there some reason, besides the political weakness created by going after farmers, that this is "questionable"?
[+] [-] merrua|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] swamp40|11 years ago|reply
1) Someone might get hurt.
2) Some really expensive part of the machine might get damaged.
It is within the realm of possibility that the engineers who designed this system knew what they were doing when they decided to shut down an entire machine when a single "minor hydraulic sensor" goes bad.
[+] [-] joelthelion|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] angersock|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Jemaclus|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] acd|11 years ago|reply
As hackers we need to be able to tinker and repair the things we have bought. Components that we by need to be recycled. Your old cell phone and laptop needs to be converted to a new one not thrown on the junk yard as trash or end up at tash dumps in Africa or China.
[+] [-] TeMPOraL|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fredgrott|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wahsd|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] georgeecollins|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Aardwolf|11 years ago|reply
Would that be legal circumvention of the DRM?