How is this practice even legal? Could auto manafuctirers do the same thing? I'm sure they discourage aftermarket programming and whatnot, but using DRM to prevent DIY repairs is bringing things to a whole new level.
EDIT: By the way, I favor owner's rights (my family farms with Deere equipment, and I think there's tons of mutual advantage in open sourcing software in this case specifically and in general), but as is often the case, the "greedy corporate oppressor" narrative is too simple.
But I do think there's a lot of room for detecting what changes were made and honoring / invalidating the warranty depending on them. Rather than simply saying "something was changed, therefore we invalidate the whole warranty."
What part of the things you describe aren't done with the purpose of making the company money? I mean, "we're risk-averse so we force the risk onto you" is kind of the same as "we don't want to spend money so we inconvenience you".
Of course, companies are in business to make money and will tend to use whatever avenues are open. When a company starts using a monopoly position to impose legal restrictions on customers (whether to avoid risk of losing money or just to make money), sympathy for their money-making efforts tends to lessen.
Edit: Note that the approach of Deer is not warranty voiding if someone hacks the software but a license agreement which effectively terminates the ability of the farmer to use the vehicle and thus the defense above is pretty disingenuous.
See: https://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/
2. What monopoly are you proposing? A monopoly on the software that comes with the tractor?
Deere effectively has a monopoly on tractors at the scale discussed in the article. That's why farmers are buying the tractors and illegally moding them rather than buying competing brands - see comments elsewhere on this page.
And, of course, they're leveraging new legal concepts which allow them to sell their tractors while maintaining control over them through software licenses.
This can also be viewed as the more general "companies act in a way that gives them the best chance of continued indeterminate existence."
Of course, most companies exist to make money. A few companies might other do good things in the mean time (go out of their way to hire under-privileged youth or something). But the assumption of liberal capitalism is that following market forces will usually do good and when it won't there are or should be laws saying otherwise.
So the "bad" companies aren't the "greedy companies" but rather those companies which either break the law or "pervert" the law - find their ways around laws that should be there or use their influence to create laws that shouldn't be there. That is, unethical corporations but not necessarily more greedy that a company hoping to make lots of money fully in the bounds of the law.
But despite this, "Corporate Greed" is shouted on the left as an objection (an objection that really makes no sense for left, right or center damn it).
And with this weak argument on the left, comes the equally disingenuous argument, "not bad because not greedy" which winds-up being a content-less defense. "What you're abusing those people but even aiming to profit by it, tell me again why this makes it OK?"
Anyway, There's nothing nefarious about protecting your profits by avoiding liability. You seem to want Deere to be this evil corporation, which simply doesn't resonate with my experience in any way.
JD has to answer to the EPA. See Tier IV.
It is highly unlikely this will work out very well for JD.
Things like ODBII Regulations, which do only Apply to Highyway Vehicles, and all of the regulations that come out of the USDOT for Highway rated Vehicles.
He reminisced about the good old days when all you needed was a wrench and a hammer and you could fix anything on a car.
This was 10 years ago. I imagine it's only gotten worse since.
Coincidentally he grew up on a farm where they would hack and build from scratch all sorts of farm equipment.
There is no vehicle on the market (that I know of) which will refuse to run without an oil change.
On my 17 year old BMW and 2 year old VW, the oil service indicator is just a reminder, a courtesy. On the BMW I can reset it with a paper clip. On the VW I can reset it on the screen on the dash.
Honestly, most of the major things that go wrong with cars these days are still mechanical, and are still fixed in the old-fashioned way. I've done countless brake jobs, oil changes, suspension changes, fluid changes, cooling system swaps, and never once been stymied by a computer.
Want to replace your relatively simple Volvo throttle body with a junkyard pull? Nope, it's programmed to your VIN.
Similar for many radios. And the notoriously glitchy matrix display on the dash cluster of 90s BMW's.
Also, PCM and body control modules, and more I've forgotten.
Similar for things like 3rd row removable seats and tailgates on trucks. Craigslist and eBay have more of these for sale than would make sense if they weren't being stolen.
Here John Deere is not simply accused of making it more complex, but prohibiting any and all repairs not authorized by their own propriety computer software.
I have a snap-on mt2500, and two other generic scan tools. I can get hard codes on most vechicles. I can't get certain codes or repair information on many newer vechicles.
The problem arises when you have an intermittent problem, and need access into those propriatiatry systems. The dealerships get software updates, but automotive companies are not required to inform anyone that there's been an change to the existing software.
In states like CA, which are very strict with emissions; failing a smog check because you have on old version of firmware is beyond frustrating. Most people have no idea that the reason they failed is due to an older software. Most smog shops don't even have information the dealerships have. It's a lot of trial and error to get that vechicle to pass those smog checks. It's not right. It should violate The Sherman Anti-Trust Act?
There are many indepent Auto Shops that are hobbled.
They need access to at least the dealership scan tool. I believe Massachusetts is the only state that enacted a "Right to Repair" law. If you live in that state, you can buy expensive dealership repair manuals, and get the opportunity to spend thousands on their scan tools. Just to find out what system/lazy sensor/etc. is broken in a vechicle you bought?
Having to take you vechicle to only the dealership is---un-American?
I thought you should know.
For me, nearly this entire page of comments show up as [dead]: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=icantdrive55&next=12...
I'm sure it was hyperbole to an extent. I don't know enough about the practice of fixing cars to know where the line lies. I just know what he said.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I usually do it by pressing the indicator with my feet and turning the key by hand.
I know people who bought brand new 2016 BMWs and Mercs, and the first thing they did was mod them - and the computer seems to work fine with whatever silly things they did with the engine.
So I don't think it's all that bad.
Honestly I'm really sick of hearing idiotic stories like this. You need to demand that he tell you exactly what car is like this (basically, "citation needed").
My 2015 Mazda is the easiest car to change oil that I've ever seen. There's a service panel on the bottom of the car that comes open with two screws, and inside is the drain bolt and the filter right next to it (hanging down, so it won't pour oil all over when you unscrew the filter). It really couldn't be any easier. Drain the oil, replace the filter, replace the crush-washer on the drain bolt and put it back on at ~35 lb-ft, pour more oil in the fill hole on top of the engine. Then, on the infotainment system, you just navigate to the "maintenance" section where the oil-change reminder is, select "Reset" and you're done. The system even has flexible oil change intervals and will tell you when to change it based on your driving habits; mine lets me go 7500-10000 miles between changes.
This canard about "proprietary interfaces only sold to licensed dealers" is either total bullshit, or is only on certain (likely high-end luxury) cars that are easy to avoid.
(Edit: to be fair there is some of this for certain things and certain cars. But it doesn't exist as far as I've seen for basic maintenance tasks, it just seems to be something created in the minds of old people and passed around as rumor until it became accepted as truth. One example of something that really is like this I've heard of is some high-end cars with electrically-adjustable suspensions, requiring a special dealer-only service tool to calibrate it in case of repairs. But you're not going to see this on a $20K Honda any time soon; regular cars these days still have the same ol' completely mechanical MacPherson strut suspensions they've had for ages.)
>He reminisced about the good old days when all you needed was a wrench and a hammer and you could fix anything on a car.
That's bullshit too. Cars have always needed all kinds of specialized tools. Disc brake spreaders, steering wheel pullers, spark plug gap tools, feeler gauges, torque wrenches (try replacing a con-rod without one and see how long your engine lasts), cylinder hones, I could go on and on.
ODBII regulations for Highway Vehicles are what prevents the bulk of it today. ODBII does not apply to non-road vehicles like Tractors.
However Automanufacturers are moving anything that is not required by ODBII (which was passed in 1996 so it very out dated) to CANBUS and disallowing 3rd parties access. This makes is harder for Independent shops to service some of the non-mechanical parts of the car like the GPS, Radio, power seats, etc
If it was about greenhouse gasses they'd let you keep the "dirty" car because the extra pound or two of emissions per gallon compared to a new car doesn't offset the carbon cost of building a new car from scratch.
This is essentially a highly regressive tax scheme that subsidises auto makers and dealerships at the disproportionate expense of poorer working Americans. It gives auto manufactures a "replace car" light that they can activate and have enforced by law and thus, planned obsolescence.
As someone who grew up poor and has spent time not having access to food in order to replace a useless sensor in a family vehicle (or paying a fine related to not having a valid inspection sticker) and knowing many other families who have been in the same situation. I have seen first hand the issues with this policy.
As for "ripping apart the dashboard" to get to the "useless" sensor, what kind of car was this?