Slashdot Mirror
American Farmers Are Still Fighting Tractor Software Locks (npr.org)
Manufacturers lock consumers into restrictive "user agreements," and inside "there's things like you won't open the case, you won't repair," complains a U.S. advocacy group called The Repair Association. But now the issue is getting some more attention in the American press. An anonymous reader quotes NPR:
Modern tractors, essentially, have two keys to make the engine work. One key starts the engine. But because today's tractors are high-tech machines that can steer themselves by GPS, you also need a software key -- to fix the programs that make a tractor run properly. And farmers don't get that key.
"You're paying for the metal but the electronic parts technically you don't own it. They do," says Kyle Schwarting, who plants and harvests fields in southeast Nebraska... "Maybe a gasket or something you can fix, but everything else is computer controlled and so if it breaks down I'm really in a bad spot," Schwarting says. He has to call the dealer. Only dealerships have the software to make those parts work, and it costs hundreds of dollars just to get a service call. Schwarting worries about being broken down in a field, waiting for a dealer to show up with a software key.
The article points out that equipment dealers are using those expensive repair calls to offset slumping tractor sales. But it also reports that eight U.S. states, including Nebraska, Illinois and New York, are still considering bills requiring manufacturers to sell repair software, adding that after Massachusetts passed a similar lar, "car makers started selling repair software."
"You're paying for the metal but the electronic parts technically you don't own it. They do," says Kyle Schwarting, who plants and harvests fields in southeast Nebraska... "Maybe a gasket or something you can fix, but everything else is computer controlled and so if it breaks down I'm really in a bad spot," Schwarting says. He has to call the dealer. Only dealerships have the software to make those parts work, and it costs hundreds of dollars just to get a service call. Schwarting worries about being broken down in a field, waiting for a dealer to show up with a software key.
The article points out that equipment dealers are using those expensive repair calls to offset slumping tractor sales. But it also reports that eight U.S. states, including Nebraska, Illinois and New York, are still considering bills requiring manufacturers to sell repair software, adding that after Massachusetts passed a similar lar, "car makers started selling repair software."
I think it's a great thing that people who typically vote for more corporate freedom finally get to see the price of unrestrained corporatism.
How long until slashdot fixes the mistake in the summary? it is currently 7:04 am EST
Also how long until manufacturer's realize that by artificially limiting options and driving up price they drive themselves out of business?
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
It seems like somebody needs to step in and develop a root kit for those tractors.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Until now, the whole "software lock in" thing has been something few politicians can grasp. Worse, it's something that few of their constituents give a shit about, so they don't bother to even try to understand it. Usually, everyone who would has something else they care about and few actually depend on it for a living. Outside Silicon Valley, who gave 2 shits about software?
This could definitely be a game changer. First, farmers are a VERY vocal group and the proverbial epitome of freedom of the land, founder spirit and everything that the average American feels good about. Everyone has a farmer somewhere in his ancestry and everyone can at least somehow understand how that's important. These people make the stuff you eat, after all!
And more important, people understand fixing agricultural machines. Maybe they don't do it themselves, but basically everyone who didn't exclusively grow up in a downtown area of a metropolis has at some point in time notice that these things break down and that some oil-covered mechanic is working his magic lying underneath one of those beasts to make it wroom again. People understand that this is a necessity, and more important, people expect this to be possible. They grew up with this being possible. This not being possible is something they'd consider impossible, and, worse, someone keeping you from fixing something you own, at least if it's something outside the "fixing costs more than buying a new one" throwaway-appliance garbage, is someone people consider despicable.
This could wake up our politicians. Mostly because it's no longer large corporate lobbying groups against consumers. It's large corporate lobbying groups against large farmer lobbying groups.
Grab the popcorn, folks, this is going to get interesting!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"If the consumer can not repair the purchased item, then the vendor must provide free parts and labour for the advertised lifetime of the item, provided within a reasonable response time for the industry and item in question".
In other words, a mandatory all-encompassing warranty with an SLA.
You want to lock in your customer base? How about the customer base locks in the manufacturer?
It is quite simple. If you lock your software with DRM or artificial lock, the unrestricted warranty of whole product including hw+sw fix automatically rise from 1(2) to 10 years. And the manufacturer / vendor is hereby required to be able to fix any issue on such product until the copyright to it is expired.
Except that if you buy Chinese you will have to buy a new tractor each time it breaks down. But maybe that's cheaper - you may get two Chinese tractors for the price of one American.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
The farmers have voted for the candidate that will be all for the farmers and will be doing what is needed for the farmers. Right?
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
The real solution however is for us tech nerds to start performing outreach to the farming community and get them on board to lobby together against hardware enforced software signing. With the brunt of America's farming community behind us (as a result of their own problems caused by Tivo-ized tractors.) we should have no trouble pushing legislation through congress to end Tivoization once and for all.
Maybe a nationwide boycott by the farming and techie community. Let's see how everybody feels after a week or two of internet and agriculture blackouts.
Shouldn't free market solution is that someone can develop and sell alternative software? Why aren't the free market people telling us why this isn't happening?
FREE MARKET ZEALOTS, PLEASE SPEAK UP!
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
If someone spends $90,000 on a brand-new Tesla and a "service call" costs a few hundred dollars, that's likely a reasonable and expected expense for a complex machine, as long as those service calls don't happen too frequently. By comparison, farmers are spending 2-3x more on high-end computer-controlled farming equipment, so what is a reasonable cost for service calls? Again, not trying to justify a vendor ripping off a customer, but from a cost vs. maintenance expense ratio, bitching about a few hundred dollars seems like a hollow complaint. Bottom line is your farming equipment needs more than a 1/2" wrench and a flathead screwdriver to work on these days, just like your new car.
Are vendors being greedy, or are they controlling what an end-user can do with their equipment because of the complexity, and perhaps even safety? Joe Mechanic sure as hell isn't gonna pop the titanium lid and DIY his Tesla battery bank. If it turns out to be little more than vendor greed, then certainly ensure that it becomes fair for all parties involved.
Those who hate the complexity of modern equipment have a simple solution too; go buy 40-year old shit.
Selling the software is not a valid response. Make that repair software free and easy to get. If they can't make a profit simply building tractors get out of the business. The idea is to build a better and cheaper tractor and the best company stays alive. Those that can't compete and use tactics to force people to spend money need to be put out of business. The auto industry is loaded with the same type of corruption. Tesla has a superior product and the industry is trying like crazy to pull any stunt that will hurt Tesla. If you can't compete move other and let others pass you by.
The only real farming left in the US are large industrial farms.
Quit parroting that left wing lie. It's total bullshit that one 5 second Google query absolutely disproves.
"using those expensive repair calls to offset slumping tractor sales."
maybe people dont want to buy new tractors with this new "tractor with expensive propitiatory software, so they are keeping their old tractors, and even buying old tractors because they can fix them their selves without some greedy corporate tractor dealer scalping their pocketbooks every time they need work done on their tractor
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
. . . I see no mention of any other company than John Deere doing this, and only on recent models.
I see no mention of New Holland, Kubota, Mahindra, or other brands. Seems like a marketing advantage for all the other brands.
This looks like John Deere's "New Coke" moment , , , ,
Except that if you buy Chinese you will have to buy a new tractor each time it breaks down. But maybe that's cheaper - you may get two Chinese tractors for the price of one American.
That's not necessarily a bad thing although I'd go for E-European or Ukrainian before Chinese but that requires you to be a bit more hands-on (like farmers used to be) and fix stuff yourself unlike when you use western equipment where you typically call in a service person. If Americans can use AK-47s without being worried about catching communism from them why not Ukrainian trucks or tractors? I came across a bunch of civilianized Ukrainian KrAZ army trucks in a farming village in western Europe and we're not talking some former communist nation, this was deep inside bedrock NATO territory. So I'm walking around these things taking a very close look, largely because I'd seen these beasts in news footage from war zones except painted green instead of red and with rocket artillery or AAA guns in place of the hydraulic open-box bed, when this guy shows up. He asks if he can help me so I just told him the truth, that I was pretty amazed to see these things in that particular corner of the world, which made him quite a lot more friendly and we got talking. He told me that him and several farmers in the area had decided to set up a truck pool and found it was an expensive proposition until somebody discovered that several of these Soviet/Ukrainian cold war army trucks could be had brand spanking new for the price of a much smaller number of MAN,Mercedes,Volvo,... trucks, so they just bought a couple of dozen of these things. There was little that could break down, when it did the parts were cheap, electronics were minimal and they had hired a Ukrainian mechanic to maintain them who knew these things better than his own trouser pockets.
...how often does the software actually break?
Once a year per vehicle? Once every ten years per fleet?
And I'm ALL FOR Right To Repair laws, and have spent literally hundreds of hours this year alone tearing apart things from vacuums, to computers, to synthesizers.
But before I can just give this guy my vote of support, I need to know what the actual stakes are.
The article doesn't provide any more details. Though, the quotes from the manufacturer already make me lean toward him. The manufacturer is trying to "protect pollution controls" (my ass) and "ensure resellability"... how does software impact vehicle wear? A vehicle hits a pothole, it breaks a rim. You check the rim. An engine blows, you replace the engine. What the hell could the software possibly touch that isn't also a part that could also mechanically fail?
adding that after Massachusetts passed a similar lar
Ermehgerd they persed a similar lar!
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
When and if I become a hipster farmer, I want to chill during my tractor experience. And when I call for support I want the call center to be supportive and say to me that I'm OK. The actual problem mustn't be mentioned as it is so coarse to do so.
No, I'd only want to sit in a comfy chair. On mild days wearing sun glasses. Contemplating the world. Gently stroking my Al Qaeda beard. Feeling good about how good I feel.
And when the harvest fails I'll activate the suing experience that will take care of the tractor experience provider.
But all the way I'll smile like an idiot behind my beard. Let us do farming and it suddenly becomes cool, neat and a doddle.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
I'm not going to say I have strong evidence to disagree with your observations about farmers. But I do live in an area that's still largely rural, in Western Maryland. And my interactions with them (including doing some computer service work for a couple of them) tells me they're not very different from anyone else trying to remain successful, running their own small business.
Last I checked on tractor pricing, John Deere products suitable for farm use weren't exactly inexpensive, as it is. You really believe they're selling all of these tractors at or below their cost to build them? I'd like to see some evidence to back that claim up.....
I'm sure that this is just an attempt for the industry to find a new avenue to monetize its products -- seeing how far they can push the boundaries before the law pushes back. The auto industry would *love* to impose the same rules on every car and truck it sells -- but that change would impact so many people (including hundreds of thousands of independent garages, auto parts dealers, etc.) - it can't realistically enforce it right now.
Picking a relative niche market like farm tractor sales is a better strategy. John Deere knows that #1. it has enough market share so farmers can't go to that many alternatives to avoid them, and #2. it sells a product that's not just purchased for pleasure or convenience. The success of an entire season's crop is at stake.
Besides, it wasn't always this way. Not all that long ago, a John Deere tractor had no such software lock because the technology to implement it didn't even exist yet. Did you suddenly see tractor prices drop sharply when they decided to start subsidizing them with this forced maintenance?
DFL??
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Democratic%E2%80%93Farmer%E2%80%93Labor_Party
The issue isn't the software breaking as much as the software has lockouts for any and all replacement parts. Consider if you changed the oil and you had to log into your car to check the RFID tag in the oil filter and if you didn't have the password and an RFID approved oil filter the engine wouldn't start.
It also means you can't alter any part of the operation of the tractor that is computer controlled. You want a custom library for a specific crop: Pay John Deere. There was a story about a month ago about farmers buying hacked motherboards. https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
Architectural plans are like computer source code with a couple of differences: You only compile once.
A Roman houshold guardian spirit
if they win car's are next just wait for the $15-$30 non dealer change oil reset code.
As I mentioned elsewhere in the thread: https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
Architectural plans are like computer source code with a couple of differences: You only compile once.
The sleazy thing John Deere did was change the terms of service for all of the older equipment they could get away with; all at once. I think it was back in October 2016. And the threat was: If you don't agree to the new terms of service we won't service your tractor.
Architectural plans are like computer source code with a couple of differences: You only compile once.
As noted elsewhere. Go buy a Russian motherboard for your john deere. https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
Architectural plans are like computer source code with a couple of differences: You only compile once.
Another version of this story suggested that some farmers had turned to unlocked copies of the control software to troubleshoot, resolve issues.
It's beginning to look a lot like Gibson...
Now that sounds like fun. I would buy one just to screw with if I had that kind of money just laying around.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
Can you not just buy a tractor these days? One that doesn't have all this software on it that is just basically a tractor?
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Well, my parents bought one Zetor 6748 and one 8045 in the 70's and they are still running. Some quirks, but overall nothing that's impossible to take care of.
And if you get the opportunity - try a Dutra (Hungarian). Straight-cut gears and unsynchronized gearbox.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
The number of "farmers" is increasing but the number of "farmers" producing food is going down. There are tax incentives to be a farmer so people will produce low-value crops (like almonds) that they don't even harvest and then take the tax deduction on a huge swath of land. So calling this a "left wing lie" based on the contents of the Wikipedia article is not really accurate.
You could try to give big old JD some hard competition by importing tractors from places where they don't try to rape you over software updates but if you do 'The Donald' will slap a 30% import tariff on you so farmers are now literally fucked in every possible way.
Those same farmers evidently voted for Trump overwhelmingly so if they do get hit with an import tariff they have no right to complain. They knew the guy was a xenophobe and protectionist when they voted for him. They made their bed so they can sleep in it.
Only downside I can see is that those costs ultimately get passed along to you and me. Allowing JD to engage in this sort of shenanigans ultimately is paid for by us at the grocery store.
Here's the problem with this: Farmer buys fancy tractor. Farmer borks fancy tractor trying to "fix" it. Farmer complains to manufacturer and goes on a social media tirade while conveniently forgetting they they are a ham-fisted individual.
ACHTUNG!
ALLES TURISTEN UND NONTEKNISCHEN LOOKENPEEPERS!
DAS KOMPUTERMASCHINE IST NICHT FÜR DER GEFINGERPOKEN UND MITTENGRABEN! ODERWISE IST EASY TO SCHNAPPEN DER SPRINGENWERK, BLOWENFUSEN UND POPPENCORKEN MIT SPITZENSPARKEN. IST NICHT FÜR GEWERKEN BEI DUMMKOPFEN. DER RUBBERNECKEN SIGHTSEEREN KEEPEN DAS COTTONPICKEN HÄNDER IN DAS POCKETS MUSS.
ZO RELAXEN UND WATSCHEN DER BLINKENLICHTEN.
Yeah, but that is one mistake that is easy to correct. Vote him out
"Easy to correct"? Not likely. Perhaps you are not aware of the fact that he can do a lot of damage in 4 years, much of which will take a long time to correct.
Vote him out, plus, farmers weren't the only ones who voted for 'The Donald' by a long shot.
No but let's not pretend he would have been elected without them. They voted directly contrary to their own self interest so I'm not oozing sympathy for any problems they incur as a result.
The section of the article to which I linked cites numbers provided by Obama's Dept. of Agriculture -- they're right at the bottom of the page if you'd cared to look. Where are the numbers to back up your claims?
As a farmer, why would you even consider buying a mission critical machine that you can't service? Harvesting is time and weather sensitive, so why don't these machines have modular components that can be swapped out with a standby part by the farmer? The computer should be a redundant hot swap module that can be swapped out by the farmer in just a few minutes. You should be able drive to your local JD dealer and exchange the computer module with one off the shelf.
I know this is not really the "right" way to think about it, but where these things not made clear at purchase, that in a lot of ways "purchase" meant "rent"? I'm sure contracts were signed, this isn't a $300 piece of software that you click through the EULA. My point is that these farmers knew or should have known what they were signing for when they bought that $400,000 tractor.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Except that if you buy Chinese you will have to buy a new tractor each time it breaks down.
Do you have a lot of experience with Chinese farm equipment, or are you just spreading baseless crap about something you know little about?
Having traveled a lot in China over the last ~20 years, I have at least seen some f the things they use in the fields. A lot of it is clearly rather old, but then it wouldn't be old, if it broke down and had to be scrapped every year, as you say. In fact, it must be both reliable and repairable, like things used to be in the West not all that long ago; back when the saying was that all you needed to repair a Land Rover was a hammer and a bit of string.
One of the contraption I've seen in China looks a bit like an oversized garden tractor - the ones with two wheels and a pair of handles - but very big. They've got one enormous cylinder and sound like an old fashioned fishing vessel. When I tell farmers here in UK about that one, they all go "I wish I had one of those". Simple, reliable and repairable is gold when your livelyhood depends on getting things done in time, before the weather turns.
If you make a second stream of income from your products...like repair...there is a perverse incentive to design your products to require frequent repair. If you pay $800 for the cellphone, and get it repaired only infrequently by your local guru, you'll probably spend $1,000-1,200 over the full lifetime of the phone.
Now, if you can buy that phone for $500 (but I doubt they'll actually lower the selling price), you'll now spend $2,000-2,400 over the same lifetime, you are a customer worth up to $1,200 more to the seller over the lifetime of the product. The lousier the phone, the more repairs it will demand; the more repairs it demands, the higher the sellers' profit. It also will probably serve to reduce local sales tax revenues by shipping phones to where the service won't be taxed, so cities and counties will get poorer, and service will take longer (oh, but we'll give you faster service for only a slightly higher (50%) premium!)
This is a perverse incentive to drive quality down so as ti increase future "repair and service" revenue...by charging, say, $250 to replace a $50 battery, because a local business person, making a living off after-market repair, could do it for $25 for that same $50 battery. So, if the batteries replaced by the vendor are half as good as those provided by the aftermarket repair option, you end up paying lots more for the service your technology delivers to you.
This is how oligarchy works. If Congress and the Courts don't stop this perverse scheme to capture excess revenue through "restraint of trade," we'll probably all have to go back to land-line phones and keep our beloved Windows 7 computers for the indefinite future. The effects will produce short-term gains, and stagger our economy with higher costs and lower quality, causing the markets for new products to decline dramatically.
Hey, we have the congresscritters we let the largest companies pay for...so, what could POSSIBLY go wrong if sale no longer means "sale," but "lease?"
What about contract farms? From your link:
Farming contracts are agreements between a farmer and a buyer that stipulates what the farmer will grow and how much they will grow usually in return for guaranteed purchase of the product or financial support in purchase of inputs (e.g. feed for livestock growers).[14] In most instances of contract farming, the farm is family owned while the buyer is a larger corporation.[15] This makes it difficult to distinguish the contract farmers from "corporate farms," because they are family farms but with significant corporate influence. This subtle distinction left a loop-hole in many state laws that prohibited corporate farming, effectively allowing corporations to farm in these states as long as they contracted with local farm owners.
Another 5 seconds on Google found this:
As of 2012, 34.8% of the value of U.S. agricultural production was governed by production or marketing contracts, up from 11% in 1969 [1][2]. These contracts are made between a farmer and a contractor (another person or company, such as a processor) for the production of agricultural commodities. In theory, contracts can benefit both parties, but in some cases, and in the poultry sector in particular, the structure of the industry allows agribusiness to set contract terms that take advantage of farmers and federal subsidies while externalizing costs and risk.
The vast majority of chickens produced in the U.S. – 96%, according to the 2012 Census of Agriculture – are raised under production contracts, which set terms for how the chickens are raised, which inputs the farmer and the company provide, and how the farmer is paid.
How much of our food supply is grown by independent family farms, not under contract?
How much of that is still dependent on inputs from other corporate farms? eg: Corporate (or contract) corn as the primary feed for livestock.
Nope, no sig
Not only is this "concern" invalid, I question the motives of anyone who brings it up.
It is well-established law that the liability for harm done by a device rests with the owner in control of the device. It always has, and nothing about having software in the damn thing changes that.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
A farm is defined as any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, during the year. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topic... So yes, there are a lot of "small farms" but they don't produce an appreciable quantity of food. States have tried to stop the takeover of corporate farms, but have lost in the courts. http://nationalaglawcenter.org... So while most of our farms are not "corporate," most of the food is produced on corporate farms. The others are mostly tax schemes.
I have experience with enough Chinese export products to discern a general pattern.
Yeah - I have tasted enough McDonald and KFC stuff back in the 80es and 90es to discern a certain pattern, so I just "know" that all American food is cheap shit. Just imagine my shock when I came to the States and tasted what ordinary Americans eat and realised that there is a lot of very good, genuinely American food, only you won't find it in a McDonald's in UK. We can all do with opening our minds a little, don't you think?
The only real farming left in the US are large industrial farms.
That will come as a shock to all the family farmers near my home in Michigan, who supply much of the food my wife and I eat.
And to all the family farmers near my vacation home in New Mexico, who supply much of the food my wife and I eat on vacation.
I'm pretty sure they think they're real. And their food has a certain ... ontological robustness, shall we say. A material reliability. An utter lack of being imaginary.