Slashdot Mirror


Elizabeth Warren Calls For a National Right-to-Repair Law for Tractors (vice.com)

Massachusetts Senator and Democratic Presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren has become the highest profile politician to support right to repair legislation in the United States. From a report: On Wednesday, Warren outlined a sweeping plan to support family farms and diminish the power of corporate agriculture. At the top of the list, she supports a national right-to-repair law for tractors and other agricultural equipment. That means she supports the simple idea that people who own a tractor should be able to repair it without permission from John Deere or any other manufacturer. "Farmers should be able to repair their own equipment or choose between multiple repair shops," Warren said in a Medium post outlining her proposal. "That's why I strongly support a national right-to-repair law that empowers farmers to repair their equipment without going to an authorized agent." For now, Warren's proposal would apply only to farm equipment, not consumer electronics.

[...] Farmers operating John Deere tractors have been fighting against John Deere's repair monopoly for years. Device manufacturers don't want people repairing their own stuff and they've taken pains to make it difficult to do so. Newer John Deere equipment comes loaded with software and firmware that make it impossible for farmers to fix their own equipment. Instead, they have to call an authorized dealer and wait for them to show up -- a fix that's too slow and too costly for a farmer. "The national right-to-repair law should require manufacturers of farm equipment to make diagnostic tools, manuals, and other repair-related resources available to any individual or business, not just their own dealerships and authorized agents," Warren said. "This will not only allow individuals to fix their own equipment -- reducing delays -- but it will also create competition among dealers and independent repair shops, bringing down prices overall."
Further reading: Grandson of Legendary John Deere Inventor Calls Out Company On Right To Repair.

117 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. Right to repair != easy to repair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't think technological progress should be slowed down by right to repair laws. Instead, what would be nice are full blown service manuals that detail how to dismantle, how to probe, a BOM, and so on.

    If there was an obligation to make that material easily (though not necessarily freely) available, I think that's all we'd need.

    Those who know what they are doing can start their own repair business, or repair items themselves, and those that don't know what they are doing can go to a repair shop.

    I mean, this is how life was like at one point. *shrug*

    1. Re:Right to repair != easy to repair by EndlessNameless · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If there was an obligation to make that material easily (though not necessarily freely) available, I think that's all we'd need.

      Right-to-repair laws include exactly this. I would like to see it universal rather than only applicable to tractors.

      In general, RTR laws include three provisions: availability of documentation, availability of parts (to anyone, not just vendor shops), and a rule against "lock out".

      In this particular case, John Deere is well known for firmware lockouts that prevent new parts from working until they are authorized.

      And don't let the corps BS you on this one either: US warranty laws ALREADY allow them to void warranties due to improper modifications. They are already protected from bad workmanship, and the issue is 100% distraction.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    2. Re:Right to repair != easy to repair by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If there was an obligation to make that material easily (though not necessarily freely) available, I think that's all we'd need.

      Wrong, it needs one more thing. It needs to be legalized.

      It's currently illegal to repair things that you own, if the manufacturer uses a technological measure to limit access (i.e. DRM). Until we repeal DMCA, a lot of everyone's common sense will remain legally incorrect. It's a corrupt law, purely motivated by corruption and nothing else.

      I'd ask Warren, though, why tractors are a special case.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    3. Re:Right to repair != easy to repair by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      I'd ask Warren, though, why tractors are a special case.

      I have it on good authority that she thinks someone's tractor is sexy.

      But really, how else is one of the four horsemen of liberals going to pick up some of the rural, conservative vote? Medicade for all might help, but a LOT of small town farmers have gotten screwed by crap like this, and it may well resonate with them. I think it's a good idea on her part - she's trying to be the champion of the little people, and this is definitely an area where giant corporations are being very abusive.

      Seems right in her wheelhouse, if a bit of a niche.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    4. Re:Right to repair != easy to repair by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      Instead, what would be nice are full blown service manuals that detail how to dismantle, how to probe, a BOM, and so on.

      That's adequate until you need to reflash some device's firmware, and the device won't accept the flash without it having been signed by the manufacturer's private key. Also, repair manuals are easily obtainable from the manufacturer for a lot of things, but they're not cheap. 20 years ago, the service manuals for my car were available from GM for the low, low price of $300. I shudder to think about what the comparable manual for the new model would cost.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    5. Re: Right to repair != easy to repair by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Which is why you have TWO tractors available... When it's time to harvest, it's time to harvest. (Just to tell Deere, they will have to stop the buy one, get one half off sales if you do).

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    6. Re:Right to repair != easy to repair by lazarusdishwasher · · Score: 1

      20 years ago, the service manuals for my car were available from GM for the low, low price of $300. I shudder to think about what the comparable manual for the new model would cost.

      I am not sure if you can purchase a set of books anymore, you can gain 3 days access to GM Service Information for $20.

      https://www.acdelcotds.com/sub...

    7. Re:Right to repair != easy to repair by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      I don't think technological progress should be slowed down by right to repair laws.

      I don't think technological progress should be slowed down by prohibition to repair laws.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    8. Re:Right to repair != easy to repair by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      You just outlined what right to repair is asking for, manuals & access to spare parts.

    9. Re:Right to repair != easy to repair by Ocker3 · · Score: 1

      I dunno, as someone in tech I care about Right to Repair, and I care about farmer's costs, which affect my food costs, and I generally care about farmers. Just because I'm not a farmer doesn't mean I wouldn't support a politician who's doing good work for the country.

  2. why limit it to tractors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why the narrow thinking? This is a good idea for many more classes of items.

    1. Re:why limit it to tractors by SlaveToTheGrind · · Score: 2

      Because politics: Warren is generally weak amongst farmers and needs to signal to them specifically.

    2. Re:why limit it to tractors by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Informative

      If she comes out with any idea Apple doesn't like they'll cut her down well before she has a chance to be completely destroyed in the primaries.

      You dummy, she wants to put the corporate tax rate back to where it was which I guarantee Apple doesn't like.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:why limit it to tractors by edi_guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not even red states, this is targeted strictly at Iowa, and PR stunts like this aren't restricted to any one party or candidate. It's fairly insane that Iowa and NH have such outsized influences in the American political process.

    4. Re:why limit it to tractors by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Warren is generally weak amongst farmers

      Polls of Iowa voters show Warren beating Donald Trump in a head-to-head election. Let me repeat: IOWA voters.

      On the other hand, Iowa Democratic voters put her 4th or 5th among other Democrats. It appears Iowa really doesn't want the Republican incumbent to win again. The trade war has hurt a lot of them, badly.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:why limit it to tractors by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Right to repair isn't a bad idea nonetheless.

      If people can't repair their own stuff it actually leads to dumbing down of society in general.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    6. Re:why limit it to tractors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      These the same pollers that showed Hillary winning 2016?

    7. Re:why limit it to tractors by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      These the same pollers that showed Hillary winning 2016?

      No.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:why limit it to tractors by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      This doesn't matter. They'd like to be able to repair their own tractors, but do they want to own guns and prevent abortions more? If they were indifferent to those positions or already agreed with Warren's position on them, then this would help her. It might make them more friendly, but it's not going to flip many votes.

      Also, why is she calling for a law? She's in Congress, she can actually propose legislation. Talk is cheap.

    9. Re:why limit it to tractors by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Because she doesn't give a shit and is only trying to win points in red states. If she comes out with any idea Apple doesn't like they'll cut her down well before she has a chance to be completely destroyed in the primaries.

      You ain't wrong.... Although I don't believe Apple has that much power alone... They could easily put together a coalition to torpedo her campaign though.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    10. Re:why limit it to tractors by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Why would Warren care about red states? She knows they're chock full of morons happily marching into retarded and obvious dystopian bondage, at a traitor's command... It's like caring about Lemmings. Nah.

      Warren cares about people who can think for themselves, not red state idiots marching to a fraud's lies, preying upon their overlarge amygdalas and fears of brown skin tones and other languages.

      Because, the Iowa straw polls and the money they can bring... Come on, this is about the primary fight, at least at this point, and has nothing to do with the general. Don't forget, democrats in the Red States have quite a bit of say in who wins the nomination, so winning primaries in red states is a good thing even if you are a democrat.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    11. Re:why limit it to tractors by bobbied · · Score: 1

      These the same pollers that showed Hillary winning 2016?

      Yea, the same ones who where actually within the margin of error for the most part, just skewed about 3% across the board.

      It was the punditry who where saying Hillary would win, who ignored the MOE's and over stated the level of certainty the polls had.

      However, I will say that any polls at this point are not worth the paper they are printed on for anything. We are still 19 months out. A whole lot of stuff is going to happen between now and then that will drive the polls. Warren won't survive the third state's primary, so how she polls vrs Trump is about as useless information as you can get. MAYBE it's useful to select the VP pick but I just don't see Warren on anybody's short list for that.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    12. Re:why limit it to tractors by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 1

      fivethirtyeight.com did a good job on the poll analysis. Somewhat simplified, before the 2016 election they were saying: Clinton is clearly ahead in the polls, but the amount she is ahead by is about the same as the typical polling error (i.e. when after the election we compare average-of-polls to actual-votes-cast.) This means there are three roughly equally probable outcomes: 1/3 probability, the polls are close to being correct, and Clinton wins. 1/3 probability the polls are significantly out, underestimating Clinton's support, so Clinton wins big. 1/3 probability the polls are significantly out, underestimating Trump's support, so Trump wins narrowly. (Of course their analysis was more subtle - they didn't just identify three outcomes and arbitrarily say they were equally likely, it just so happened that these possibilities came out to be roughly 1/3 each.)

      I haven't looked at the analyses that were giving something like 98% win to Clinton, but likely they made a bad assumption that poll errors were uncorrelated - that if Trump outperformed polls in one state, that made it no more or less likely that he'd outperform in other states.

      --
      Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
    13. Re:why limit it to tractors by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Not even red states, this is targeted strictly at Iowa, and PR stunts like this aren't restricted to any one party or candidate. It's fairly insane that Iowa and NH have such outsized influences in the American political process.

      Whenever states try to advance their primaries to have more influence, they get shot down by the national party, who does not want some regional issue deciding the national candidate, which could hurt the national chances.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    14. Re:why limit it to tractors by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      It would be just desserts for the Democrats if somehow they got the Constitution changed, forcing the Republicans to fight tooth and nail in the "very blue" giant states, that they have largely given up on.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    15. Re:why limit it to tractors by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      Nobody is trying to change the Constitution. Instead, States are passing laws that say that once enough States pass the same law so that it adds up to enough electoral votes to win the election, then the law goes into effect and those States agree to assign all their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote.

      Simple, easy, no Amendment needed. This is coming. Probably not this cycle. But it is coming.

    16. Re:why limit it to tractors by jythie · · Score: 1

      The case is easier to make for industrial tools than consumer entertainment devices.

    17. Re:why limit it to tractors by Talderas · · Score: 1

      It's not about winning Iowa in the general election. It's about winning or placing well in the Iowa Democrat caucus. There are currently eighteen candidates seeking the nomination. If all of them make it to the Iowa caucuses expect fourteen to sixteen of them to drop out shortly after the caucuses are held.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    18. Re:why limit it to tractors by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      There weren't many that showed her "winning" in 2016. What they showed was that she generally had a higher share of the vote, but you had to aggregate and process the polls to determine whether she was actually going to win the EC. FiveThirtyEight, possibly the strongest of the polling analysis organizations, said that, given the margins of errors and previous history of each poll, Clinton had, at best, a 2/3 chance of winning the election.

      But the general sense of the polls was that Clinton would get more votes than Trump, with a margin of 3M or more. That's exactly what happened. The polls didn't fail in 2016, the analysts did.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    19. Re:why limit it to tractors by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      State legislatures have the authority to appoint electors. Voting for them is optional, and is done because States choose to. The Supreme Court isn't going to even take that sort of challenge; it is very very settled law. It is in the Constitution.

      The Constitution says:

      Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.

      You do have a right to vote on Representatives in the House:

      The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.

      Or at least, to vote on Electors who choose the Representatives.

      But not Senators, those can by selected however the State legislature chooses:

      The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.

      The SCOTUS is only going to be willing to look at if the Legislature did in fact pass the law that assigns the Electors. There is no challenge to be had there.

  3. How about for everything instead of just tractors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So the farm lobby has greased her palm but what about the rest of us?

    I'd like to be able to own things also. You know out of box admin access to my phone without jailbreaking. I'd like to be able to tell game consoles to do what I want them to do rather than what Sony, MS want them to do.
    If I buy a TV I do not want someone else making money off my property by having it show me pop up ads by default.

  4. Ditch Intellectual Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The real root of this problem is the government's protection of corporations via IP laws.

    If IP laws didn't exist, John Deere and anybody else would have no leverage with which to prevent their products from being repaired/altered by a customer or other business.
    But of course, like any politician, Warren isn't addressing the root cause.

    She just wants to levy another patchwork of thousands of pages of laws and regulations and pretend that fixes the problem when in actuality it'll have a myriad of second and third order effects on the economy in various foreseeable and unforeseeable ways.

    1. Re:Ditch Intellectual Property by Stolovaya · · Score: 1

      The real root of this problem is the government's protection of corporations via IP laws.

      Agreed. But I imagine taking that on will be a gigantic challenge, with many more players coming out against it.

      This might just be "chipping away at the problem". Start with stuff like farm equipment. If there's success there, maybe it can be broadened into other areas.

      A complete guess on my part, though.

    2. Re:Ditch Intellectual Property by Stolovaya · · Score: 1

      This is certainly a band-aid and doesn't address the root of the problem, but I don't see how it adds to the problem. How is it "the complete opposite"? It fixes one small area, but at least that area is fixed.

  5. Don't politicize common sense! by sobachatina · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Darn it!

    Now this very practical bit of needed legislation will become politicized. Republicans will oppose it as a knee jerk reaction and Trump will create an agency or executive order banning all aftermarket repairs.

    This is not an anti Republican post. Both sides do this with every thing. As an independent I'm thoroughly sick of it.

    1. Re:Don't politicize common sense! by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Darn it!

      Now this very practical bit of needed legislation will become politicized. Republicans will oppose it as a knee jerk reaction and Trump will create an agency or executive order banning all aftermarket repairs.

      They can't though. The only 2 things more American than farmers are coal miners and the NRA. Farmers have already been hurt by the trade war Trump started with China, and steps he took to try and make it up have so far fallen short. And really, it's a good tactic. If she can get the Republicans to go with it (because they don't want to be seen as going against farmers) and get it into law, then it is a foothold for RtR to spread to other areas as well.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:Don't politicize common sense! by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Right to repair was in the past a very bi-partisan issue. In fact there is already legislation requiring it for automobiles that covered tractors in the past. But under the Bush admin when Republicans controlled congress they wrote an exception for Tractors into the law after Deere funneled a bunch of money into Congress. Now Republicans are trying to defend this exception to keep the Deere money flowing even though their constituents want the exception ended.

      Deere created this exception and I have no doubt they will fight tooth and nail to avoid the exception being lifted. They make very good money using software and copyright to prevent people from doing something completely legal. It's an abuse of copyright by using the copyright to gain control of another market in the same vein as using a monopoly to gain control of a separate market. This is exactly the same type of abuse the anti-trust laws were created to address in normal markets but copyright abuse makes this possible while laying outside the anti-trust laws protections.

      The penalty of abusing a copyright like this should be revocation of the copyright. Deere should lose copyright on all their software for doing this along with any other manufacturer engaged in similar behavior. On top of that it should be perfectly legal for anyone to break their software locks and provide tools to do so.

    3. Re:Don't politicize common sense! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      You have to get to that point, first. Currently there are user agreements , shrink wrap equivalents, hacking laws, copyright laws, and other things stacking up to block repairs as if it was a copy of Office.

      It's perfectly fine for Congress to declare this a misuse of these laws.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    4. Re:Don't politicize common sense! by Phasedshift · · Score: 2

      Uh, no. My family are "farmers". Soybean prices dipped but have recovered to the price prior to the China trade issue. Many farmers just silo'd the soybeans until later in the year and sold them then.
      Source: https://www.macrotrends.net/2531/soybean-prices-historical-chart-data

      The right to repair issue IS a big deal to farmers, but, just like everything that comes out of most politicians, it is likely to be a broken campaign promise. However, I do welcome the attention brought to the issue, even if apparently it isn't getting a mention on the MSM.

    5. Re:Don't politicize common sense! by Scroatzilla · · Score: 1

      It's a good notion and, on its face, simple. In fact, it is so simple that there is no reason for legislation supporting the notion to be more than a single page. Single paragraph, even. Unfortunately, legislation and simplicity are incompatible. So, what I'm opposed to is a complicated regulation that is ultimately going to come with a cost that prices small businesses out of the market, stifling innovation. If, however, the scope were only tractors, or the only requirement with such regulation were to provide owners with a technical manual and eliminate regulations preventing companies from specializing in after market parts and repairs, sounds good to me.

  6. Forget tractors! by Pitawg · · Score: 2

    Forget tractors!
    There needs to be a right to repair Politicians!

    1. Re:Forget tractors! by EvilSS · · Score: 4, Funny

      I prefer my politicians disposable with build in obsolescence.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    2. Re:Forget tractors! by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      There needs to be a right to repair Politicians!

      There is. The repair is performed by voting.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    3. Re:Forget tractors! by bobbied · · Score: 1

      I prefer my politicians disposable with build in obsolescence.

      It's called "Term Limits" and we need them for congress...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    4. Re:Forget tractors! by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Start petitioning among the states and Article V it. That's the only way it'll get done.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  7. My dad had this problem by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    Bought a Long Tractor because they were cheap and it was the same one the state of Virginia was using. When it inevitably broke down, he just plain couldn't get the parts to fix it, so it just sat out in the yard for several years, immovable. Not sure if he ever got rid of it.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:My dad had this problem by mOzone · · Score: 1

      it must have been before the web there is like 10 sites dictated to long tractors and eBay amazon etc for parts

  8. Visions of Michael Dukakis on a tank by Lucas123 · · Score: 1

    Just kidding. Sen. Warren's too smart to go sit on a tractor (I hope).

    1. Re:Visions of Michael Dukakis on a tank by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Just kidding. Sen. Warren's too smart to go sit on a tractor (I hope).

      Your hopes will be dashed: I'm gonna have me a beer!

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    2. Re:Visions of Michael Dukakis on a tank by Lucas123 · · Score: 1

      Oh, good grief.

      "I'm just like you. I drink beer after a hard day hammering my political opponents."

      It's like if she took a DNA test to prove she has Native American ancestry. At least she hasn't done that yet. /s

  9. Re:I understand... by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    she is still not white enough for you.

  10. As a sitting US Senator by kenh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why doesn't she put forth legislation to that effect? If she waits till elected President, she'll have to convince someone in either chamber of Congress to put the bill forward.

    She's not helpless, she needs to step up.

    --
    Ken
    1. Re:As a sitting US Senator by robinsonne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because in the current Senate if it doesn't:
      1)Give a tax cut to the rich
      2)Install a conservative judge

      Then Mitch McConnell won't even bring it up for a vote.

  11. Re:Sanders has integrity? by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    You do realize that Sanders cannot spend his campaign money on anything except campaigning?

    Campaigns are required to report on how they spend their campaign money. I'm too lazy to chase down examples right now, but my observation is that both parties have messed up handling or reporting of campaign money from time to time. They have to fix the problem and possibly pay a fine. But the point is, candidates cannot do whatever they want with campaign money.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  12. Sounds good but... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    if modern tractors are anything like modern cars they are full of computers. Modern cars require really expensive computer diagnostic equipment that makes it impractical to repair them on your own. What her proposal might do though is open it up to 3rd party repair shops that could do it a lot cheaper than the dealer would.

    1. Re:Sounds good but... by GregMmm · · Score: 1

      Visiting a friend of ours who is a farmer in eastern Washington I learned a lot about this issue.
      1) Farmers who make it are not dumb, in fact they usually can fix anything because either they have the tools, or their neighbors do. Farmers help each other out. By the way this is as simple as changing a part with bolts on it. Not just the fancy software. But right now you can't do this.
      2) Farmers can't wait for the repair man to show up. It can take a couple of weeks and this is suicide for a farmer. If it's time to plant and dry enough, you have to go. It could mean success or failure of a crop.
      3) Even if it's just the software, you know how easy it is to show up and install an update. Make a video how to do it. But this wouldn't line the pockets of John Deere. It's just a USB stick.

    2. Re:Sounds good but... by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      It is really expensive computer diagnostic equipment only because the manufacturer is trying to control the repair market. Modern engines are run by computers that know a lot about what is going right and what is going wrong, without any outside guidance. Simple error codes or status codes should be sufficient.

      In most cases, an experienced mechanic could figure out what needs to be replaced even without the aid of a computer, by observing what does not work or listening to the engine.

      But your John Deere combine might shut itself down if it detects a non-John Deere part. For your protection, of course.

  13. Re: What can't they do? by ruddk · · Score: 1

    True. but it is easier finding the error if you have the right interface and software.
    After having my type-r at the official dealer 3 times and $2000 later without them actually being able to fix my ac which only worked for 10 minutes after starting the car, I managed to diagnose it in 20 minutes using the repair manual and a the official interface and software myself. (Worm down clutch basic really)
    I wonder how long it would have taken them not to fix it. I gave he idiots a detailed description and asked them to drive it for 20 minutes afterwards to test it out.
    Iâ(TM)ll just leave the name here for google to index. It was Henrik Larsen Automobiler now called P. Christensen. Overpriced wankers.

  14. By 'reprogram' perhaps they mean 'reflash' by Brannon · · Score: 1

    It's probably reasonable for a 3rd party service shop to be able to reflash a component to a known good factory-provided image.

    Your point stands, though. These right-to-repair laws need to be written sensibly. There are all sorts of dangerous scenarios if someone is allowed to freely poke around in firmware. And it is perfectly reasonable to insist on some level of training and certification for servicing certain sensitive parts.

    The baseline standard should be that a sufficiently trained & certified 3rd party shop should be able to perform the same sorts of common repairs that your own internal service personnel are trained to perform.

    The tricky thing to legislate around is security. What if a product has a good reason to implement lockouts for non-standard code or components? The motivation could at least plausibly be for security or safety reasons.

  15. Re: What can't they do? by magzteel · · Score: 1

    True. but it is easier finding the error if you have the right interface and software.
    After having my type-r at the official dealer 3 times and $2000 later without them actually being able to fix my ac which only worked for 10 minutes after starting the car, I managed to diagnose it in 20 minutes using the repair manual and a the official interface and software myself. (Worm down clutch basic really)
    I wonder how long it would have taken them not to fix it. I gave he idiots a detailed description and asked them to drive it for 20 minutes afterwards to test it out.
    Iâ(TM)ll just leave the name here for google to index. It was Henrik Larsen Automobiler now called P. Christensen. Overpriced wankers.

    Lots of shops have limited expertise. They are just parts-changers. It's rough on the consumers.

    The article mentioned service manuals were available but did not mention diagnostic tools. There is a big difference between diagnostics and ECU modding/reflashing. Some speed shops do it, like http://www.ivansperformancepro... . I'm planning to do this for one of my rides, but it definitely voids the warranty.

  16. Get Your Tractors off Our Lawn` by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    Any politics involving tractors always reminds me of British PM John Major's bizarre "Get Your Tractors Off Our Lawn" speech and makes me smile.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  17. I like Warren by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    I like Bernie more because while Warren gets more done she, like a lot of Democrats, is a bit too defeatist. Democrats give up too easy, even when a position is 70-90% popular. Warren's already backed off Medicare for All into a public option. Now, I know what she's up to (a properly implemented public option would quickly out-compete private, for profit insurance programs) but the trouble is the other side isn't negotiating in good faith, and will use cyclic political changes to undermine the law. They did it with Obamacare, where a popular law is currently on the chopping block because it's been systematically undermined.

    I want Warren and the whole of the Dems to stop reaching across the isle. Everytime they do the GOP moves a little further right to escape their grasp. That's how we got Trump, and that's how we got to the point where we're talking about turning Social Security into a Welfare Program.

    Back in the 90s Newt Gingrich and the GOP came up with "A Contract for America" which when you stripped away the niceties was a plan to block everything the other side did no matter what while advancing the most radical ideas of their party. It completely revitalized the GOP. The Dems need something like that. They need to draw a line in the sand and say "This is who we are, and this is what's right. This is what we're doing". On the plus side most of their positions (Medicare for All, $15/minimum wage, Tuition Free college, childcare, paid family medical leave, public works and infrastructure programs, etc, etc) are overwhelmingly popular.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I like Warren by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      >Warren gets more done she,like a lot of Democrats
      Except for when it comes to voting on their own proposals. Then all of the sudden they can't be bothered to do the only job they have to do which is to vote yea or nay.

      >the other side isn't negotiating in good faith
      Right. I believe the side that put forward the ACA that was designed to fail so that single payer medicare for all would be put in its place. That's good faith politics.

      >I want Warren and the whole of the Dems to stop reaching across the isle.
      Did you know that the Dems reach across the isle less? Whoops.

      >are overwhelmingly popular.
      Right until you ask the details of how those programs will pay and how it will affect their lives through their economic impact. Whoops. Why can't you do those things in your own state instead of forcing them on the entire nation? Why does Montana need a $15 minimum wage because Silicon Valley can't fix their damn housing problems?

  18. Except when he does by virtig01 · · Score: 2

    He brought the Green New Deal up for a vote.... and the vote to limit the national emergency powers of the President.

    1. Re:Except when he does by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      He brought the Green New Deal up for a vote

      That was a trick! You see even though the democrats sponsored and support the GND they didn't intend to vote on it.

      The best part of that was Mike Lee. Reagon on a dinosaur, TaunTauns, Aquaman, and the "documentary" Sharknado 4 are forever part of congressional history.

    2. Re:Except when he does by theycallmeB · · Score: 1

      McConnell brought the Green New Deal up for a vote so that he and friends could do a bit of grandstanding against. Will play well with the base but whether it will bite them in butt with other voters is up in the air.

      For the national emergency vote, that was legally required to have a floor vote in the Senate once it was approved by the House (also works the other way around). Not a whole lot of credit due for actually following your own laws.

  19. Goodby yellow brick road by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Don't remove the restraining bolt or those droids will run off into the hills. There will be no end to the trouble.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  20. Re:AOC by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    Did you seriously just reference a fox story? What next the weekly world news? CNN?

  21. Very Naive by TRRosen · · Score: 1

    The reality is farmers own their machines less and less. Outside of simple tractors they are too complex and too expensive. Combines today are processing plants on wheels. Pass this and they will just stop selling altogether and only lease.
    You want things opened up give manufacturers immunity from liability. Manufacturers don't care about few hundred dollars in service work. The dealer gets most of that anyway. They care about a multi-million dollar lawsuit because some idiot bypassed the safety lock and ground himself into kibble. Jurys don't care about who's really at fault. they just see a poor farmer and a billion dollar company.
    The fact is these companies can be fined and sued for things they allow others to do with their product.

  22. Just make an DMCA exemptions so hosting leeked by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Just make an DMCA exemptions so hosting leaked software for repair / restore images is 100% legal.

  23. Re:She would make a great VP candidate by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    Something only possible because of laws that discriminate against her racially.

    That is like striking someone's hand when they are about to pull the trigger. Sometimes you have to commit a small evil to prevent a greater miscarriage of justice. Our founders did that when they rebelled against England. Granted, the severity is less than either of those two examples but nonetheless she committed a small offense to prevent a great one.

    I would think most sane people identify as black women on any forms these days.

  24. Re:She would make a great VP candidate by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    Also, it is worth pointing out that technically you can't lie about those things. Race is literally defined as what you identify as legally. That was firmly established because many Hispanic Puerto Ricans identify as white and there aren't actually legitimate definitions for race.

  25. Why just farm equipment? by drainbramage · · Score: 1

    Why the f--- do we no longer have the right to repair something we bought?
    What nation wide law was passed that took that right away?
    What's next, bread that we aren't allowed to slice?

    --
    No brain, no pain.
    1. Re: Why just farm equipment? by drainbramage · · Score: 1

      Thank you.
      I hate that it is allowed to be so, not seeing terms during the buying process is allowed to be binding.
      Thank you supreme court, I can always count on your honesty, much like congress.

      --
      No brain, no pain.
  26. Re:What can't they do? by magzteel · · Score: 1

    Not sure when you were a mechanic, but ABS, Airbags, security, etc, etc usually require dealer diagnostic tools to reset warnings. Some stuff can be done with generic ODB tools, but many things can't. Add to that a tractor has a whole lot of hydraulic systems that a car doesn't, and there is a lot of scope for needing to be able to update settings held in the ECU or related control units.

    I think you are confusing what they mean by "reprogram" (although plenty of places will do reprogramming of maps on ECUs, it often requires an aftermarked ECU anyway).

    I've worked on all this. As I wrote, I do not know what the situation is with regards to tractor diagnostic tool availability from the manufacturer or aftermarket.

    Reading live and freeze-frame diagnostics and resetting diagnostic codes is in no way "reprogramming". I think the article author is confused (or is deliberately confusing) the line is between legitimate diagnostic interaction and modding.

  27. Right to repair is the wrong way to do it by Solandri · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Instead, just make it so if a company requires repairs be done through themselves or their authorized dealer chain, then the repairs are free. i.e. If the company wants to insist on exclusivity of repairs for 10 years, then their product basically has to have a 10 year warranty. If they want to insist on exclusivity forever, then the product is warranted forever.

    The advantage is that a right to repair law can be challenged on the grounds that it's violating the manufacturer's right to offer its products for sale in whatever fashion it sees fit. If you do it my way, companies can still do what John Deere does with tractors, or Epson does with chipped printer cartridges, or Apple does with iPhones. But if they elect to do it that way, then the purchase essentially becomes a lease - the lessee gets use of the product, but the lessor is responsible for the maintenance and repair costs (not always obvious, but if your leased car breaks down and is too expensive to repair, you can just walk away from the lease and leave the car company to eat the loss on their broken product, not you). And the legal framework for leases is very well established so is unlikely to be overturned by a court challenge.

    Basically, don't set up a confrontation between the buyer's right to repair and the seller's right to design a product as they see fit. Instead, channel products which come without restrictions on the owner into purchases, while products where the manufacturer retains control over after possession is transferred to the "buyer" become leases.

    1. Re:Right to repair is the wrong way to do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's also a regulation. Right wing folks are opposed to all regulations. They don't actually want a solution; they just want companies to be free to do whatever they want.

  28. Re:What can't they do? by Agent0013 · · Score: 2

    Plenty of the parts have DRM on the firmware that prevents them from working in the tractor until an approved person unlocks it. So you can install the new parts all you want, but they won't work until John Deere sends someone out to activate the new parts.

    --

    -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
  29. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Typical: Someone in power shows signs of getting it and the response is to shit all over them. Nice job.

  30. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by epyT-R · · Score: 2

    They all 'get it'. They just don't care. Sometimes a few decide to pretend to care thinking it will get them votes. Then when it's time to pay the piper, they reneg.

  31. Re:What can't they do? by mOzone · · Score: 1

    unless they have a crane or ultra heavy lifting gear not much they can do that's major ..and when it comes to high end drive by wire {joystick} and GPS auto nav why would they wish to re-flash or mess with something i could actually kill someone by mistake

  32. There are restrictions. by BlueCoder · · Score: 1

    You can design anything you like but you can't necessarily sell it. Specifically products have to comply with the FCC and UL just a name a couple groups of regulations.

    An anti-obsolescence law against waste would be very American. And it would strengthen the security of the country. Products do need minimum standards.

  33. Re:I understand... by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

    David Duke jumped back to Democrat, he hates Donald Trump

  34. Re:Sanders has integrity? by rsborg · · Score: 1

    [cite needed]

    And don't link to fake news sites, please.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  35. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

    Did she suggest or introduce legislation regarding this before announcing her desire to be president?

  36. Re:AOC by rsborg · · Score: 1

    Hey at least it wasn't a link to breitbart or 8chan.
    You know, Fox is respectable fake news.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  37. Re:Nice smoke-screen by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    She will probably forget about all these ideas fast, should she get elected.

    This is why we're screwed. Even when someone from the "other side" comes up with something you really like you cannot bring yourself to say anything positive at all. Enjoy your partisan hellhole.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  38. Re:AOC by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    Story that says differently. AOC stole $1 million out of her campaign and pocketed it for personal use, hasn't been charged.

    You're grossly mischaracterizing the Fox News story. Here's what it actually says:

    - Saikat Chakrabarti (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez' chief of staff) transferred $885,000 from two PACs to two LLCs he controls.
    - Such transfers (even large ones) are not uncommon.
    - The PACs claimed the transfers were for "strategic consulting".
    - The complaint (and that's all it is right now) alleges that this was an attempt to dodge FEC reporting requirements.
    - The complaint was filed by the National Legal and Policy Center, a Virginia-based conservative organization.

    So no, AOC did not "steal" money from her campaign and pocket it "for personal use". And it's hardly outrageous that she hasn't been charged, because at this point it's still just a complaint.

    Reactions from several former FEC officials appear to be mixed. Chakrabarti has been very forthcoming with explanations of what he did and why. So it doesn't appear he's trying to hide anything.

    TL/DR: this looks complicated, but let's not jump to conclusions.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  39. Re:What can't they do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I work for John Deere, and while there are some controllers that require dealer intervention the vast, vast majority do not. Engine controllers are probably the biggest one, due to emissions regulations. Those regulations effectively require that to be the case. If the engine manufacturer cannot provide certain information, it can result in very large fines.

  40. The only tractor in America is by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    they have to call an authorized dealer and wait for them to show up -- a fix that's too slow and too costly for a farmer.

    Why do they insist on buying John Deere tractors then? Isn't this where the invisible hand of the free market makes consumers prefer tractors that CAN be repaired on site by anyone, and where John Deere goes out of business because it can't sell tractors any more? I'm sure Ford or Massey or Tracto Universal or any of a hundred other tractor manufacturers wouldn't mind the extra business. There's something fishy here if a law is required.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:The only tractor in America is by Aighearach · · Score: 3, Informative

      They have patents and aggressive lawyers, you probably can't build a competing tractor for a long time.

    2. Re:The only tractor in America is by strikethree · · Score: 1

      They have patents and aggressive lawyers, you probably can't build a competing tractor for a long time.

      Patents? What could there possibly be to patent on a fucking tractor? IIRC, patents are for things that not obvious to anyone familiar with the subject. What could fail to be obvious about a tractor? Using GPS? How is that not obvious? Are they using some sort of new combustion technique? Surely, combustion is exhausted of all patents by now. What could possibly be patented ON A TRACTOR?

      I could see Copyright on the software... but god, what an abomination of a thought. The purpose is the tractor, not the software.

      I just don't see John Deere having any patents that should be considered valid.

      Wait! I figured it out! They patented Air Conditioning the cab. Of course it's not obvious. Look at all the old tractors: Open to the air, no protection from sunlight, etc. And I am sure that no farmer anywhere or even tractor manufacturer anywhere, except John Deere, had the idea and the courage to add a climate controlled cab to the tractor.

      Never mind. Carry on. Everything is normal.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    3. Re:The only tractor in America is by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      They have patents and aggressive lawyers, you probably can't build a competing tractor for a long time.

      Patents? What could there possibly be to patent on a fucking tractor? IIRC

      Stop trying to recall, and go look it up. Modern tractors that farmers actually use are not merely powered plows. Fucking duh.

      Also, patent law doesn't care about what makes sense to you. There is no need for you to try to "figure it out." Stop fucking figuring and look shit up; educate yourself about the subject.

  41. Uh huh. Under what time frame? by Uberbah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Instead, just make it so if a company requires repairs be done through themselves or their authorized dealer chain, then the repairs are free. i.e. If the company wants to insist on exclusivity of repairs for 10 years, then their product basically has to have a 10 year warranty. If they want to insist on exclusivity forever, then the product is warranted forever.

    Farmer Bill: Hey, John Deere, my tractor broke down. I need it fixed ASAP as the window for planting in Spring 2019 is closing.

    John Deere: Sure, Bill, no problem. We'll get your tractor fixed at no charge - in time for the 2020 planting season.

    Farmer Bill: I can't wait that long! If I can't plant my crop in time I'll lose my farm.

    John Deere: We're happy to help. If you fork over $25,000 we'll get it fixed by Easter. $65,000 for expedited service if you want it by the weekend. Have a nice day!

    1. Re:Uh huh. Under what time frame? by Snufu · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you can mandate 10 year warranties, you can mandate free replacements while your tractor is being serviced. You are leasing, not buying.

  42. Re: What can't they do? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Why would you ever take a car to a dealership for non-warranty service?

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  43. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by Psion · · Score: 1

    Oh, please. She's a stopped clock; occasionally right.

  44. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by Psion · · Score: 1

    While I doubt she'll get far in the primaries, I hope she sticks with the issue -- she might be able to get it to the Democratic party's platform in exchange for her endorsement.

  45. Re:AOC by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    Liberal breaks law, other liberals give pass..

    See Somollett in Chicago. One rule for them, another for you.

    News at 11.

    Anthony Weiner, Al Franken, Rod Blagojevich, John Conyers, and so on ... all were urged to resign by their fellow Democrats.

    Ditto for the two guys in Virginia, although they have refused to leave (yet).

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  46. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by DarkVader · · Score: 1

    She's been working for people and against Wall Street for years.

    I'm still supporting Bernie in the primaries, because she still thinks capitalism is somehow functional. But she's one of the good ones.

  47. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

    American capitalism is functional. Its just riddled with corruption because the foxes are guarding the henhouse, between the DOJ, SEC, and laws passed by Congress. The fault lies on the voters, because they have the power to remove politicians that are too brazenly deferential towards Wall Street.

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  48. Re:How about for everything instead of just tracto by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    She's already committed to only accepting individual donations. Don't be a mean dunce.

  49. Re:What can't they do? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    You're simply wrong. When the government talks about reprogramming machines, it does include updating the settings. Don't confuse yourself with arguments about what you believe words are required to mean. Sometimes you have to learn that words mean different things in different situations.

    And literally, when you clear a code, you're reprogramming the EEPROM values or something equivalent.

    Regarding diagnostic tools, no, you're totally banned from having the tools currently, by manufacturer decree. There is no aftermarket.

    The main thing this proposal does is to prevent the manufacturer from interfering with the aftermarket. (which would quickly appear, because these tractors are big business)

  50. Re:What can't they do? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    due to emissions regulations. Those regulations effectively require that to be the case.

    Bullshit spill in the produce section

  51. Re:Nice smoke-screen by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Well, you have either never seen this happening or you have not realized what was going on. I have seen this numerous times. Anybody that wants power on this level is corrupt and has no honor. No exceptions. So they will investigate what people want to hear, pick a group they think can give them a win and say anything tho please that group.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  52. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by Talderas · · Score: 1

    It's a smart move for her if she' s running in 2020. I actually find it shocking to see a candidate make an "appeal to the grass roots" move like this.

    There's nothing shocking about this. Warren is currently campaigning in Iowa, announced this right to repair for tractors, and also announced a plan to target large agri-business like Tyson. These are all maneuvers to get her in the heads of Iowa caucus members. The caucus tend to result with all but two to four candidates dropping out. She may never bring it up again after Feb 3, 2020.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  53. Re: What can't they do? by ruddk · · Score: 1

    I hoped they could fix the problem so I didn’t have to fix it myself. Clearly I was wrong.
    I retrospect I also remember that I paid to have my disc brakes in back cleaned as I hadn’t been doing any track days for a while and they hadn’t been exercised enough. When I switched the tires two days later the metal rims that were on the car was rusted and completely stuck. They clearly hadn’t removed them to clean anything.
    Blah. Guess I learned my lesson the expensive way.

  54. Re:Nice smoke-screen by Talderas · · Score: 1

    She will probably forget about all these ideas fast, should she get elected.

    That's being optimistic. She'll forget about it after Feb 3, 2020 with the Iowa caucuses over.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  55. Re:Fox News by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    "Sorry you are so fucking stupid that you don't realize whatever news outlet you use has outright lied to you for two years and I guess you still believe them."

    No, I'm just not stupid enough to believe there is one that doesn't lie. The problem with the liberal media post Trump is that they've become more like Fox which has never had problems lying not only through omission but with outright false reporting all along.

  56. Re:She would make a great VP candidate by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    Race is an artificial concept determined by self-identification because there is no definition. She didn't lie because you can't lie whatever box you check is what you are legally speaking.

    Are you really claiming there is an option out there who hasn't done far worse than this? Seriously is that really the best dirt they can come up with to disparage the woman who spearheaded banking reform and is the reason you don't pay hundreds in overdraft fees because the bank reordered transactions when you really had one overdraft of .56 cents in the actual order you paid that day?

    My wife works in finance, she hates Warren as a worker for all the reasons she supports her as a candidate. All those consumer protections in lending she put in. If you aren't filthy rich you should be supporting a Sanders/Warren ticket. Don't let a man making $250k/yr (or whatever senators are up to now) buying a $600k beach house within his means or a woman who supposedly fibbed on a form when she was a kid throw you off. The other options either aren't qualified or definitely have way more dirt in their closets than this.

    What matters is how they vote and who they fight for. Not any dirt someone comes up with for a smear campaign no matter what it is. I don't believe either of these are up to anything particularly dirty but even if they were I don't really care. We have executives and politicians pocketing millions and even billions all over the map and we shouldn't throw away people in the system who are actually going to fight for real people just to pick another one of those who is better with laundry.

  57. Re:She would make a great VP candidate by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    Basing policies on something you can't even define is immoral not checking a box to get around the immoral policies.

  58. Don't stop there by sixsixtysix · · Score: 1

    If something is legal to do by oneself, it should always be legal to pay someone else to do it for you.

    --
    ...
  59. Re: What can't they do? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Most stealerships have, at most, one or two competent techs. The rest are cheap (to them).

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  60. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by lgw · · Score: 1

    It's shocking to me because it seems like every DC politician has forgotten that voters even exist, except to occasionally mock them. A candidate that actually campaigns? That doesn't act like she entitled to the office? It's a refreshing change, to be sure.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  61. Re:Nice smoke-screen by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Indeed.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  62. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    Republicans ... be for corruption? Yep. It checks out.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  63. Re: I can see why she'd be a big tractor fan by Ocker3 · · Score: 1

    Between gerrymandered districts, incredibly huge amounts of corporate cash going into PACs to run ads and way voter opinion, poor education and the like, is it really only the fault of the voters that the USA is seeing such huge problems.