4 ms·
That component you refer to was necessary for the safe usage of the vehicle. If it fails, bad things would happen (and they did). Having control over your trac
by goodplay 10y ago
That component you refer to was necessary for the safe usage of the vehicle. If it fails, bad things would happen (and they did).
Having control over your tractor does not necessarily kill people. Death is not inherently implied by farmers merely having access.
Apples and oranges. Equating the two is silly.
Most people won't be adding in gotos and if statements, they'll be replacing borken parts and getting their tractors working again.
Those few who actually do end up writing code for it, and those who opt to run it, will do so with the full knowledge that it'll be their asses on the line when something goes wrong.
Either way, my point was that people won't die from access unless they do something really stupid, and death due to stupidity is going to occur regardless of whether the tractor is locked down or not.
- foepys 10y ago> Those few who actually do end up writing code for it, and those who opt to run it, will do so with the full knowledge that it'll be their asses on the line when something goes wrong. In a world where extremely dangerous phone chargers are getting bought just because they are cheap, I cannot imagine that your views are correct. People are putting active fire hazards into their homes and other people are building them in full knowledge that the components used are inadequate. Yes, people should be able to repair their machines and change single components but it should be guaranteed that basic safety functionality is working. I'm not talking about something where a farmer personally modifies their own machine. I'm talking about manufacturers that build cheap replacement parts.