> We could insist on a right to repair, open standards, etc The advantage older equipment has is that a generalist can repair it because the equipment is fairl

> We could insist on a right to repair, open standards, etc The advantage older equipment has is that a generalist can repair it because the equipment is fairly simple and well understood. Parts on older equipment are easier to source or sometimes can be fabricated by the farmer themselves. Newer equipment has tighter tolerances and components are more difficult to fabricate or repair. Computerized components require special tools to interact with and specific knowledge to configure. Newer equipment is more complex and thus more difficult to diagnose and repair. Right to repair won't fix that. Regulations aren't going to make manufacturers return to having simpler machines, it can only force them to make the knowledge required to repair those machines public. If need a left-handed knurled whats-it to remove a part or a special diagnostics tool to service the electronics, regulations might force the companies provide documentation and sell those tools, but it won't remove the need for those special tools and domain expertise. The only real way to change this would be for a manufacturer to pivot to selling field serviceable equipment which seems unlikely.