7 ms·

Having worked on a John Deere integration for an agtech company I can't say I'm surprised. The MyJohnDeere API had a lot of idiosyncrasies that smelled like ine

by HEHENE 5y ago

Having worked on a John Deere integration for an agtech company I can't say I'm surprised. The MyJohnDeere API had a lot of idiosyncrasies that smelled like inexperienced or mismanaged development, especially around authentication/authorization. At the time I was working on it they had some extremely arcane authentication process that required round-trip emails, various link clicking and code entering, and all kinds of craziness. Toward the end of my tenure our point of contact finally told us they were moving to OAuth but they had nearly zero documentation on it. For anyone who isn't knowledgable in the farming space, I'd highly recommend a browse through John Deere's API documentation [0]. Before the agtech gig I hadn't really given it a second though, but modern farms are very high tech operations. Really cool stuff happening in agtech. [0] https://developer-portal.deere.com/#/myjohndeere/api-inventory https://developer-portal.deere.com/#/myjohndeere/api-invento...

vladmk 5y ago
Lol this was literally my reply
nightowl_games 5y ago
We need a new word for these high tech massive farming operations. I come from the Canadian farming sector. Most of the farmers here are individuals, or medium sized family operations. Even the big farms aren't "high tech". There just a lot of guys and a bunch of leased machines. We have essentially 0 "high tech" farms. I wouldn't say "modern farms are very high tech operations", I'd say "high tech industrial players are in the process of taking over western agriculture". The word "farm" mean something special to me, as I was born and raised on one. What your talking about is something completely different.
- ABeeSea 5y ago
  So said the blacksmith’s son watching the invention of the steel press. “High tech industrial players are in the process of taking over western forgery.”
  - nightowl_games 5y ago
    Ya and we don't call a factory a Blacksmith now do we? "Modern blacksmiths sure are big!"
    - ABeeSea 5y ago
      Blacksmith was a job. Forge was the location. And industrial forges are very, very large. Blacksmith:Farmer::Forge:Farm
      - hinkley 5y ago
        Foundries were a thing, but even those are giving way to factories, right? I mean, someone will always make stock, but fewer companies melt metal these days, or at the very least relative to those that carve it up or weld it together (which may or may not involve a little melting, given spin welding and other techniques).
        ABeeSea 5y ago
        Foundries and forges are different things. A forge is closer to what you would call a manufacturing factory: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forging https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forging A foundry smelts. But it is also technically a factory for input material. In the same way a sawmill is a factory. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundry https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundry
        InitialLastName 5y ago
        Yeah, "factory" is really the general term for a facility that adds value to inputs at an industrialized scale. A lay person would call everything from a smelting plant to an electronics assembly floor a "factory" and not be wrong. From a pre-industrial blacksmith's perspective, the bigger distinction might be between a "factory" and a "shop". The processes involved are effectively the same; the difference is the scale/flexibility tradeoff (a shop can make different things every day without added overhead, where a "factory" gains enormous efficiency by being configured to do a single process).
- frosted-flakes 5y ago
  Factory farm.
- MAGZine 5y ago
  I'm curious to know what your standards for high tech are. I know that there are many farms in southern alberta who regularly get the latest farming equipment which includes john deere's that drive themselves. Hell, Lethbridge is home to at least one successful agtech biz, if not more. They're flying drones to analyze weed cover and optimize spraying based on positional data. It can be very high tech. I don't know what you're saying that it doesn't exist. It's happening in canada literally right now. That said a lot of these are for medium to large operations. Despite high tech, farmers who farm smaller plots generally have better yield. The automation has basically just let business expand into larger operations they might not otherwise have manpower or expertise to cover.
  - commentingbadly 5y ago
    > There just a lot of guys and a bunch of leased machines. We have essentially 0 "high tech" farms. I think OP might mean that these "high tech farms" are less like farms and more like movie studios. The tractor makers and the bank are acting like a movie studio. The are running a production in a certain area, with certain high tech equipment, with certain subleases on land for a certain number of years. There is no one driving vision and keeping the flame of what high tech should be. It's more like, "let's get this soy to market in the new way that is 7% cheaper before the other team does." Just a guess on what OP means
- universa1 5y ago
  hmm... having grown up on a farm in Germany and even though my father was only employed as the manager, it still felt more like "our" farm. It was definately a big farm compared to the german average, but then that average also includes a lot of part-time/side-business farms, where. Despite the size, the general methods between a smaller and a larger farm are not that different imho. But the amount of tech in a modern tractor was and still is amazing, and at the time the average car was definately not up to par. "automatic" GPS assisted driving, "laser" assisted driving (on harvesters). Beyond that, most of the "management" data was already digital 15 years ago, partly due to compliance requirements. And satellite imagery, soil samples, etc... were at least partly integrated. And I would still call this a farm! Times change, and clinging to the old times in some nostalgia doesn't help. (I don't want to imply that you do!) And on a slightly different perspective: I don't think bigger farms necessarily produce worse food, generate more externalities, etc... The processes are much more optimized, and at least I think the potential for better food with less externalities is with bigger farms. Also it is a somewhat bogus comparison: Mostly nobody complains that their car / laptop / smartphone comes from a factory, but for farming there is this strange preference for something of 50-100years past.
  - GuB-42 5y ago
    > Also it is a somewhat bogus comparison: Mostly nobody complains that their car / laptop / smartphone comes from a factory, but for farming there is this strange preference for something of 50-100years past. It is not specific to farming. Handmade, artisan stuff sells well, even when it is objectively worse. And in general, people are more sympathetic to small businesses than big, faceless corporations. We value the human element I guess. As for food, we tend to equate big farms with everything bad with current agriculture, even if it doesn't have to do with it: crops bred for yield instead of taste/nutrition, monoculture with pesticides/herbicides, ... It is partly true because small, traditional farms then to focus on quality and ethics/sustainability/... rather than price, because they can't compete on price.
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      Who's we? I know a guy who can't go through a drive through without lecturing everyone in the car about how being able to get 400kcal for a buck and a half is an amazing feat of societal progress. But he's old and emigrated from Poland so... My example may be an outlier but there's plenty of people who are happy to get Chilean produce in January and don't care how much methane their 75/25 beef emitted. HN has the spare cash and brain cycles to care about a lot of things that normal people don't even think about.
- anonymfus 5y ago
  I like the idea of SMBC author Zach Weinersmith to repurpose a word "villain" for them IIRC what he wrote on his twitter correctly.
- newsclues 5y ago
  Southern Ontario has farm tiling fields with high tech gps tractors. Lots of tech for data and tracking
- alricb 5y ago
  Sovkhoz? That's what they called them in the soviet union.
- cronix 5y ago
  > What your talking about is something completely different. I wonder if farmers felt the same way when tractors first started coming onto the scene replacing ox/horses and a plow, or combines, or grain carts, or seed drills, or... Did you grow up using any of that at-the-time "high tech" equipment? It was high tech at some point, now just common tech. At what point is something considered "high tech?" If you were born in the age of cell phones, are they considered high tech, or just common tech you can find on any street corner like gumball machines? If you were born in the 1950's, does your opinion differ on cell phones from someone currently in their 20's who grew up with it and knew no other way? Technology fueled the Agricultural Revolution. https://www.thoughtco.com/agricultural-revolution-1991931 https://www.thoughtco.com/agricultural-revolution-1991931
  - hellbannedguy 5y ago
    If a John Deere salesman knocked on that screen door 80 years ago and said, "Mr. Farmer I have something that will make your life easier. The only drawback is when it breaks down, you can't buy parts, can't see repair documatation, and only pricy factory workers whom live far away will be able to repair the machine at set rates. The farmer would have slammed the door, and fed his horses.
    - cto_of_antifa 5y ago
      To be fair, if you made the pitch that way to farmer today they would as well - those points are all iffy. mostly, though, the nature of labor has completely and utterly changed in 80 years and comparing the two is like apples and oranges.
      - cat199 5y ago
        > those points are all iffy. for tractors generally, maybe, but have read many things specifically about john deere being very DRM/anti repair, and a quick google seems to highlight that there are court battles being fought over exactly this right now. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-03-05/farmers-fight-john-deere-over-who-gets-to-fix-an-800-000-tractor https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-03-05/farmers-f...
- snarf21 5y ago
  For perspective, my parents both grew up on farms and I spent my summers on them. You are right but "farming" used to be a family with 3 acres and an ox and a plow. These small farms you lament are just as much a whole new world to the ox and plow as a 16/20 row combine that can process 150 acres a day is to your childhood. Efficiency comes from specialization which creates incentives for economies of scale. Software will continue to eat the world.
louis___ 5y ago
> Really cool stuff happening in agtech. I don't know if I agree with you. These kind of agtech farms tend to get heavy on pesticides use and tillage, which on the long term kills the ground life. And it leaves the farmers' hands tied when a bug happens : https://www.vice.com/en/article/xykkkd/why-american-farmers-are-hacking-their-tractors-with-ukrainian-firmware https://www.vice.com/en/article/xykkkd/why-american-farmers-...
- p_l 5y ago
  They tend to be because it's cheap and easy to be this way. Meanwhile they are also the biggest levers if appropriately motivated (whether by extra legal or legal incentives) to use better solutions.
  - bordercases 5y ago
    > They tend to be because it's cheap and easy to be this way. This is descriptively correct - and stupidly unsustainable. Something like 1/3 of US topsoil has already been consumed. Your second claim is vaguely correct but doesn't have much insight.
throwaway894345 5y ago
I've worked as a contractor for John Deere, and I can vouch for "inexperienced and mismanaged development". I was working on the embedded side of the business, not the API side. Some interesting observations: * John Deere didn't hire anyone for a Software Engineering job unless they were a licensed engineer, at least in the area that I worked in. This meant a lot of EE and CE majors were writing the software and they pretty much all viewed software dev as "a foot in the door" to do the hardware work to which they aspired. This may not have been true across the company (perhaps only in the area that I worked in) and it may not be true today. * This also manifest in a culture that was utterly divorced from the rest of the software industry. They're just moving from subversion to git, much of their "CI/CD pipeline" was built with windows .bat scripts and code generation via excel files that take hours to run (I shit thee not). They build pretty much everything in-house from hardware to embedded operating systems, and their embedded codebases are littered with #ifdefs to conditionally compile different code snippets based on the specific model of tractor/comine/sprayer/etc and feature set that it is to be loaded onto. It's hard to put into writing how difficult this is to maintain. * They build everything in-house, but it's a big company and people just email around binaries for various development tools with no way to find the source code or even the author except to ask around. Submitting a patch to a dev tool is an enormous effort. Word is they're moving to GitHub, and I think it's going to be a game changer for developers. * Other than that, there's a long tail of other problems. IT seems to have management paranoid that if developers are too productive the hackers will steal their IP and the company will go under or something. So getting a server provisioned is a months-long affair and teams will occasionally just run a Jenkins server from a former coworker's desktop that IT forgot to pick up. There's a culture of "don't try to improve things that aren't immediately in your purview". They routinely pick tools that are abysmal to work with--I don't mean "everyone has different preferences", I mean "they bought SharePoint and made everyone use it, but didn't pay for the SharePoint consultants who program the software to be actually usable within an organization (I'm generously assuming that it's possible to make SharePoint usable--I'm not sure this is the case). All of that said, John Deere has some really cool problems that would be really fun to work on if not for all of their organizational issues. They had self driving tech years before anyone else, they have a vast array of vehicles that run these distributed networks of embedded controllers, they make their own hardware and software (which could be a lot of fun to work on if managed properly), they aspire to use ag data to improve yields and have a credible path forward (as opposed to the "step 1: use big data, step 2: profit!" sense). Additionally, I think they probably are innovative and well-run in many non-software respects, but I'm not qualified to comment. Similarly, for all of its issues (including hostility toward folks who want to repair their vehicles), I really want them to turn a corner and succeed because agtech is really cool and they're an American Icon with a (increasingly tarnished) reputation for quality, innovation, and providing quality jobs. I wish them the best and maybe one day I'll apply and try and help from within.
batmaniam 5y ago
Where would one find these kind of jobs? Practically all job boards I see just list standard companies doing ads, or whatever.

by HEHENE 5y ago

vladmk 5y ago

Lol this was literally my reply

nightowl_games 5y ago

We need a new word for these high tech massive farming operations. I come from the Canadian farming sector. Most of the farmers here are individuals, or medium sized family operations. Even the big farms aren't "high tech". There just a lot of guys and a bunch of leased machines. We have essentially 0 "high tech" farms. I wouldn't say "modern farms are very high tech operations", I'd say "high tech industrial players are in the process of taking over western agriculture". The word "farm" mean something special to me, as I was born and raised on one. What your talking about is something completely different.

ABeeSea 5y ago
So said the blacksmith’s son watching the invention of the steel press. “High tech industrial players are in the process of taking over western forgery.”
- nightowl_games 5y ago
  Ya and we don't call a factory a Blacksmith now do we? "Modern blacksmiths sure are big!"
  - ABeeSea 5y ago
    Blacksmith was a job. Forge was the location. And industrial forges are very, very large. Blacksmith:Farmer::Forge:Farm
    - hinkley 5y ago
      Foundries were a thing, but even those are giving way to factories, right? I mean, someone will always make stock, but fewer companies melt metal these days, or at the very least relative to those that carve it up or weld it together (which may or may not involve a little melting, given spin welding and other techniques).
      - ABeeSea 5y ago
        Foundries and forges are different things. A forge is closer to what you would call a manufacturing factory: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forging https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forging A foundry smelts. But it is also technically a factory for input material. In the same way a sawmill is a factory. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundry https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundry
        InitialLastName 5y ago
        Yeah, "factory" is really the general term for a facility that adds value to inputs at an industrialized scale. A lay person would call everything from a smelting plant to an electronics assembly floor a "factory" and not be wrong. From a pre-industrial blacksmith's perspective, the bigger distinction might be between a "factory" and a "shop". The processes involved are effectively the same; the difference is the scale/flexibility tradeoff (a shop can make different things every day without added overhead, where a "factory" gains enormous efficiency by being configured to do a single process).
frosted-flakes 5y ago
Factory farm.
MAGZine 5y ago
I'm curious to know what your standards for high tech are. I know that there are many farms in southern alberta who regularly get the latest farming equipment which includes john deere's that drive themselves. Hell, Lethbridge is home to at least one successful agtech biz, if not more. They're flying drones to analyze weed cover and optimize spraying based on positional data. It can be very high tech. I don't know what you're saying that it doesn't exist. It's happening in canada literally right now. That said a lot of these are for medium to large operations. Despite high tech, farmers who farm smaller plots generally have better yield. The automation has basically just let business expand into larger operations they might not otherwise have manpower or expertise to cover.
- commentingbadly 5y ago
  > There just a lot of guys and a bunch of leased machines. We have essentially 0 "high tech" farms. I think OP might mean that these "high tech farms" are less like farms and more like movie studios. The tractor makers and the bank are acting like a movie studio. The are running a production in a certain area, with certain high tech equipment, with certain subleases on land for a certain number of years. There is no one driving vision and keeping the flame of what high tech should be. It's more like, "let's get this soy to market in the new way that is 7% cheaper before the other team does." Just a guess on what OP means
universa1 5y ago
hmm... having grown up on a farm in Germany and even though my father was only employed as the manager, it still felt more like "our" farm. It was definately a big farm compared to the german average, but then that average also includes a lot of part-time/side-business farms, where. Despite the size, the general methods between a smaller and a larger farm are not that different imho. But the amount of tech in a modern tractor was and still is amazing, and at the time the average car was definately not up to par. "automatic" GPS assisted driving, "laser" assisted driving (on harvesters). Beyond that, most of the "management" data was already digital 15 years ago, partly due to compliance requirements. And satellite imagery, soil samples, etc... were at least partly integrated. And I would still call this a farm! Times change, and clinging to the old times in some nostalgia doesn't help. (I don't want to imply that you do!) And on a slightly different perspective: I don't think bigger farms necessarily produce worse food, generate more externalities, etc... The processes are much more optimized, and at least I think the potential for better food with less externalities is with bigger farms. Also it is a somewhat bogus comparison: Mostly nobody complains that their car / laptop / smartphone comes from a factory, but for farming there is this strange preference for something of 50-100years past.
- GuB-42 5y ago
  > Also it is a somewhat bogus comparison: Mostly nobody complains that their car / laptop / smartphone comes from a factory, but for farming there is this strange preference for something of 50-100years past. It is not specific to farming. Handmade, artisan stuff sells well, even when it is objectively worse. And in general, people are more sympathetic to small businesses than big, faceless corporations. We value the human element I guess. As for food, we tend to equate big farms with everything bad with current agriculture, even if it doesn't have to do with it: crops bred for yield instead of taste/nutrition, monoculture with pesticides/herbicides, ... It is partly true because small, traditional farms then to focus on quality and ethics/sustainability/... rather than price, because they can't compete on price.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    Who's we? I know a guy who can't go through a drive through without lecturing everyone in the car about how being able to get 400kcal for a buck and a half is an amazing feat of societal progress. But he's old and emigrated from Poland so... My example may be an outlier but there's plenty of people who are happy to get Chilean produce in January and don't care how much methane their 75/25 beef emitted. HN has the spare cash and brain cycles to care about a lot of things that normal people don't even think about.
anonymfus 5y ago
I like the idea of SMBC author Zach Weinersmith to repurpose a word "villain" for them IIRC what he wrote on his twitter correctly.
newsclues 5y ago
Southern Ontario has farm tiling fields with high tech gps tractors. Lots of tech for data and tracking
alricb 5y ago
Sovkhoz? That's what they called them in the soviet union.
cronix 5y ago
> What your talking about is something completely different. I wonder if farmers felt the same way when tractors first started coming onto the scene replacing ox/horses and a plow, or combines, or grain carts, or seed drills, or... Did you grow up using any of that at-the-time "high tech" equipment? It was high tech at some point, now just common tech. At what point is something considered "high tech?" If you were born in the age of cell phones, are they considered high tech, or just common tech you can find on any street corner like gumball machines? If you were born in the 1950's, does your opinion differ on cell phones from someone currently in their 20's who grew up with it and knew no other way? Technology fueled the Agricultural Revolution. https://www.thoughtco.com/agricultural-revolution-1991931 https://www.thoughtco.com/agricultural-revolution-1991931
- hellbannedguy 5y ago
  If a John Deere salesman knocked on that screen door 80 years ago and said, "Mr. Farmer I have something that will make your life easier. The only drawback is when it breaks down, you can't buy parts, can't see repair documatation, and only pricy factory workers whom live far away will be able to repair the machine at set rates. The farmer would have slammed the door, and fed his horses.
  - cto_of_antifa 5y ago
    To be fair, if you made the pitch that way to farmer today they would as well - those points are all iffy. mostly, though, the nature of labor has completely and utterly changed in 80 years and comparing the two is like apples and oranges.
    - cat199 5y ago
      > those points are all iffy. for tractors generally, maybe, but have read many things specifically about john deere being very DRM/anti repair, and a quick google seems to highlight that there are court battles being fought over exactly this right now. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-03-05/farmers-fight-john-deere-over-who-gets-to-fix-an-800-000-tractor https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-03-05/farmers-f...
snarf21 5y ago
For perspective, my parents both grew up on farms and I spent my summers on them. You are right but "farming" used to be a family with 3 acres and an ox and a plow. These small farms you lament are just as much a whole new world to the ox and plow as a 16/20 row combine that can process 150 acres a day is to your childhood. Efficiency comes from specialization which creates incentives for economies of scale. Software will continue to eat the world.

louis___ 5y ago

> Really cool stuff happening in agtech. I don't know if I agree with you. These kind of agtech farms tend to get heavy on pesticides use and tillage, which on the long term kills the ground life. And it leaves the farmers' hands tied when a bug happens : https://www.vice.com/en/article/xykkkd/why-american-farmers-are-hacking-their-tractors-with-ukrainian-firmware https://www.vice.com/en/article/xykkkd/why-american-farmers-...

p_l 5y ago
They tend to be because it's cheap and easy to be this way. Meanwhile they are also the biggest levers if appropriately motivated (whether by extra legal or legal incentives) to use better solutions.
- bordercases 5y ago
  > They tend to be because it's cheap and easy to be this way. This is descriptively correct - and stupidly unsustainable. Something like 1/3 of US topsoil has already been consumed. Your second claim is vaguely correct but doesn't have much insight.

throwaway894345 5y ago

I've worked as a contractor for John Deere, and I can vouch for "inexperienced and mismanaged development". I was working on the embedded side of the business, not the API side. Some interesting observations: * John Deere didn't hire anyone for a Software Engineering job unless they were a licensed engineer, at least in the area that I worked in. This meant a lot of EE and CE majors were writing the software and they pretty much all viewed software dev as "a foot in the door" to do the hardware work to which they aspired. This may not have been true across the company (perhaps only in the area that I worked in) and it may not be true today. * This also manifest in a culture that was utterly divorced from the rest of the software industry. They're just moving from subversion to git, much of their "CI/CD pipeline" was built with windows .bat scripts and code generation via excel files that take hours to run (I shit thee not). They build pretty much everything in-house from hardware to embedded operating systems, and their embedded codebases are littered with #ifdefs to conditionally compile different code snippets based on the specific model of tractor/comine/sprayer/etc and feature set that it is to be loaded onto. It's hard to put into writing how difficult this is to maintain. * They build everything in-house, but it's a big company and people just email around binaries for various development tools with no way to find the source code or even the author except to ask around. Submitting a patch to a dev tool is an enormous effort. Word is they're moving to GitHub, and I think it's going to be a game changer for developers. * Other than that, there's a long tail of other problems. IT seems to have management paranoid that if developers are too productive the hackers will steal their IP and the company will go under or something. So getting a server provisioned is a months-long affair and teams will occasionally just run a Jenkins server from a former coworker's desktop that IT forgot to pick up. There's a culture of "don't try to improve things that aren't immediately in your purview". They routinely pick tools that are abysmal to work with--I don't mean "everyone has different preferences", I mean "they bought SharePoint and made everyone use it, but didn't pay for the SharePoint consultants who program the software to be actually usable within an organization (I'm generously assuming that it's possible to make SharePoint usable--I'm not sure this is the case). All of that said, John Deere has some really cool problems that would be really fun to work on if not for all of their organizational issues. They had self driving tech years before anyone else, they have a vast array of vehicles that run these distributed networks of embedded controllers, they make their own hardware and software (which could be a lot of fun to work on if managed properly), they aspire to use ag data to improve yields and have a credible path forward (as opposed to the "step 1: use big data, step 2: profit!" sense). Additionally, I think they probably are innovative and well-run in many non-software respects, but I'm not qualified to comment. Similarly, for all of its issues (including hostility toward folks who want to repair their vehicles), I really want them to turn a corner and succeed because agtech is really cool and they're an American Icon with a (increasingly tarnished) reputation for quality, innovation, and providing quality jobs. I wish them the best and maybe one day I'll apply and try and help from within.

batmaniam 5y ago

Where would one find these kind of jobs? Practically all job boards I see just list standard companies doing ads, or whatever.