3 ms·
I am still trying to understand your point. While I agree these systems are highly complex, I am not sure why farmers need to mess with source code to perform
by itake 4y ago
I am still trying to understand your point.
While I agree these systems are highly complex, I am not sure why farmers need to mess with source code to perform a repair? If farmers are messing with the code (disabling sensors or whatever), then I'd have to assume the farmer knows they are taking on this risk that their tractor will not function as expected.
If sensors can be safely disabled, then why not provide an easy to do that?
- JoeAltmaier 4y agoAgain, we're not talking about a lawn mower or toaster. We're talking about a multi-ton autodriving machine of destruction. God no, don't disable a sensor, any more than you'd disable a sensor on a jet airliner. I agree; farmers should under no circumstance mess with code to perform a repair. I'm concerned that the software documentation is part of this bill (and in the minds of many technologists, should be open).
- itake 3y agoThe closest example I can think of is my car. If the seat belt sensor doesn't detect when my safety belt is properly working, I think it's ok to disable the sensor so that I can operate my vehicle without warning lights and sounds distracting me while I drive. I am sure there are comparable sensors on these vehicles that can have inaccurate readings that can safely be ignored if the operator knows what they are doing.
- Etrnl_President 4y ago[dead]