8 ms·
John Deere does not receive any credit for any innovations they may have made in the area of self driving vehicles until they acknowledge the right of vehicle o
by gnu8 11y ago
John Deere does not receive any credit for any innovations they may have made in the area of self driving vehicles until they acknowledge the right of vehicle owners to service their own machines and release all required documentation, source code, and diagnostic tools to facilitate this.
- davelnewton 11y agoCouldn't agree more; it's pretty insidious. To be fair, the other systems we've installed are similarly encumbered (at least so far).
- viggity 11y agoI understand where you're coming from and I think there is a middle ground, but there is certainly a decent rationale for locking it down: these machines cost $750K to $1M and enormously complex. Allowing an owner to inject some jury rigged code could cause hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage to the machine, or worse yet hurt or kill someone. Honestly, what would happen if the implements you have hitched to the back of the tractor can't receive the proper instructions because the owner bought some counterfeit FTDI chip. You can set up your spray zones to make sure you don't spray pesticides near waterways, who is liable if that gets screwed up? The counterfeiter? The Farmer? Either way you know John Deere is going to get dragged through the mud for it.
- nmrm2 11y agoThis is an argument against allowing self-service, but it isn't an argument against opening things up and allowing certified third party service. Preventing counterfeiting by not releasing source/documentation is a pretty textbook case at an attempt at security through obscurity.
- teddyh 11y agoThe exact same argument could be made about cars. Or a house. Or any large, complicated and expensive modern thing, really. I’m assuming that you don’t believe that similar restrictions are reasonable on cars or houses, etc. So what makes a tractor so utterly different? Is it more dangerous? Cars can certainly be more dangerous. And a house? Where people sleep? Wouldn’t that be even more important to restrict people’s ham-fisted “repairs” or the like? But we don’t. So why are tractors different?
- jcranmer 11y agoBut we do have similar restrictions on a house--you need licensed electricians, etc., as well as approved building permits to do many tasks.
- Phlarp 11y agoCars are similarly locked down, as are many (most?) consumer electronics devices. Buildings have an even more complex system of restrictions placed on them, called fire/building/electrical codes, albeit the enforcement is more nuanced. If you want to advocate for a more open system of published regulations and a licensing/insurance system for professionals that's fine, but don't try to pretend that other facets of life aren't equally regulated.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- codezero 11y agoI have a hunch future retail self driving cars will have the same restrictions, unfortunately.
- stephengillie 11y agoWho wants to actually own their own bare metal anymore? Why do you want to be tied to this specific server or car, this specific package of molecules? The SPSD Car[1] will not be something that can be owned by individuals. You can use your smartphone to request a pickup, which will be fulfilled by any of a number of nearby cars. You'll lease a license to be transported in one car, and the app will automatically transfer that license to the car that's fulfilling your trip. Your Leased License to be Transported in a Car will only apply for the duration of the trip, and gives you no rights or responsibilities to the underlying vehicle. [1] (Solar Powered Self Driving)
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoWe are a long way from that. In a cab, its somebody's job to keep it clean and safe. An auto-car may arrive with dog droppings, vomit, trash in the back seat with slashed upholstery and condom wrappers. How is that going to be managed?
- stephengillie 11y agoIt will be managed by whatever company owns the cabs and rents them out. They may subcontract that to car detailing businesses.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoSure, once a day or once a week. A cabbie is right on any problem. Or they don't get any custom. An auto-car could be disgusting for hours or days.
- stephengillie 11y ago
- rayiner 11y agoThat makes no sense at all.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- tgb 11y agoHow do we make this ideal compatible with the often-stated claim that, for insurance and legal purposes, the manufacturer should be liable for the vehicle? A car you can service only at the cost of losing your insurance and legal protection is practically a non-serviceable car.
- fluidcruft 11y agoYou mean how Apple similarly doesn't deserve credit for the iPhone and iPad until they open up the platform?