Comments by "TheEyeTeaMan" (@TheEyeTeaMan) on "Louis Rossmann"
channel.
-
4
-
2
-
2
-
I actually know something about both sides of both industries (computers and mechanical / automotive / industrial)...
on the farmers side: yes right to repair is good to help their already thin margins. being able to swap parts upgrade and fix things is important and most have the skills to do it without needing to go to a shop for help. mechanical stuff is not particularly difficult and can be fixed by nearly anyone with a bit of forethought, patience, hand tools, and effort. however the recalibrations, modifications, and reprogramming needed depending on the repair or modification might be difficult for someone not well versed in C and if done incorrectly may damage the system (sensor feed programmed incorrectly may tell the computer it can send another 10 tons of force through the equipment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyA1lBJl_qM). upgrading things for more power is also good but if done incorrectly it would be like over overclocking immediately snaps your board in half but certainly doesn't stop people from doing it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGLdF6EDwHY.
against the farmers: being able to modify their equipment allows them to skirt government regulations including removing emissions equipment which unlike you car which is on the road and easily policed a tractor is not easily policed to find illegal modifications to emissions equipment as they are typically used solely on private property where they are hardly ever exposed to any kind of authority that could inspect and regulate them. in short cops on the road can look at your car but there are no farm cops to look at tractors for federal and state violations.
for the tractor manufacturers: allowing this adds extra expense to warranty related issues, the farmers can always swap back to oem if they were tinkering (and no I personally do not see this as an excuse but I am biased since I do this and then use the warranty after something goes boom). creating extra software and applications to make it possible for laymen to program and calibrate their controllers adds significant expense to the end product for very very little gains
against the manufacturers: this allows them to sell the exact same thing for more $$$ when it already could do that. A giant purchase such as a tractor which starts at the cost of most people's houses should come with the repair manual and the software to reset and calibrate sensors and the computer. locking out a machine at a critical time due to "possible damage" should have an override button which the company can say "if you use this over ride your warranty on parts xyz are null and void do you want to continue" and if the farmer says yes than it goes "ok you have another 1 day till timer goes off again to schedule a maintenance appointment click this button" this will be an easy way for equipment manufacturers to save a ton of money. this also allows them to maintain a grip on repairs and sell expensive software tools to repair shops. In short this is what the auto manufacturers did and still try to do.
for the guy writing the letter: I agree he genuinely sounds like a genuine human being and has some really really spot on points and well thought out reasonings. I have a really hard time disagreeing with him for the most part. notice how the letter writer says nothing about keeping their brand image shiney, or making sure things have the proper fit and finish or other bs. also when he says certified repair shop he is not talking about "john deere branded and owned shops" he means shops that are certified to work on the equipment which is just about any equipment shop out there. However this is the catch as far as I can see most 3rd party shops are priced out of the expensive monthly licensing fee for the software even if they can legally purchase it so there are few shops that actually have it due to their own thin margins. I also think there are some reasonably difficult hoops you need to jump through to get a copy of the software in the first place as in taking a john deere repair coarse to become properly certified.
against the letter writer: yes you would need to upgrade parts and cooling to take the extra power that chipping (or adding a turbo, or port and polishing, or using thinner head gaskets, or flat topped pistons, or etc...) creates. this argument is a strawman argument pointing at the fact that if I, the person doing the modifying, don't upgrade the necessary components to make the upgrade work properly then I may damage something. which is the same "reason" cpu manufacturers try to lock you out of overclocking unless you pay more. We all know that if you overclock or swap out a cpu or upgrade ram from sata 3 to sata 4 and you do not change out the necessary parts to make the machine work then it will not work and may cause permanent damage and if you didn't know that you will have learned in short order (I have seen someone who jammed ddr1 into a ddr2 slot it was bad, please swap your motherboard first). just because an upgrade means you will need to do an, um, upgrade does not bar you from doing so. the straw man is the fact that tractor parts are big, heavy, probably not readily available to swap in, hard to manage, don't a;ways just snap in, etc. vs "a computer heatsink which apparently is not only readily available for the heat dissipation you need just snaps in and works no sweat" which is why you can't just crank up the power and be happy.
now to respond to the "oh everyone will delete their emissions equipment without proper supervision" argument. Yes one could do this but they can also easily trick a certified tech by disconnecting it and feeding data using an arduino to the main computer and that will also pass muster too. releasing diagnostic tools does not mean releasing the development tools to modify the equipment controller. the diagnostic tools would still need to do all the verifications necessary to restart the equipment if all the sensors say everything is in good working order. no to make sure government regulations are met there should be a registry of who buys what and just like smogging a car the farm would need a routine inspection of their equipment which would include logging of hours used and how much exhaust fluid was purchased during that period (if they do not match then that would be a big giant red flag leading to even larger fines because I like other non plant based life forms enjoy oxygen). in short the writer does not take into consideration the fact that the diagnostic and repair software is different than a suite of tools used to modify and reprogram the system. he also points at the government regulation as the reasons for some of this which in short is the governments issue not to be foisted on the manufacturer to uphold and police. that regulation should be something that the government upholds and police's through a law stating that any time they want they can visit any land designated as farmland or any land that is being used as such to inspect equipment for epa violations. the manufacturer can send a list of individuals who have purchased equipment that fall under epa rules and the epa can follow up with annual inspections just like cars. these types of emission inspections would greatly reduce the incentive to try and bypass these systems and for the farmers who do there would be cost prohibitive fines that would be much greater than any kind of savings one would get from not repairing the systems and keeping them operational. so pointing at the smog equipment and bypassing that is also not a valid excuse.
©®apple: yeah apple has none of the excuses of "if you remove this thingy our chips will release excessive amounts of acrid black smoke into the air". They don't even let 3rd party repair places or individuals buy the repair tools.
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1