boltsfan17

beowulfschmidt said:

boltsfan17 said:

Right to repair has been a huge issue with farmers here in California. Coming from a family of farmers, I'm very well versed on this issue. For those who are unaware, just say you buy a $300k John Deere tractor. The firmware on the tractor prevents farmers from making unauthorized repairs, even simple ones. If something goes wrong with the engine and you need to replace a part, the software won't allow you to do that yourself. The issue with this is sometimes you can't get a John Deere tech out to your farm for days. This creates a huge problem because there are times when you can't wait for days, especially depending on the crop. It's expensive to get a tech out there just to authorize a repair. It's usually $200-300 just for them to come out and then hundreds per hour to put the codes in. I've seen people with bills that were over $500 and that's before the repair. I know quite a few farmers who are now using pirated John Deere software. This may not be related to Apple currently but if legislation like this passes, there definitely would be a trickle down effect. 

Not to minimize the pain this causes for farmers, but is John Deere the only only manufacturer that can provide such equipment?  Or are they the only producing good equipment?  Are there any manufacturers from whom farmers could buy equipment that don't do the things JD is doing?

It's just not John Deere doing it, all farming equipment manufacturers are doing it. Say for example you have a Toyota and it needs repaired. You can take it to a Toyota dealership or any other auto repair place. Other auto repair places have access to diagnostic tools, parts, and service manuals. That's not the case in the agriculture industry. No one has access to parts, manuals, diagnostic tools, etc except the manufacturers. 

Right to repair has been a huge issue with farmers here in California. Coming from a family of farmers, I'm very well versed on this issue. For those who are unaware, just say you buy a $300k John Deere tractor. The firmware on the tractor prevents farmers from making unauthorized repairs, even simple ones. If something goes wrong with the engine and you need to replace a part, the software won't allow you to do that yourself. The issue with this is sometimes you can't get a John Deere tech out to your farm for days. This creates a huge problem because there are times when you can't wait for days, especially depending on the crop. It's expensive to get a tech out there just to authorize a repair. It's usually $200-300 just for them to come out and then hundreds per hour to put the codes in. I've seen people with bills that were over $500 and that's before the repair. I know quite a few farmers who are now using pirated John Deere software. This may not be related to Apple currently but if legislation like this passes, there definitely would be a trickle down effect. 

sflocal said:

poisednoise said:

wood1208 said:

Don't believe what you read. Pilots are trained in many ways including flight simulators,cockpit practical flying,etc. Than, they fly for thousands of hours call on job perfecting skills.

I don't think the suggestion is that just anyone off the street was put in the 737-8 cockpit after a few hours on an iPad, that's obviously ridiculous.

AppleInsider said:

It was determined that, at least in the case of the Max, pilots with prior 737 experience [my emphasis] learned about the new plane using an iPad for two hours, as well as a 13-page handbook of differences between the Max and earlier models.

That's just about plausible, but still criminal - quite possibly literally.

Why?  The 737-8 is pretty much identical physically as the prior planes, sans more elaborate software.  Same controls, etc.  It's not like there's a physical defect that caused the planes to crash.  If a 737 pilot with thousands of flight-hours starts on a 737-8, why re-learn everything that hasn't changed?  If all it is is software about this anti-stalling feature, I really don't have a problem with training on something as humble as an iPad if it's for information-use only.  Sure, simulators would be much better in any situation.

What I have a problem with is Boeing's lack of transparency here.  if all it takes is a software fix, great.  The problem I have is testing/training on the updated software.  Buggy software on my PC could cause it to lock up, requiring a reboot and life moves on until a fix is made.  Buggy software in the 737's flightOS could cause the plane to literally fall down from the sky, killing hundreds of people.  That kind of unreliability is inexcusable.  Boeing really needs to step up here, which to me seems like they're asleep at the wheel.

The 737 Max 8 is actually different physically. The Max 8 has bigger engines that are on a different position of the aircraft compared to older 737 models. With larger engines in a different position, the center of gravity shifted forward on the new Max 8 models. That can cause the nose to pitch up during takeoff. I believe that's why Boeing has that new MCAS software to counter that. Going off what has been reported so far, I'm going to assume faulty software/sensors and lack of training caused both crashes. 

GeorgeBMac said:

I have always been in favor of net neutrality -- enforced by government.   The idea of "government control of the internet is as ridiculous as government control of any utility.  The regulations are there to insure a fair shake for consumers and effective management of national infrastructure, nothing more, nothing less.   But, that was all "back in the day" of internet being delivered over coax, FiOS, and LTE.

With the advent of 5G that could all change.   Not only does 5G have the capacity to replace most or all of today's conventional delivery methods, but 5G can be software targeted to deliver pinpoint accuracy for critical functions like remote surgery and self-driving or remotely driven vehicles -- and a ton more.

I think this whole thing needs to be thought through as to how it will be used, how it fits into and supports critical U.S. infrastructure, and who says which resources get which resources?   For instance:   Do you trust Verizon to provide and decide how much you pay for remote surgery over their network?  What will stop them from price gouging based on willingness to pay -- the same as Big Pharma does for life saving critical medications?  Or say, your self driving car travels from the area covered by your Verizon network into AT&T's -- can AT&T then charge you a "roaming fee"?

If you look at the big picture, net neutrality hasn't done anything. I think the mandate by Obama in 2015 declaring internet a public utility made things worse. Net neutrality caused investment into broadband internet to decrease. With net neutrality, Title II regulations were imposed on ISP's. Under the regulations, all proposals had to be submitted to the FCC for approval. Look at how long it took the FCC to allow T-Mobile's Binge On service. Another huge problem in this country net neutrality doesn't address is the local monopolies all around the nation. All these restrictions city, county, and state governments have done has stymied competition. Almost every place I've lived in only had one option for high speed internet. Net neutrality also hasn't helped rural customers, who represent 20% of the U.S. population. I've seen quite a few local projects aimed at rural customers get the ax due to the bureaucracy of net neutrality regulations. Bottom line, I just think enforcing Great Depression era laws on the internet don't protect the consumer or help broadband growth. There is just too much misinformation out there where people continue to falsely believe net neutrality creates an open and free internet, which it doesn't. The hands off approach prior to the 2015 mandate is the way to go. 

MplsP said:

lkrupp said:

This sounds like these tools don’t really work very well. Why would a $6000 piece of equipment being going for $1000 or lower on eBay? You would think these tools would command a king’s ransom on the open market and that hackers would be trying to outbid each other. The whole thing sounds fishy. But more than that it completely squashes the government’s claim that any backdoor or master key manufacturers would provide could be kept secure. 

Do we know if they even work on a device with iOS 12? that may be why the dump - Apple updated iOS and they're suddenly useless.

I was checking out the listings. The majority of them say expired license key. Most seem to be on outdated software so they are probably useless on newer iPhone's. I did visit Cellebrite's website and was looking at the services they provide. Their website says they can unlock data from iPhone's on iOS 5 to iOS 11.