[AT] OT modern computer controlls

Thomas Mehrkam tmehrkam at sbcglobal.net
Fri Mar 24 07:50:11 PDT 2017


I am perfectly capable of modulating the volume knob when the speed changes.
I do not need a &%$# computer to do it for me.
If course I grew up with vibrator power supplies in a tube radio.  You just banged on the dash to fix the darn thing. :-}


      From: Stephen Offiler <soffiler at gmail.com>
 To: Antique tractor email discussion group <at at lists.antique-tractor.com> 
 Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 6:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [AT] OT modern computer controlls
   
Easy answer is anti-theft.  YOU might live in a rural place where theft
just isn't even a thing, but, cars are built for the majority of the
population, which in more suburban and urban areas, suffers a certain
amount of petty theft of things like car stereos.  A radio that
authenticates itself with the rest of the car's computers, and goes dead if
it's removed and reinstalled in the wrong car, is a radio nobody wants to
steal, problem solved.  In addition, a radio that talks to other parts of
the car knows, for example, how fast you're driving and can automatically
adjust volume to compensate for road noise.  Then we get into Bluetooth
communication of the radio with your cell phone for hands-free calling,
which is law in many states.  The radio has to communicate with a
microphone located somewhere up near your head, not down on the dash where
the rest of the radio is located.

I get it ... it sounds like completely needless complexity to some people.
It solves problems for other people.

SO


On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 6:26 AM, Howard Fleming <hfleming at moosebird.net>
wrote:

> Nothing really new to add to this, but the story is showing up on some
> of the security sites I check:
> https://securityledger.com/2017/03/hobbled-by-dmca-
> famers-are-jailbreaking-tractors/
> https://securityledger.com/2017/03/right-to-repair-on-
> the-ropes-in-minnesota-motherboard/
>
> and others:
> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150513/18001030993/
> john-deere-clarifies-trying-to-abuse-copyright-law-to-
> stop-you-owning-your-own-tractor-because-it-cares-about-you.shtml
>
> On the subject of computerization, I have owned VWs for years (diesel up
> to recently... :o(, and and while computer controls for engines, etc.,
> have their good points, "why" does my radio have to talk to the system?
> Makes is a real pain to add a cd changer to a stock VW radio.... (in the
> past).
>
> For a tractor reference, my 48 Ford 8N has no need for it.... :o).
>
> Howard
>
>
>
> On 03/23/2017 02:03 PM, Stephen Offiler wrote:
> > My point, Dean, is not really pro-EPA nor con-EPA.  My point is that
> > computerization might have been started by emission controls, but that's
> > history already.  MANY aspects of modern automobiles (and modern farm
> > equipment for that matter) that have nothing at all to do with emissions
> > (antilock brakes, traction control, security systems, entertainment
> > systems, climate control systems, automatic transmissions, etc) are now
> > computerized.  Therefore, repairs that relate to any of these systems now
> > tends to require a level of equipment and technical understanding that
> > surpasses most shade-tree do-it-yourselfers.
> >
> > SO
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Dean VP <deanvp at att.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Stephen,
> >>
> >> The EPA has done some good things to help clean up the air but IMHO have
> >> gone way overboard in over regulating causing excessive cost increases
> for
> >> manufactures.  There has to be some kind of reasonable balance.  We are
> >> not
> >> at that point right now.
> >>
> >> Dean VP
> >> Apache junction, AZ
> >>
> >> It's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
> >> [mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of Stephen
> Offiler
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 7:20 AM
> >> To: Antique tractor email discussion group <
> at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [AT] OT modern computer controlls
> >>
> >> I don't intended to sound like I'm disagreeing with Thomas.  I think his
> >> EPA
> >> comment does in fact apply to the basic history of modern engine
> >> complexity.
> >> But as usual the story is a lot more complex than that.  I lifted the
> >> following from Wikipedia because I agree and so it saves me a bunch of
> time
> >> trying to summarize what I know about Right To Repair legislation and
> >> controversy (I work in the automotive aftermarket, and occasionally
> some of
> >> this stuff touches me professionally)
> >>
> >> "...The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments required all vehicles built after
> >> 1994 to include on-board computer systems to monitor vehicle emissions.
> The
> >> bill also required automakers to provide independent repairers the same
> >> emissions service information as provided to franchised new car dealers.
> >> California further passed legislation requiring that all emissions
> related
> >> service information and tools be made available to independent shops.
> >> Unlike the Clean Air Act, the California bill also required the car
> >> companies to maintain web sites which contained all of their service
> >> information and which was accessible on a subscription basis to repair
> >> shops
> >> and car owners.
> >>
> >> As automotive technology advanced, computers came to control the vital
> >> systems of every vehicle, including brakes, ignition keys, air bags,
> >> steering mechanisms and more.[3] Repairing motor vehicles became a
> >> high-tech
> >> operation, with computer diagnostic tools replacing a mechanic's
> >> observation
> >> and experience.[4] These developments eventually made manufacturers the
> >> "gatekeepers" of advanced information necessary to repair or supply
> parts
> >> to
> >> motor vehicles..."
> >>
> >> Link:
> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Vehicle_Owners'_Right_to_Repair_Act
> >>
> >>
> >> SO
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Thomas O Mehrkam <
> tmehrkam at sbcglobal.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am aware most to the complexity you find in modern engines is the
> >>> result of EPA regulations. I was not aware the EPA would go after the
> >>> manufacture for modifications made by a third party.  That is insane.
> >>>
> >>> On 3/22/2017 9:19 PM, Henry Miller wrote:
> >>>> I'm an employee of John deere, but I don't speak for them.
> >>>>
> >>>> This article is misrepresenting the situation. People claim they
> >>>> just want to fix things, but when you really press then in it they
> >>>> will admit what they really want is to disable all the emissions
> >>>> controls and/or get more power. Of course John deere isn't going to
> >>>> agree to that, nor will any competitor. The way the law is written
> >>>> the EPA will be after deere for anyone who modifies their tractor
> >>>>
> >>>> If you want to work on your tractor, all the codes are in a book
> >>>> that you can order.  Any heavy duty scan tool which your autoparts
> >>>> store will sell you will read the codes. That is enough to do most
> >>>> repairs.  It isn't enough to replace an ecu, but since that only
> >>>> comes from deere, the dealer should provide the programming.
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> AT mailing list
> >>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> AT mailing list
> >> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> AT mailing list
> >> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > AT mailing list
> > http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
_______________________________________________
AT mailing list
http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at


   



More information about the AT mailing list