Farming Equipment is Beaming Back 'Reams of Data' To its Manufacturers (forbes.com) 57
Farming equipment like combine harvesters "beam back reams of data to its manufacturer," reports Forbes:
GPS records the combine's precise path through the field as it moves. Sensors tally the number of crops gathered per acre and the spacing between them. On a sister machine called a planter, algorithms adjust the distribution of seeds based on which parts of the soil have in past years performed best. Another machine, a sprayer, uses algorithms to scan for weeds and zap them with pesticides. Meanwhile sensors record the wear and tear on the machines, so that when the farmer who operates them heads to the local distributor to look for a replacement part, it has already been ordered and is waiting for them. Farming may be an earthy industry, but much of it now takes place in the cloud.
Leading farm machine makers like Chicago-based John Deere or Georgia's AGCO collect data from all around the world thanks to the ability of their bulky machines to extract a huge variety of metrics from farmers' fields and store it online... The amassing of all that data in the hands of the few major companies that sell farm equipment across the country or worldwide has opened up big opportunities for the "smart farming" industry, even as many in the farming community are reluctant to part with information about the fields they plow....
Equipment makers with sufficient sales of machines around the country may in theory actually be able to predict, at least to some small but meaningful extent, the prices of various crops by analyzing the data its machines are sending in — such as "yields" of crops per acre, the amount of fertilizer used, or the average number of seeds of a given crop planted in various regions. Were the company then to sell that data to a commodities trader, say, it could likely reap a windfall: normally, the markets must wait for highly-anticipated government surveys to run their course.
Leading farm machine makers like Chicago-based John Deere or Georgia's AGCO collect data from all around the world thanks to the ability of their bulky machines to extract a huge variety of metrics from farmers' fields and store it online... The amassing of all that data in the hands of the few major companies that sell farm equipment across the country or worldwide has opened up big opportunities for the "smart farming" industry, even as many in the farming community are reluctant to part with information about the fields they plow....
Equipment makers with sufficient sales of machines around the country may in theory actually be able to predict, at least to some small but meaningful extent, the prices of various crops by analyzing the data its machines are sending in — such as "yields" of crops per acre, the amount of fertilizer used, or the average number of seeds of a given crop planted in various regions. Were the company then to sell that data to a commodities trader, say, it could likely reap a windfall: normally, the markets must wait for highly-anticipated government surveys to run their course.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:yet at the same time (Score:5, Informative)
Here's an interesting article [bloomberg.com] about the right-to-repair movement for these industrial tools!
Re: (Score:2)
Any other company suffering this amount of scrutiny by machine manufacturer would consider it espionage.
Re: (Score:2)
There was a time when the CIA would look at a countries production.
Re: (Score:3)
Did they ever stop?
If anything it would be a lot easier today to get those figures, but for some countries the data might be a bit fuzzy.
Re: (Score:1)
Of course not. Have you ever seen repairs the farmers make? A sensor is going to fail, the farmer is going to replace it with some piece of crap duct taped in place, it won't work right, and they'll bad talk the system. They attempted to allow minor repairs for a couple of years of the Precision Farming system, but the inevitable happened and they had to disallow it. It pisses farmers off to no end and they whine about it incessantly but it's still making them enough money that they'll keep using it.
Re: (Score:2)
At least half the repairs Davis sees involve code faults triggered by emission-control systems. The faults render vehicles inoperable—a bit like a mouse incapacitating an elephant. He can replace the exhaust filters and particulate traps that throw a tractor’s codes, but dealerships won’t provide the software to restart it unless he or the owner hauls the machine in or pays for a mechanic to make a house call. Who can fix a tractor? [bloomberg.com]
Imagine the uproar if every time your car's check engine light illuminated, it stopped running right where it
Re: (Score:3)
What are you talking about? I've been using so-called "precision farming" equipment since the beginning and I have no idea what you're talking about when you say "they attempted to allow minor repairs for a couple of years." Look, sensors are, well sensors. Analog devices. Unlike sensors used by the arduino hobbyists, sensors used on cars and machines have a bit more robustness built into them and additional characteristics to allow an ECU to detect a broken or shorted wire going to that sensor. But mak
Re: (Score:1)
I have heard that the Chinese government has required and been granted full access to the code, yet US farmers are not granted any access. I'm not exactly patriotic and even I find that pretty disgusting.
Re: (Score:2)
[citation needed]
I have heard that a lepracan will trade his pot of gold for a pack of Marlboros. It's just about as believable.
Re: (Score:1)
Sure, I'll cite where I heard it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, some random guy with a web site to fix Macbooks, definitely a reliable source.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm no he's not some random guy. This man is a legend in repair circles. He's chronicled for years the things Apple does to deliberately sabotage efforts to repair their devices. He knows of what he speaks.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, according to what I have seen and read, the MSRP is very high while the discounted price is what the farmer is more likely to want. You pay The Deere on the front end or the back end but The Deere wants to be paid.
Sucks to use these new tractors!
And The Deere adds to the decline of the family farm.
IMHO
Opt out? (Score:3)
TFA doesn't say whether the farmers can disallow the data uploads totally or not.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Opt out? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is data the farmers want for themselves, not necessarily to share. Like how I can't graph the history of my blood pressure monitor without a smartphone app that uploads the data to a website first.
Re: (Score:2)
Simple. Get a non-bluetooth BP checker and a pencil. Or re-enter those two numbers into excel manually.
Be old-school cool. You can do it.
Re: (Score:2)
I also have a sphygmomanometer. Don't need advice in old-school cool.
Re: (Score:2)
TFA doesn't say whether the farmers can disallow the data uploads totally or not.
You could probably look in the fine print on their website, but I'm willing to bet John Deere is holding the hardware warranty over the consumers head if they don't keep hardware "maintained properly", which of course now translates into a connected device where they conveniently gather system performance information to support a (for-profit) maintenance plan, under the guise of gathering consumer usage data.
John Deere isn't stupid. Doesn't exactly take a genius to look at all the other data farmers getti
Re: (Score:3)
Farmers are using drones, self-driving tractors, IoT moisture sensors, remote soil analysis, etc. It's called 'Precision Farming'. Other farmers of course **are** "bucking the system", but not surprisingly the Luddites are far less productive.
Re:Opt out? (Score:4, Interesting)
Farmers are using drones, self-driving tractors, IoT moisture sensors, remote soil analysis, etc. It's called 'Precision Farming'.
Time will tell of those "Luddites" made the right decision to avoid modern equipment. Maintaining your own equipment and not being beholden to licensing and usage fees in the future scenario I described, could prove quite valuable in the end. There's a reason the right to repair fight is damn near targeting this specific hardware industry right now. I can't imagine mandatory factory maintenance at the 21st Century premium tractor stealership being any less costly than at the 21st Century premium auto stealership.
Other farmers of course **are** "bucking the system", but not surprisingly the Luddites are far less productive.
Productivity needs are often driven by demand. There are probably quite a few organic farmers that cannot produce at the same level as their chemically-enhanced competitors, but still run a very successful business even at a slower pace due to a constant demand for organic products. Same goes for Grandma's corner bakery armed with two bakers and a single oven vs. the Wal-Mart bakery armed with 8 bakers and half a dozen ovens. Both businesses can find ways to survive and thrive at far different levels of productivity and efficiency. Perhaps I'm wrong, but right now precision farming appears to be more an upgrade justified by considerable volume than a farming necessity to avoid being labeled a "Luddite".
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly the primary mover for the introduction of robotic agriculture in Europe are organic farmers, because of the high cost of farm labor there.
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly the primary mover for the introduction of robotic agriculture in Europe are organic farmers, because of the high cost of farm labor there.
Since Europe has done well to buck a lot of the horrific food trends the US has accepted as safe (e.g. HFCS, GMOs, etc.), it make sense that there is probably a lot more demand for organic farming in Europe, and thus some larger operations to justify precision farming.
And given the fact that the US often abuses immigrants as cheap (read: underpaid) labor in farming operations, I'd say the cost of farm labor in Europe is not necessarily high by comparison. I see it more as realistic for those who still care
Re: (Score:2)
TFA doesn't say whether the farmers can disallow the data uploads totally or not.
From TFA:
Still, farmers have yet to be fully won over. Many worry that by allowing the transfer of their data to manufacturers, it will inadvertently wind up in the hands of neighboring farmers
and:
Farmers frequently agree to share data
There.
Re: (Score:1)
Deere is doing all the data analysis for them, so disallowing uploads would be pointless. How many farmers do you know capable of configuring their home PC, much less a precision farming system?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, a farmer's job consists of hitting the ground with sticks until plants appear due to the providence of the Good Lord. No capacity for planning, grasp of market forces, or technical skill is needed.
Stop trolling.
Re: (Score:2)
The reality is IoT. Internet of Tractors.
When I was buying my current truck I had the option of shelling out ~80% of list price for ex-display or getting a 3 year old one which was used by the guy who supports the IoT (as in Tractors) for Honda and a couple of other manufacturers in my county. He managed to clock 107K miles on it in 3 years. This was mostly DEPLOYMENT, not support.
Right to repair, vendor locking, etc. (Score:1)
Farmers can't repair stuff unless they use more expensive John Deere (etc) parts.
There can be an equivalent part, that's built to spec (or even better than the poorly designed original) that simply can't be used because of lock-in, or the fact the machine will refuse to work with the part installed. This should be outright illegal.
Re:Right to repair, vendor locking, etc. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's worse! Even with the genuine John Deere part, the machine will refuse to work with it until it is "introduced" using software that Deere will only license to authorized dealers.
Deere would have us believe that this is somehow the EPA's fault.
Re: Right to repair, vendor locking, etc. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
No. it's called "introduction" and it is a process of granting an official blessing to cooperate with a particular unique ID.
Also known as activation. See this: [vice.com]
“The seat in my tractor is more complicated than the entire tractor [I grew up with],” Tom Schwarz, a fifth-generation farmer old me. “As tractors have become more high-tech, we do not have the ability to hook up a tractor to diagnose it, to repair it, or even to activate parts that we’ve already bought. There are used parts that are available, but if I put them on, the tractor won’t run” because of software activation locks.
Where did you think all this history was stored? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Farmers are pretty high tech these days. Some of them might even have one of those newfangled computer things in their home!
Seriously, there are plenty of better places they could keep their data.
Lets get real here (Score:1)
Unless you're growing pot on a large scale, or fraudulently accepting subsidies to *not* grow a crop, why on earth would a farmer care what information a manufacturer collects in terms of tractor usage?
Re:Lets get real here (Score:4, Interesting)
This is important because we have to maintain our right to informed consent. If we donâ(TM)t we will lose it. This is not to say we canâ(TM)t put trackers on our cars to satisfy the insurance companies, just that we need to know why.
That said, this idea of selling data while reasonable probably overestimates the value. My understanding is that farmers borrow money for seeds and chemicals. This gives the bankers , who have vast historical data, more than they need to invest in futures. They have the most data. A person with more limited data will not be nearly as successful.
Re: (Score:2)
right to informed consent.
I'm all for demanding informed consent. But I think its making a mountain out of a molehill freaking out over collected data that isn't really an invasion of privacy (which is not an enumerated CotUS right) when the information is innocuous.
My understanding is that farmers borrow money for seeds and chemicals. This gives the bankers , who have vast historical data, more than they need to invest in futures.
Do you really think this theoretical, potential disadvantage to farmers is worth focusing attention on, while Trump has been using federal gov't power to engage in a trade war with China that has devastated that market for American farmers? Or your local police seizing
Insider trading? (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe we already have a term for an unfair advantage due to access to information that is not generally public: "insider trading"
Whether using this sort of private data to place bets on the commodities market will indeed end up being labeled as insider trading remains to be seen, but if the first few instances to occur end up sweeping massive gains, I don't see how it couldn't be construed as such.
I'm definitely speculating on the sorts of information that manufacturers are currently pulling in from all the sensors attached to the field equipment they've already sold, but it's not unreasonable to suspect that the intent of sensors attached to equipment may change over time. Today they may simply be helping the farmer and the manufacturer's relationship with them, but that's not necessarily exclusive of also including plant types and yield predictions, which could be more readily converted into market trading intelligence.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, in the world of commodities trading, it's almost impossible to conduct "insider trading".
First, inside what? Company executives have a duty and obligation to their company. But oil traders? Soybean traders? Do they have an obligation to... oil and... soybeans? Second, there are a ton of companies that collect and sell hard-to-get-information like satellite data on oil tankers, oil storage silos, crop yield, climate models, etc. Whoever buys this data could definitely have an "unfair" advantag
Wrong tool for the job (Score:5, Funny)
Imagine how much more effective these machines would be if they sprayed weeds with herbicide
Re: (Score:2)
As a gardener I can assure you that weeds are pests.
FCOJ (Score:1)
Farmers already have this data. (Score:4, Informative)
This data is being collected locally as well, and is used when the farmer plans for next year. GPS, satellite imagery, drones, yield data, input rates, soil test data...it's all used when they sit down with their agronomy dealers to maximize production per dollar of inputs. Maybe equipment manufacturers might use it, but the farmers already have it, and are making good use of it.
what if it can't call home ? (Score:3)
So the Iowa farmer who can't even get a cell signal is not allowed to use his tractor? Seems extreme. Perhaps there is also a requirement for such remote people to install a cell tower nearby so their equipment can call home.
Re: (Score:2)
Deere provides relays that will feed back to the internet connection.
Re: (Score:2)
Deere provides relays that will feed back to the internet connection.
and where would that internet connection would come from? most farmers i know have horrible, spotty cell phone coverage and non-existant internet... which ISP do you think would put up a couple hundred of miles of fiber to deserve 10 customers?
Re: (Score:2)
Elon Musk has a solution...
(Starlink... Autonomous tractors... Tesla isn't just a car company...)
You don't own that. (Score:2)
The big farm machinery companies won't let farmers repair their own equipment and they have an insatiable desire for information about its use that is none of their business. Like the auto industry, they seem determined to harvest every datum they can get about the people using their products. I understand this desire, as it is a big new source of income for them. But, do they pay their customers for this information that they are harvesting? No. Instead, they convince them that it is in their interest
Re: (Score:3)
Actually it is in their interest to provide the data. If John Deere is able to analyze their operation sufficiently to (for example) tell them they can plant their rows of corn 4 inches closer together on 100 acres of planting that's a big deal.