I'm curious to know what your standards for high tech are. I know that there are many farms in southern alberta who regularly get the latest farming equipment which includes john deere's that drive themselves.

Hell, Lethbridge is home to at least one successful agtech biz, if not more. They're flying drones to analyze weed cover and optimize spraying based on positional data.

It can be very high tech. I don't know what you're saying that it doesn't exist. It's happening in canada literally right now.

That said a lot of these are for medium to large operations. Despite high tech, farmers who farm smaller plots generally have better yield. The automation has basically just let business expand into larger operations they might not otherwise have manpower or expertise to cover.

> There just a lot of guys and a bunch of leased machines. We have essentially 0 "high tech" farms.

I think OP might mean that these "high tech farms" are less like farms and more like movie studios. The tractor makers and the bank are acting like a movie studio. The are running a production in a certain area, with certain high tech equipment, with certain subleases on land for a certain number of years. There is no one driving vision and keeping the flame of what high tech should be. It's more like, "let's get this soy to market in the new way that is 7% cheaper before the other team does." Just a guess on what OP means

hmm... having grown up on a farm in Germany and even though my father was only employed as the manager, it still felt more like "our" farm. It was definately a big farm compared to the german average, but then that average also includes a lot of part-time/side-business farms, where.

Despite the size, the general methods between a smaller and a larger farm are not that different imho. But the amount of tech in a modern tractor was and still is amazing, and at the time the average car was definately not up to par. "automatic" GPS assisted driving, "laser" assisted driving (on harvesters). Beyond that, most of the "management" data was already digital 15 years ago, partly due to compliance requirements. And satellite imagery, soil samples, etc... were at least partly integrated.

And I would still call this a farm! Times change, and clinging to the old times in some nostalgia doesn't help. (I don't want to imply that you do!)

And on a slightly different perspective: I don't think bigger farms necessarily produce worse food, generate more externalities, etc... The processes are much more optimized, and at least I think the potential for better food with less externalities is with bigger farms. Also it is a somewhat bogus comparison: Mostly nobody complains that their car / laptop / smartphone comes from a factory, but for farming there is this strange preference for something of 50-100years past.

> Also it is a somewhat bogus comparison: Mostly nobody complains that their car / laptop / smartphone comes from a factory, but for farming there is this strange preference for something of 50-100years past.

It is not specific to farming. Handmade, artisan stuff sells well, even when it is objectively worse. And in general, people are more sympathetic to small businesses than big, faceless corporations. We value the human element I guess.

As for food, we tend to equate big farms with everything bad with current agriculture, even if it doesn't have to do with it: crops bred for yield instead of taste/nutrition, monoculture with pesticides/herbicides, ... It is partly true because small, traditional farms then to focus on quality and ethics/sustainability/... rather than price, because they can't compete on price.

I think this is because when an artisan makes something, usually you know he tried hard, even if it ends being crap because subpar skills.

With industrialized products you know they want it cheap, resulting in crap product that didn't need to be crap.

For example once I had to repair my Electrolux fridge, when I opened it up I saw two very nasty things: 1. the holes between parts were all misaligned, to the point it was impossible to insert the screws intended to go in them. 2. it was then glued with a ton of glue spread "randomly" all over the place, it was obviously shoddy.

And the issue I had to fix in that fridge? They used the cheapest "defrost" button they could, one that notoriously got stuck often, so your fridge would stay in "defrost" mode forever and stop working, the solution was disassemble it, force the button back with a screwdriver, assemble it again... every time you used the button.

Somewhat related, but the glue situation reminded me of the time I realized I'm going to need to hire a woodworker if I ever want quality cabinets in my kitchen. I was doing delivery for one of the big home improvement stores and got asked to stay late and run some cabinets to a customer. Light crap on overtime? I'm there.

I'm looking at these cabinets in the stock room and they're crap. No joinery, no screws, just flat pieces of cheap wood glued together. So I go to joke with the woman who works in that department about how cheaply they were constructed. She looked me dead in the eye and told me, oh no, these were the nicest cabinets we sold in the store. Top of the line. They even use extra glue to make them sturdier.

Who's we?

I know a guy who can't go through a drive through without lecturing everyone in the car about how being able to get 400kcal for a buck and a half is an amazing feat of societal progress. But he's old and emigrated from Poland so...

My example may be an outlier but there's plenty of people who are happy to get Chilean produce in January and don't care how much methane their 75/25 beef emitted. HN has the spare cash and brain cycles to care about a lot of things that normal people don't even think about.

For comparison: A regular buck (the animal) may have something around the 160000 kcal.

As to distrusting large companies, I think that is an intuitive understanding we have that in any organization larger than 100 people, it is likely led by a sociopath. They gravitate towards positions of power, they have superficial charm that hold in large groups where you don't get to know people well, and they occur at about 1 in 100.

Even ignoring leaders, once you get beyond 100-200 people responsibility is necessarily divided up such that people stop being responsible for the organization and start being responsible to the organization. And then the organization does sociopathic things things whether people want to or not. Even an organization's leaders are subject to this. After all 100s of people's paychecks depend on their decisions. The more people you add, the more you divide up responsibility, the more you remove the leaders from the customers, the worse it gets.

> What your talking about is something completely different.

I wonder if farmers felt the same way when tractors first started coming onto the scene replacing ox/horses and a plow, or combines, or grain carts, or seed drills, or...

Did you grow up using any of that at-the-time "high tech" equipment? It was high tech at some point, now just common tech. At what point is something considered "high tech?" If you were born in the age of cell phones, are they considered high tech, or just common tech you can find on any street corner like gumball machines? If you were born in the 1950's, does your opinion differ on cell phones from someone currently in their 20's who grew up with it and knew no other way?

Technology fueled the Agricultural Revolution. https://www.thoughtco.com/agricultural-revolution-1991931

If a John Deere salesman knocked on that screen door 80 years ago and said, "Mr. Farmer I have something that will make your life easier. The only drawback is when it breaks down, you can't buy parts, can't see repair documatation, and only pricy factory workers whom live far away will be able to repair the machine at set rates.

The farmer would have slammed the door, and fed his horses.

To be fair, if you made the pitch that way to farmer today they would as well - those points are all iffy.

mostly, though, the nature of labor has completely and utterly changed in 80 years and comparing the two is like apples and oranges.

> those points are all iffy.

for tractors generally, maybe, but have read many things specifically about john deere being very DRM/anti repair, and a quick google seems to highlight that there are court battles being fought over exactly this right now.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-03-05/farmers-f...

And yet... Deere still gets bought. So clearly someone isn't pointing out something they should be.

Or the comparison is flawed, farmers aren't dumb and it makes economic sense to buy the Deere?

"Farmer" is an interesting word these days. Think giant corp running 1 million acres across 200 sites. And think of "tractor" as a fleet of combines that cost $500K each and are shared across all 200 sites.

The picture of a hard-working solo farmer repairing his only tractor out in the barn is becoming a rare thing. When you say "farmer" today, it is unclear if you mean the multi-billion dollar multi-national, the "manager" for this 400-acre parcel, or the lady next to the field operating the drone or mostly-autonomous equipment. Or perhaps you meant the latest breed--that fellow who greases the conveyor belt in the metal building in the middle of town where they do the vertical farming with the fancy lights and watering systems. No tractors or even dirt involved.

So said the blacksmith’s son watching the invention of the steel press.

“High tech industrial players are in the process of taking over western forgery.”

Ya and we don't call a factory a Blacksmith now do we?

"Modern blacksmiths sure are big!"

Blacksmith was a job. Forge was the location. And industrial forges are very, very large.

Blacksmith:Farmer::Forge:Farm

Foundries were a thing, but even those are giving way to factories, right?

I mean, someone will always make stock, but fewer companies melt metal these days, or at the very least relative to those that carve it up or weld it together (which may or may not involve a little melting, given spin welding and other techniques).

Foundries and forges are different things.

A forge is closer to what you would call a manufacturing factory:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forging

A foundry smelts. But it is also technically a factory for input material. In the same way a sawmill is a factory.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundry

Yeah, "factory" is really the general term for a facility that adds value to inputs at an industrialized scale. A lay person would call everything from a smelting plant to an electronics assembly floor a "factory" and not be wrong.

From a pre-industrial blacksmith's perspective, the bigger distinction might be between a "factory" and a "shop". The processes involved are effectively the same; the difference is the scale/flexibility tradeoff (a shop can make different things every day without added overhead, where a "factory" gains enormous efficiency by being configured to do a single process).

The industrial revolution and its consequences...

For perspective, my parents both grew up on farms and I spent my summers on them. You are right but "farming" used to be a family with 3 acres and an ox and a plow. These small farms you lament are just as much a whole new world to the ox and plow as a 16/20 row combine that can process 150 acres a day is to your childhood. Efficiency comes from specialization which creates incentives for economies of scale. Software will continue to eat the world.

Factory farm.

Southern Ontario has farm tiling fields with high tech gps tractors.

Lots of tech for data and tracking

Sovkhoz? That's what they called them in the soviet union.

I like the idea of SMBC author Zach Weinersmith to repurpose a word "villain" for them IIRC what he wrote on his twitter correctly.