McDonald's Denies Prof's Claim Staff Attacked Him For Wearing Digital Glasses

It's too much! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:25 · Score: -1

I can't hold anymore! I'm going to have to fart out of my fuck!

hey ronald... by tommeke100 · 2012-07-18 12:29 · Score: 5, Funny

release the security cams!

And looks like someone failed hamburger college!

Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:27 · Score: 2, Informative

I wish there were footage of my buying a McRib and the result: Two days of Projectile Vomiting. (The McRib was the only thing I ate that day -- I was a poor student at the time -- so I definitely know where it came from.) That was 17 years ago. I haven't bought a burger and especially a McRib from McDonalds since. (Though I do stop in for breakfast when traveling on occasion.) The great thing is that I have no desire to eat a McDonalds burger since and I have no doubt that I'm not missing anything.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:18 · Score: 1

That's food poisoning, and I kid you not I have gotten food poisoning twice from McDonalds (both times in the USA).
Re:hey ronald... by gsgriffin · 2012-07-18 14:19 · Score: 1, Funny

Story failed to mention that he was dressed as the Hamburgler...obvious response, eh?

--
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
Re:hey ronald... by Grishnakh · 2012-07-18 14:27 · Score: 5, Insightful

What's really bad about this is that a fast-food restaurant like McDonald's should, in theory, be the last place you might get food poisoning. The whole way FF restaurants work is by turning the preparation of food into an industrial process, and eliminating all the art from it (and all the variables), so they can maximize speed and profit. It's like an assembly line back there. Contrast this to a regular kitchen at a sit-down restaurant, where it's really all about human skill, and especially the head chef's skill in managing everyone. At a FF restaurant, everything's supposed to be dumbed-down so much that any moron can just follow the instructions and churn out Big Macs at breakneck speeds, in combination with the specialized equipment they use, so eliminating methods for contaminating foods should be part of the process. Of course, one main vector is by employees not washing their hands, but even so they usually wear gloves, so who knows what the problem is, probably a management failure in making sure employees wash hands and also wear gloves when handling anything.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:42 · Score: 0

Those things can sit in a tray all day long - they don't have a timer. Also, their storage tray can allow the water to evaporate, making the temperature they're held at not within the food safety requirement of 155F. I would have sicced the health inspector on them if I was you, but it's far too late now.
My worst case of poisoning was Shoney's strawberries. There was a light foam around them. When I was eating them I didn't realize that was their industrial-strength soap. That evening I was nearly immobilized. I got over it the next day, but that was scary. Next time, I'll head for the hospital and get a toxicology test, followed up by a lawyer depending on the results. There was also an incident with a manager at this location that had spoiled bananas on the food bar. She refused to sample them, remove them, admit spoilage, or offer anything in return. It's been over 2 years. I will never return to that location.
Re:hey ronald... by magarity · 2012-07-18 15:04 · Score: 5, Informative

That's food poisoning, and I kid you not I have gotten food poisoning twice from McDonalds (both times in the USA).
Maybe you did and maybe you didn't; a lot of "food poisoning" type bacteria have fairly lengthy incubation times. People always assume it was the last meal they ate but often it was really the meal before or even something from the day before.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:47 · Score: 1

It was food poisoning from McDonald's. I remember going over what I ate the day before too. Yes, you are right it can be something from the day before but in this case it wasn't. BTW: I made my money writing code and now, I work in the food industry (in a business I started) and spend the money I made writing code. ;-)
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

Well, part of the problem is that people wear gloves -- and handle the same things they did before. So the gloves look clear but they aren't.....
Re:hey ronald... by torkus · 2012-07-18 16:13 · Score: 3, Insightful

I've eaten McD about 5 times a week for the last decade. Probably closer to two if you include BK and Wendys. Yeah seriously. My Dr might have his own heart attack if he knew.
The only time i've gotten food poisoning is from the hot dog at 7-11 at 3AM in florida oddly enough.
The problem is the more big chains try to standardize their food the more stupid children ignore the rules. Steak fries might need 7-10 minutes but the thin McD fries need 3:12 (or whatever) and a 30 second variance means overcooked or soggy fries. You DO get consistent quality if the procedures are followed exactly. Last time I checked minimum-wage jobs are not the best place to get people to perform admirably and consistently.

--
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
Re:hey ronald... by 0100010001010011 · 2012-07-18 16:54 · Score: 1

turning the preparation of food into an industrial process
At that point is it really 'food'?
Re:hey ronald... by KramberryKoncerto · 2012-07-18 17:02 · Score: 1

Most of the raw food got through an industrial process. Modern farming is already both agricultural and industrial I suggest you plant and grind your own wheat.
Re:hey ronald... by Grishnakh · 2012-07-18 17:05 · Score: 2

Sure, why not? If it provides your body with the fuel and nutrients it needs to continue, then it's "food". It may not be "good food", but even slop is still food.
Finally, in theory, an industrial process should be able to produce very good food too. In fact, many higher-end restaurants, while not refining it down quite as much as McD's, still do make food preparation as industrialized and mechanical as possible. Recipes call for very specific steps, very specific amounts of ingredients, and very specific cooking times and temperatures to achieve the same result every time. Chefs don't like it when line cooks try to do things their own way; this gets the line cooks screamed at (I've seen it). And restaurant food, even at high-end restaurants, isn't as good as what a talented chef (even amateur) can do at home; restaurants simplify their recipes so they can be produced at higher speeds by underpaid line cooks; customers want consistency and they don't want to wait 2 hours for their food. They would never put on the menu something found in some fancy cookbook, because it's just too complex and would take too long to make.
Re:hey ronald... by 0100010001010011 · 2012-07-18 17:17 · Score: 1

I guess I'm more talking the industrial processes to get the meat substitute to you. In'n'Out and Steak'n'Sheak both have 'processes'. But at least their "meat" has the feigned appearance of ground beef. Everything in McDonalds shows up 'made' and is reheated with steam.
And then there's the question about how much of the hamburger is actually ground beef. To the other reply. For now I trust that ground wheat is ground wheat. It may be bleached if you get white flour. But when stories start to come out that XXX flour company is now taking corn stalks, treating them with a ton of chemicals to soften them, grinding those up, adding a bit of flavoring to make sure it somewhat tastes like flour. Then I'll start to question other industrial processes.
I get my beef from a local place and cut out the middleman. I'm sure the butchering process is pretty industrialized but I don't feel the need to go down and stick my head up a bulls ass, I take my butcher's word on it.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 17:22 · Score: 0

The McRib was the only thing I ate that day -- I was a poor student at the time -- so I definitely know where it came from.
Because half a bottle of Cuervo doesn't technically count as "eating"...
Re:hey ronald... by Dahamma · 2012-07-18 17:28 · Score: 4, Informative

People definitely like to call things "food poisoning" whenever they have a violent stomach flu after eating something they wondered about in the first place.
About a year ago I had a horrible, coming-out-of-both-ends "food poisoning type" incident I was ready to blame on a local restaurant I ate at that day. It turned out my co-worker had it 2 days earlier, and my girlfriend got it 2 days later. Became pretty clear about the incubation time and the fact it wasn't food poisoning at *all*...
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 17:33 · Score: 1

Most food poisoning takes 12 hours before it manifests, and it can be up to 5 days. It's very unlikely you got food poisoning from a meal you ate earlier in the day, it's much more likely that McDonald's was the easiest thing to blame.
Re:hey ronald... by Grishnakh · 2012-07-18 18:27 · Score: 1

Oh, sorry, I was just talking about the process of preparing the food inside the restaurant's kitchen, not the processes used before it gets there. Yes, I imagine McD's gets their ingredients as cheaply as possible, rather than using real beef and other farm products. That bit about the corn stalks is pretty horrifying.
Re:hey ronald... by Khyber · 2012-07-18 19:02 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Do you not know what a McRib is, or how it was invented?
It was stumbled upon while a company was making a new type of CAULK.
Go eat some caulk and tell me that you aren't throwing up later.
http://chompasaur.us/tag/mcribs/

--
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Re:hey ronald... by Khyber · 2012-07-18 19:04 · Score: 0

"The only time i've gotten food poisoning is from the hot dog at 7-11 at 3AM in florida oddly enough."
Nah, you just got Florida poisoning. Anyone under the age of 65 can't live there.

--
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:13 · Score: 0

Contrast this to a regular kitchen at a sit-down restaurant, where it's really all about human skill
Nope. Any regular sit-down restaurant is just as industrialized as a fast food joint. The difference is that they server more items and hopefully of a higher quality. 99% of restaurants buy their food, frozen, through a catalog. It's exactly the same system fast food chains use. In many cases it's the same brands. You can find exceptions in all price ranges, but they are the rare exception.
The reason fast food is more prone to food poisonings is that lesser pay and a demeaning working environment buys and breeds lesser caring people.
Re:hey ronald... by Khyber · 2012-07-18 19:36 · Score: 1, Insightful

Oh, look, downmods. Protip: If that link was false, they'd have the shit sued out of them and the site taken offline.
That site has been around for two years. Obviously, McD's isn't trying to stop them because it's true.

--
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:40 · Score: 0

im reminded of a story of a mcD's in lidcombe, sydney, australia.
two staff had a root in the freezer room and as the chick was wearing a tampon it was left in the among the meat for about a week until someone else found it.
Re:hey ronald... by thsths · 2012-07-18 19:51 · Score: 3, Informative

> Well, part of the problem is that people wear gloves -- and handle the same things they did before.
Yes, especially money. I have seen that many times, and I would assume it is always against company policy, and for good reason.
Re:hey ronald... by ArsenneLupin · 2012-07-18 20:03 · Score: 5, Funny

Well, part of the problem is that people wear gloves -- and handle the same things they did before.
That reminds me of an old joke:
The Waiter and the Spoon
I took some friends out to dinner last week, and I noticed a spoon in the shirt pocket of our waiter as he handed us the menus. It seemed a little odd, but I dismissed it as a random thing. Until our busboy came with water & tableware; he, too, sported a spoon in his breast-pocket. I looked around the room and all the waiters, waitresses, busboys, etc. had spoons in their pockets.
When our waiter returned to take our order, I just had to ask, "Why the spoons?"
"Well," he explained, "our parent company recently hired some Andersen Consulting efficiency experts to review all our procedures and after months of statistical analyses, they concluded that our patrons drop spoons on the floor 73% more often than any other utensil at a frequency of 3 spoons per hour per workstation. By preparing all our workers for this contingency in advance, we can cut our trips to the kitchen down and save time...nearly 1.5 extra man hours per shift."
Just as he concluded, a "ch-ching" came from the table behind him, and he quickly replaced a fallen spoon with the one from his pocket. "I'll grab another spoon the next time I'm in the kitchen instead of making a special trip," he proudly explained.
I was impressed. "Thanks. I had to ask." "No problem," he answered, then he continued to take our orders. As the members of my dinner party took their turns, my eyes darted back & forth from each person ordering and my menu. That's when, out of the corner of my eye, I spotted a thin, black thread protruding from our waiter's fly. Again, I dismissed it; yet I had to scan the room and, sure enough, there were other waiters & busboys with strings hanging out of their trousers.
My curiosity overrode discretion at this point, so before he could leave I had to ask. "Excuse me, but...uh...why, or what...about that string?" "Oh, yeah," he began in a quieter tone. "Not many people are that observant. That same efficiency group found we could save time in the Men's room, too." "How's that?" .. "You see, by tying a string to the end of our, eh, selves, we can pull it out at the urinals literally hands-free and thereby eliminate the need to wash our hands, cutting time spent in the restroom by over 93%!"
"Oh, that makes sense," I said, but then thinking thru the process, I asked, "Hey, wait-a-minute. If the string helps you pull it out, how do you get it back in?"
"Well," he whispered, "I don't know about the other guys; but I use my spoon.
Re:hey ronald... by Vskye · 2012-07-18 20:09 · Score: 1

Have you actually gone to a McDonald's restaurant where they actually make a consistent product?
I know I haven't at least.

--
Life was hell, then I discovered Linux...
Re:hey ronald... by Grishnakh · 2012-07-18 20:16 · Score: 1

I did say this was in theory. Logically, the corporation would try to take all variability out of it, but I guess the minimum-wage workers manage to screw things up no matter how simple they try to make it.
Re:hey ronald... by aaaaaaargh! · 2012-07-18 20:28 · Score: 1

I didn't find anything disgusting on this page. Perhaps you should visit the kitchen of any restaurant some day to see what it's really like...?
Re:hey ronald... by sFurbo · 2012-07-18 20:32 · Score: 1

Or they know about the Streisand effect.

There seem to be many possibilities as to what caulk is. What would this caulk be made of? Would it be legal to put that in a food product?
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 20:34 · Score: 2, Informative

Just to add to this, real food poisining is often life-threatening and has to be treated in a hospital. What people often call "food-poisining" is usually caused by a Norovirus; it's very unpleasing, but also not particularly dangerous, lasts typically less than a day and is transmitted from human to human.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:35 · Score: 0

You appear to have real difficulty detecting satire. It's either that, or you're a massive troll. It's difficult to decide which.
Re:hey ronald... by shokk · 2012-07-18 22:13 · Score: 1

Due to Taco Bell, here.
Ruined a whole Christmas break.

--
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 23:00 · Score: 0

Hmmm... sounds like your co-worker and your girlfriend are "close"...
Re:hey ronald... by pepeperes · 2012-07-18 23:29 · Score: 1

Am I the only one who finds it really weird that they call themselves a "Restaurant"?
They keep using that word, I don't think they know what it really means...

--
... from the forgotten corner in europe
Re:hey ronald... by f3rret · 2012-07-18 23:29 · Score: 1

Sure, why not? If it provides your body with the fuel and nutrients it needs to continue, then it's "food". It may not be "good food", but even slop is still food.
Finally, in theory, an industrial process should be able to produce very good food too. In fact, many higher-end restaurants, while not refining it down quite as much as McD's, still do make food preparation as industrialized and mechanical as possible. Recipes call for very specific steps, very specific amounts of ingredients, and very specific cooking times and temperatures to achieve the same result every time. Chefs don't like it when line cooks try to do things their own way; this gets the line cooks screamed at (I've seen it). And restaurant food, even at high-end restaurants, isn't as good as what a talented chef (even amateur) can do at home; restaurants simplify their recipes so they can be produced at higher speeds by underpaid line cooks; customers want consistency and they don't want to wait 2 hours for their food. They would never put on the menu something found in some fancy cookbook, because it's just too complex and would take too long to make.
This really depends on the restaurant. I've worked in quite a few of them, some higher-end than others, and the getting yelled at part is most certainly true, the same mostly goes for recipes and procedures being designed for speed rather than quality.
However, some restaurants specifically market themselves on the complexity of their recipes. Needless to say these types of restaurant tend to be the hideously expensive kind.

--
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
Re:hey ronald... by f3rret · 2012-07-18 23:37 · Score: 1

I didn't find anything disgusting on this page. Perhaps you should visit the kitchen of any restaurant some day to see what it's really like...?
Mostly it's hot, noisy and slippery when wet.
It's a lovely place to work.
Yes I work in one.

--
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
Re:hey ronald... by tehcyder · 2012-07-18 23:58 · Score: 0

LOL I was expecting the spoon to be used instead of toilet paper when they had a dump.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:hey ronald... by tehcyder · 2012-07-19 00:01 · Score: 1

The problem, obviously, is that no one (apart from the manager who is probably doing quite well financially at least) wants to be working in McDonalds, so they have no interest in following hygiene rules or making an effort of any kind when they're not being watched, which is a lot of the time.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:hey ronald... by tehcyder · 2012-07-19 00:05 · Score: 1

I'm not quite sure what your idea of a "high end" restaurant is. Wendy's maybe?

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:hey ronald... by l-ascorbic · 2012-07-19 00:06 · Score: 1

Actually, that sounds a lot like norovirus, so it could be food poisoning.
Re:hey ronald... by tehcyder · 2012-07-19 00:11 · Score: 3, Funny

Have you actually gone to a McDonald's restaurant where they actually make a consistent product?
I know I haven't at least.
I avoid McDonald's except when drunk or otherwise desperate, but I wouldn't criticise their consistency: they've been identically crap ever since I can remember.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:hey ronald... by tehcyder · 2012-07-19 00:18 · Score: 1

Oh, look, downmods. Protip: If that link was false, they'd have the shit sued out of them and the site taken offline.
That site has been around for two years. Obviously, McD's isn't trying to stop them because it's true.
Oh come on, that site is a joke.

Surely?

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:hey ronald... by crashumbc · 2012-07-19 00:29 · Score: 1

And absolutely, nasty, raw food on the floor, picked-up and put right on the grill. nothing is ever clean, the fridges hardly ever hold temp.
I did refrigeration work for 8 years. Doesn't matter, carry out or 5 star restaurant, 95% of the kitchens I was in, were filthy and those working could care less...
Re:hey ronald... by f3rret · 2012-07-19 00:38 · Score: 1

Can't speak for how it is over in the US (or wherever you're from), but it's not like that here. The Danish FDA has a nasty habit of showing up unannounced and customers here complain like babies if they even come close to suspecting that stuff like that goes on.
That said, the fridge thing can sometimes be right, unfortunately.

--
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
Re:hey ronald... by sgbett · 2012-07-19 00:44 · Score: 2

Perhaps they read this part...

TAGS: FAST FOOD, HUMOR, MCDONALD'S, MCRIBS
...and realised that trying to sue someone for making a joke would be a rather silly idea.
Perhaps you were joking too, your post had no tags though so I couldn't tell!
TAGS: COMMENT, ATTEMPTED HUMOUR, FAIL

--
Invaders must die
Re:hey ronald... by umghhh · 2012-07-19 00:49 · Score: 1

You do realize of course that major cause of vomiting in human population is noro virus and it takes approx 2 days to develop the vomiting symptoms so your sickness may be relate to e.g. traveling on a bus where sick person left some traces of its sickness - not much is needed to do that - sick person may be weak enough not to be able to wash hands properly or aerosols created by flushing toilet used by sick person etc - there are many possible vectors. Not that I do not support your quest against golden arch.
Re:hey ronald... by Inda · 2012-07-19 01:06 · Score: 3, Funny

It's always norovirus.

95 times out of 100, anyway.

--
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:07 · Score: 0

When I worked at a chain sandwich making place people were always suppose to change gloves if they handled anything non food (we used markers to mark sandwich bags and take orders on phone etc etc). I would hope McDonalds has a similar policy
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:07 · Score: 0

In the holding cabinets, it's required to be 140F, and the meat is NOT supposed to be swimming in juice - quite the opposite, hence why they have a special paper liner and are supposed to be held above the grill sideways to drain for a second before placing in the tray. The 155F requirement is for what it needs to be when it comes right off the grill.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:11 · Score: 0

The main problem is, itself, the industrialization of the food preparation at the slaughterhouses/freezing works.
a) increasing the speed of slaughtering, leading to improper hygeine between kills
b) lowering the skill level of individual parts of the butchering
c) feedyards - bringing lots of livestock all together, increasing cross contamination
d) fewer, larger suppliers able to pressure back/lobby against more stringent controls
e) fragmentation of legislation and enforcement between FDA and USDA
f) less restriction on the slaughtering of sick animals.
g) single point of 'failure' : one sick animal can infect millions of burgers.
I suggest reading 'Fast Food Nation' and moving to Europe or New Zealand.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:42 · Score: 0

i think the source of the food poisoning is most likely due to an expiration date on something that someone overlooked or in the condiments or both. i love McRibs. i wish they sold them year-round but i'll probably live longer since they don't LOL.
anyways, i was food-poisoned a few years ago at a local mexican restaurant. i'm pretty sure it was the sour creme that i mixed in with a bunch of stuff. this occurred right after christmas holidays. my theory is that there was a bucket of sour creme back there that had expired but was not thrown away while they were closed for christmas.
Re:hey ronald... by IICV · 2012-07-19 01:55 · Score: 2

The weirdest part is, your body doesn't care, it still decides that the last thing you ate was sickening.
For instance, one time I got pretty bad food poisoning after eating a gyro, and now I can't stand the way that gyro place smells. The thing is, though, that I'm like 80% sure that the food poisoning was from some undercooked beef that I'd made earlier in the week and and eaten for lunch that day. My body doesn't care though, it thinks gyros = bad just because it was the last, most fragrant thing I ate before getting sick.
Re:hey ronald... by Pope · 2012-07-19 02:03 · Score: 2

I've eaten McD about 5 times a week for the last decade.
Why?

--
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Re:hey ronald... by magarity · 2012-07-19 02:22 · Score: 1

Read the sequence of events; he and his co-worker are close.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 02:44 · Score: 0

To the other reply. For now I trust that ground wheat is ground wheat. It may be bleached if you get white flour. But when stories start to come out that XXX flour company is now taking corn stalks, treating them with a ton of chemicals to soften them, grinding those up, adding a bit of flavoring to make sure it somewhat tastes like flour. Then I'll start to question other industrial processes.
I presume you're referring to the so-called "pink slime" that was in the news recently.
First, let me say that that name ("pink slime") is a marvelous example of how people can be manipulated with words. Call something perfectly innocuous by a nasty-sounding name, and people will hate it. That's how you can get people to sign a petition to ban water- call it a chemically-sounding name like 'Di-hydrogen monoxide', and people will hate it.
Second, a better analogy would be "XXX flour company is sweeping up the wheat that falls on the ground during picking, and the floor during processing, washing it, and grinding it up and adding it to the flour". You see, "pink slime" is nothing more than scraps of trimmings that get cut off with the fat. The little scraps were too small to bother with, until the process came along to heat them up, causing the fat to soften. Then the mix is spun around (like a washing machine on 'spin'), and the little scraps are spun out of the fat. They then get a puff of ammonia gas to kill any bacteria on the surface, and get ground up and added to the ground beef (which, in fact, they are).
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 02:49 · Score: 0

But 1) FF restaurants' manager's get bonuses based on how much they can save money, and earn more. 2) when there are so many corporate policies, not all of them are followed.
When I worked FF in high school, we often learned of differences between corporate policies and our work habits. Mostly, there were rules about throwing out old fries, bacon, burgers, grease, etc. when we prepared too much. After the lunch rush, none of us were throwing out the food we had prepared to be ready. Breeding grounds for bacteria. But, generally, there was a lot of cleaning, and we all washed our hands pretty frequently. I would still eat at the restaurant I worked at, even after lunch.
Re:hey ronald... by ravenscar · 2012-07-19 03:09 · Score: 1

Quite honestly, McDonald's and the like probably are the last paces you might get food poisoning. I'm willing to wager that the instance of food poisoning per person served (when consuming similar food) is lower at McDonald's than most non-fast-food restaurants. The similar food factor is important as items such as ground beef have an inherently high liklihood of contamination.
I wouldn't say this was the case prior to the Jack-in-the-box e-coli outbreak, but I think it is today.
Re:hey ronald... by Hatta · 2012-07-19 03:16 · Score: 2

Gloves are nothing but hygiene theatre. Human hands, regularly washed are cleaner than gloves that haven't been changed. You're less likely to feel contamination on your gloves than on your hands, so you're likely to change gloves less often than you'd wash hands.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:31 · Score: 0

In reality gloves in the kitchen are a bad idea as you don't then feel 'gross' stuff on your skin and wash your hands.
Gloves don't make food any safer... They are not magic.
It does not matter what touches the food.
What matters is that it is CLEAN, and has not already touched something raw or otherwise harboring bacteria before touching finished food.
When you grab a supposedly sealed bag of uncooked food and toss it on the counter in the kitchen, but it was actually leaking raw chicken juices; the un-gloved person will feel the leak and wash their hands, the gloved will not, and then cut up some tomatoes and put them on your burger and wrap it up with raw chicken juice all over everything...
Thus sending you to the bathroom for a few days of praying to the porcelain god.
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:38 · Score: 0

Your site claims the creation happened when a worker dripped McNugget sauce on the caulk. The McRib sandwich was introduced in 1981. McNuggets were introduced in 1983. Work it out for yourself.
Re:hey ronald... by shaitand · 2012-07-19 03:56 · Score: 1

"Recipes call for very specific steps, very specific amounts of ingredients, and very specific cooking times and temperatures to achieve the same result every time."
At that point you are talking about every restaurant (at least every one that isn't failing) and it is about consistency and predictable expenses. You suggest in another post that this results in lower quality than found at home and this is not necessarily accurate. Restaurants most definitely do not have to cut corners vs home. By selecting the correct menu and doing adequate prep restaurants can produce the same or better results and do it more consistently. There are definitely restaurants making things out of fancy cookbooks. In my experience it is cooks at home that usually take shortcuts. For instance, cooks at home will used bullion or boxed stock where quality restaurants will make their own. Using a thin commercial stock might not make a difference that stands out enough to tell the difference on its own but lots of small shortcuts add up. Restaurants also often have daily resupply of fresh ingredients where home cooks do not. Almost no home cook keeps their spices fresh because they are expensive and will last a long time. Restaurants will generally make pasta where home cooks usually buy packaged.
Doing things well at home takes longer because people don't actually do prep. They want to do everything at dinner time. Restaurants have learned which parts of the process can be done in advance and which parts are time sensitive. A restaurant that opens at 11 might start prep at 5. That is the secret to getting you your dinner in less than two hours.
Re:hey ronald... by shaitand · 2012-07-19 03:59 · Score: 1

ummm yeah... all of them. I can walk into any McDonalds in the country and order mcnuggets and they will taste exactly the same, the sauce will be the same, etc. I can order a burger at any of them and the beef will be exactly the same even genetically. The only variation is the level of sloppiness put into slapping the ingredients together on the bun.
Re:hey ronald... by shaitand · 2012-07-19 04:00 · Score: 1

The manager isn't doing well financially either. Passable. McDonalds managers top at 50k last I checked and many are doing more like 30k
Re:hey ronald... by DriveDog · 2012-07-19 04:03 · Score: 1

Speaking of "as long as I can remember"... I noticed the local McDs has advertised on their sign this week "Arctic Orange" milkshakes. I recall, possibly erroneously, that they introduced those as a special holiday offering back in the 70s and few ordered them so there were a lot of leftover ingredients (with indefinite shelf life). McDs around here had Arctic Orange available sporadically for years afterward. They were not advertised or even on the menu; one had to know to ask for them. Actually, that's not as long as I can remember... I do remember the Golden Arches, no inside seating, and "Over xxx Million Served."
Is there more to the Arctic Orange story?
Re:hey ronald... by shaitand · 2012-07-19 04:08 · Score: 2

Fast and cheap I'm sure. I make a few dollars more these days and spend more on food so I do less McDonalds but I used to do it quite a bit more. You can't make the crap on the McDonalds dollar menu that cheaply at home because you can't buy those ingredients that cheaply.
You can feed a fat person on McDonalds for $2-$5/day and you have a selection. If you want to replicate that feat at home you are going to have to do a lot of work and advanced planning. There isn't going to be much variety on your menu either. You certainly can't do it with burgers.
Re:hey ronald... by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 04:24 · Score: 1

Perhaps, but even in more expensive sit-down restaurants, the line cooks don't really make that much money either (probably a fair bit better than McD's, but still not all that great).
Re:hey ronald... by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 04:30 · Score: 1

I suggest reading 'Fast Food Nation' and moving to Europe or New Zealand.
The problem with moving to Europe is that, at least in France, you're likely to be assaulted.
As bad as fast-food restaurants are here in the US, I've never had to worry much about that here. Such a thing is unheard of.
Re:hey ronald... by greyhoundpoe · 2012-07-19 04:31 · Score: 1

The site's clearly a joke, but it's got some elements of truth. Here's the real story:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/11/04/142018151/from-nebraska-lab-to-mcdonalds-tray-the-mcribs-strange-journey
Re:hey ronald... by Genda · 2012-07-19 04:36 · Score: 1

Mostly it's hot, noisy and slippery when wet.
It's a lovely place to work.
Yes I work in one.
I don't think I've ever seen lines more begging to be taken out of context... Alex, I'll take "Brothel Worker" for 400
Re:hey ronald... by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 04:36 · Score: 1

I never said ALL home chefs get better results, only that it's possible to do better at home because you have the luxury of time. If you want to spend hours making a meal totally from scratch, using a very complex recipe, and know how to do it, you can, and you don't have to spend $100/plate like you would at a restaurant that can pull off that same quality of meal. For the restaurants that only cost $20-25/plate, you're not going to get such a complex recipe.
Re:hey ronald... by sp0tter · 2012-07-19 05:12 · Score: 1

haha my mother had the exact same experience. We call it the McBarf in our family. Even better was their slogan, "McBag it!"

--
you don't eat crackers in the bed of your future--or else you'll get all scratchy
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 05:23 · Score: 0

5 times a week? I think you should be more worried about a heart attack than food poisoning.
Re:hey ronald... by mcgrew · 2012-07-19 05:46 · Score: 1

If you're not growing your own corn, shucking it, and cooking it, it's gone through an industrial process whether it comes in a can or froxen in a bag. The same goes with any other vegetable. If you don't raise your own meat and butcher it yourself, then it, too has gone through an industrial process.
Have you ever seen a modern farm? They're almost all roboticized, using GPS to steer planters and harvesters and other aspects of their farming. They're planting Monsanto GM crops, adding fertilizers and pesticides... you may possibly have never eaten anything that hasn't gone through industrial processes.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 06:24 · Score: 0

Actually, there is no such things as "stomach flu." Those are all cases of food borne illness.
Re:hey ronald... by pluther · 2012-07-19 06:49 · Score: 1

What's really bad about this is that a fast-food restaurant like McDonald's should, in theory, be the last place you might get food poisoning.

Yeah, I blame employees not washing their hands too.
I haven't been able to bring myself to set foot in the place (or wheel in the drive-through as it were) since the late 90s, when I ended up in the emergency room after three days of vomiting so badly I couldn't even keep water down. No fun.

--
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
Re:hey ronald... by mcgrew · 2012-07-19 06:52 · Score: 1

However, some restaurants specifically market themselves on the complexity of their recipes. Needless to say these types of restaurant tend to be the hideously expensive kind.
Perhaps generally, but in the midwest you'll find restaraunts with some of the best tasting food you ever put in your mouth and very reasonable prices. Here in Springfield, D'Arcy's Pint comes to mind. You can take a date there and get out for under fifty bucks, including drinks and tip. One woman told me as we were walking back to the car "I just had a food orgasm!" Of course, even though it's a huge place, there's usually a long wait to get in. It's my favorite eatery, with Top Cat's coming in second (they have more home-cooking type food).
George Ranks used to be like that, but it's changed hands and now the food is overpriced and nasty and the portions are small. The guy who used to own it had been to chef school, and had resiped published in culinary magazines. Great food at low prices. The old owner once told me that he got people in chairs with the food and made his money on drinks. The new owners are clueless, I expect them to close again within the year.
It goes the other way, too. I took my daughter to a restaraunt downtown, it took forever to get served (even though the place was empty), the portions were small, but it didn't matter because the food wasn't that great, and it cost me about $80. I never went back, of course.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:hey ronald... by The+Archon+V2.0 · 2012-07-19 07:53 · Score: 1

What's really bad about this is that a fast-food restaurant like McDonald's should, in theory, be the last place you might get food poisoning.
Theory: Everything works as planned.
Reality: Douchenozzles stand on lettuce and post pictures on 4chan.
(Surprise: 4chan got the guy fired.)
Re:hey ronald... by tehlinux · 2012-07-19 08:01 · Score: 1

There are many types of food poisoning.

--
Most linux users don't know this, but the man pages were named after Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris fsck'ing hates noobs!
Re:hey ronald... by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 08:16 · Score: 1

What's disappointing there is that the asshole wasn't prosecuted for that. What's to stop him from getting another job at a Wendy's or McDonald's down the street? It's not like they're going to check his background and previous employment, call up his previous employer and find out what he did to get fired.
Re:hey ronald... by Nyder · 2012-07-19 11:32 · Score: 1

Gloves are nothing but hygiene theatre. Human hands, regularly washed are cleaner than gloves that haven't been changed. You're less likely to feel contamination on your gloves than on your hands, so you're likely to change gloves less often than you'd wash hands.
Spoken like someone who has never actually worked in a kitchen wearing gloves.
The gloves are cheap as all fucking hell, you have to change them regularly. If you are making stuff, they get shit on them and don't stay on as good. they get wet, they don't stay on as good.
Of course, there are different types of gloves, the loose fitting ones, which are more popular in restaurtants and the nice tight fitting ones you find in hospitals or doing janitor work. Of course, depending on how cheap your boss is, on which ones you end up with.
And you are still supposed to wash your hands all the time.

--
Be seeing you...
Re:hey ronald... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 23:17 · Score: 0

I suggest reading 'Fast Food Nation' and moving to Europe or New Zealand.
The problem with moving to Europe is that, at least in France, you're likely to be assaulted.
As bad as fast-food restaurants are here in the US, I've never had to worry much about that here. Such a thing is unheard of.
Horseshit. How about that McDonalds restaurant in San Ysidio, CA? One incident in a Paris McDonalds = likely to be assaulted. Following your logic, 1 incident (from a quick google) in a California McDonalds = likely to be shot.
Re:hey ronald... by Do+You+Smell+That · 2012-07-20 04:32 · Score: 1

Yep - same reason I couldn't drink black tea for 5 years - a cup of black tea was the beverage I had at my desk *as I was starting to feel a bit nauseous* from a norovirus my wife'd picked up a few days earlier. I never finished it, and ended up having to take the train home soon after. Around 4 years in, I could start making my tea/coffees at less than 30% milk-by-volume again. I still can't drink them black, even diluted with water to half-strength.

--
I'm not good at making signatures...
Re:hey ronald... by Frosty+Piss · 2012-07-20 05:07 · Score: 1

"You see, by tying a string to the end of our, eh, selves, we can pull it out at the urinals literally hands-free and thereby eliminate the need to wash our hands, cutting time spent in the restroom by over 93%!"
Most state health laws *requre* hand washing when using the restroom, little strings don't cut it.

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Re:hey ronald... by pegasustonans · 2012-07-23 13:20 · Score: 1

LOL I was expecting the spoon to be used instead of toilet paper when they had a dump.
Jesus H. Candycorn in a tub of cider, man!
How would that even work?

--
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
Re:hey ronald... by Uzuri · 2012-08-01 04:35 · Score: 1

While we're on the on-upping...
Cinnamon rolls gave me appendicitis* Had one in the morning; was in the emergency room hours later.
Can't eat them to this day.
*Yes, I realize they didn't. I still can't eat them.

--
I'm a she-slashdotter... but I make up for it by living with my folks.

there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:29 · Score: -1, Troll

there are signs on every McDonald's across europe (no pictures/no dogs/no smoking)
it's pretty obvious this is just a paranoid american, incapable of reading door signs..

Re:there are signs by Attila+Dimedici · 2012-07-18 12:33 · Score: 2

Well, I guess technically, since Canada is in North America, Professor Mann would be an american. However, usually when people refer to someone as an american, they mean a citizen of the U.S.. Professor Mann is a Canadian.

--
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:45 · Score: -1, Troll

Lol! faggot can't read that he's Canadian. You're a faggot! Eat that tasty fucking penis. Thrust it into the back of your throat faggot.
Re:there are signs by Sussurros · 2012-07-18 12:51 · Score: -1, Redundant

When I learned Spanish, over twenty years ago, "americano" meant anyone from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego. Now it means anyone from the US and no-one else. This change happened in English long ago and I think we're going to have just leave the word to the Yanks and live without a word for someone from either the North or South Amercas.

--
I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:02 · Score: -1

Takes one to know one you cock-gobbling faggot.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:04 · Score: -1

This isn't redundant, it'f OFF TOPIC: the word they used was "American" not "americano." What relevant does spansh you learned, at any point, have to do with the English word "American"?
Re:there are signs by Attila+Dimedici · 2012-07-18 13:09 · Score: 1

That's interesting because when I learned Spanish somewhat longer ago, "americano" already usually meant someone from the U.S., and when I visited a Latin American country a little over 20 years ago, the locals all asked if I was "americano", meaning from the U.S. So, the Spanish word "americano" has meant someone from the U.S. for quite some time now (admittedly, the Spanish speaking world is a large and diverse place, and my experience only really encompasses Mexico and Central America).
The main reason for my original post was that I am pretty sure that the poster I replied to thought that professor Mann was a U.S. citizen and used the term "american" in that manner, when in fact, Professor Mann is a Canadian.

--
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Re:there are signs by Johann+Lau · 2012-07-18 13:16 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Hey-hey-hey-hey-yeah
Hey-hey-hey-hey-yeah oh
ThereÂs a place
Where a kid without a cent
He can grow up to be president (to be president)
A magic kingdom filled with Barbie-Dolls
If youÂve got time we can make it a good time
Ooh yea-eah, yea-eah
Americanos
Blue Jeans and Chinos
Coke Pepsi and Oreos
Americano-ooh-ohs
Movies and heroes
In the land of the free
You can be what you wanna be
Ah yeah yea-eah
They know how to advertise
Sell you anything at any price
Need it or not thatÂs what you got yeah
Take no bull from anyone
We just wanna have some fun
We got the queen of soul
Created rockÂnÂroll yeah
(queen of soul oh-oh oh-oh)
Ah yeah yea-ea-ea-eah (oh yeah yeah)
Americanos
Blue jeans an Chinos (blue jeans)
Coke Pepsi and Oreos
Americano-ooh-ohs
Low riding chicanos
In the land of the free
You can be what you wanna be
(Be what you want yeah)
(Totally spectacular)
(An educated consumer is our best concern)
Yeah-ea-ea-ea-ea-eah
Take it to the bridge one time yeah
Satellite stations across the nations
ThatÂs cable TV for you and me
uh-huh-uh
IÂm cleaning kitchens washing pots and pans
EverythingÂs organised
From crime to leisure time
High schools and swimming pools
King sharksÂnÂfools ooh-ooh
Uh-huh-uh-huh
Americanos
Blue Jeans and Chinos
Coke Pepsi and Oreos
Americano-ooh-ohs
Movies and heroes
In the land of the free
You can be what you wanna be
Ah yeah yea-eah
Americanos
Blue Jeans and Chinos
Coke Pepsi and Oreos
Americano-ooh-ohs
Movies and heroes
In the land of the free
You can be what you wanna be
Re:there are signs by stephanruby · 2012-07-18 13:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

there are signs on every McDonald's across europe (no pictures/no dogs/no smoking)
Yes, restaurants usually hate dogs on premises, but even in France, a restaurant can be fined from 150 to 450 Euros for refusing service to a disabled person because of their service dog (at least, that was the fine in 2003, that fine may have gone up since then). And in the end, it really doesn't matter what the sign supposedly says. A sign at the door can never supersede what the law of the country you're in dictates.
And it doesn't matter if the person at the food counter doesn't believe in someone's disability. Usually, a Medical Doctor is asked to make that call, not some fast food minimum wage worker. This point is important because many people can be considered legally blind even if they're only half blind, or have a form of blindness that doesn't make them appear blind to the casual observer.
The same goes if you don't believe someone's medical documentation. It's not your call to tear it up, even if you believe it's BS. If you have any doubts, just call the police and ask them to investigate it. Do not take the law into your own hands. A McDonald's T-shirt doesn't imbue you with special authority to just tear up other people's medical documentation.
Re:there are signs by EdIII · 2012-07-18 13:22 · Score: 5, Funny

A McDonald's T-shirt doesn't imbue you with special authority to just tear up other people's medical documentation.
But.. But.. what about Mayor McCheese and Officer Big Mac?
Re:there are signs by loneDreamer · 2012-07-18 13:29 · Score: 1

Actually you are completely right. The equivalent would be people from, say, the UK, calling themselves "European" in exclusion of everybody else in the same continent. Even more curious since America's name come from an Italian cartographer, Amerigo Vespucci, who only visited South America.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:29 · Score: -1, Troll

Suck your dad's cock good motherfucker while I thrust my arm into your mom's salty pussy. Look I can get it all the way up to my elbow too! Look at the blood gushing faggot! Don't forget to lick your father's ballsack - that's where the hidden toy surprise is faggot. Mmmmmmm that ballsack tasty faggot? MMMMMM lick it good faggot! It's ice cold too - warm it up with your tongue! Lick lick lick!
Re:there are signs by bky1701 · 2012-07-18 13:40 · Score: 5, Insightful

No sign legalizes physical assault.

--
Great Intellect...
Re:there are signs by Kreigaffe · 2012-07-18 13:41 · Score: 2

And if the European Union were a nation, the citizens would be referred to as European -- and while the term would still apply to those of Europe as a whole, it would also apply to those of the nation with the word in its name. Unitedian? Statesian? No, citizens of the United States of America are -- following me camera guy? -- American.
If your usage of the term is ambiguous you use North or South American. Referring to both continents at the same time is about as common as referring to Europe and Asia together.

--
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
Re:there are signs by viperidaenz · 2012-07-18 13:41 · Score: -1, Flamebait

About as much relevance as this

a native or inhabitant of any country of North, Central, or South America

America is not just "The United States of America". There are some continents that go by the name too.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:46 · Score: 0

Typical USAmerican, always thinking it's all about you.
Pro-tip: the Americas are continents.
Re:there are signs by InspectorGadget1964 · 2012-07-18 13:47 · Score: 0

Funny you wrote that! I was born not far from Tierra del Fuego (I live in Australia now) and quite often introduce myself as American just to have some fun. As for the quality (Or lack of thereof) of McDonald’s food (If you could call it that way), I buy it once a year, the reason for this is that I like to eat and enjoy it quite a lot, so in order to judge food objectively, it is necessary that I know both ends of the scale. No point in eating lobster mornay and filet mignon if you do not realize how good they are..
Re:there are signs by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-07-18 13:49 · Score: 1

It would only be the equivalent if UK was called the United Kingdom of Europe.
Re:there are signs by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-07-18 13:49 · Score: 1

and live without a word for someone from either the North or South Amercas.
Why would you need a word for that? I mean, how often do you really use, say, "Eurasian"?
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:58 · Score: 0

Why should I believe you about the signs if you're too lazy to look up where Steve Mann works/was born?
Re:there are signs by loneDreamer · 2012-07-18 14:01 · Score: 2

Sure, but this is clearly not the case here. The main point is that many people UNDERSTAND "American" to mean "U.S. Citizen", almost exclusively. This is the root of this predominant confusion. When you say "Eurasia" you include both Europe and Asia, not Europe alone.
In fact, the word in Spanish is "Estadounidense" which is pretty much the "Unitedstatian" you seem to be mocking.
Re:there are signs by camperslo · 2012-07-18 14:04 · Score: 1

Perhaps a recipe has been declared a state secret?
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1079364
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:11 · Score: 2, Interesting

Here's the thing: It's a device he had implanted because he wanted it, not because he needed it. If I decide to implant a camera on my feet and then go walking around in sandals in a Catholic school that has a "no cameras aimed up a girl's skirt" policy, they would be in the right to kick me out. The guy has a history of being a jerk in order to promote himself, and this fits that history.
Re:there are signs by Ateocinico · 2012-07-18 14:18 · Score: 1

When I learned Spanish, over twenty years ago, "americano" meant anyone from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego. Now it means anyone from the US and no-one else. This change happened in English long ago and I think we're going to have just leave the word to the Yanks and live without a word for someone from either the North or South Amercas.
The rating of -1 is symptomatic of what slashdot has become. A parroquial and narrow-minded anglosaxon forum
full of bigotry.
And then you ask why you are hated?
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:21 · Score: -1

You are technically correct.
However. When someone says "Fucking Americans" we all know they are not talking about Hondurans. Right?
Re:there are signs by Kreigaffe · 2012-07-18 14:21 · Score: 2

Of course I'm mocking that term. It doesn't exist in English, and pissing over the proper term in English is foolish.
The Germans don't call themselves German, in German. It's Deutschlander. That doesn't mean that I get to call the Germans stupid for calling themselves something other than German.
Fun Fact. New Guinea is part of Australia. The continent, not the nation. Australia is also a nation, and its citizens are Australian. There's no confusion there, is there? No? There's no confusion when referring to Americans, either. It's understood that you're speaking of citizens of the United States of America, not Canadians, not Brasilians, not Mexicans, not Cubans.

--
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
Re:there are signs by catd77 · 2012-07-18 14:21 · Score: 1, Funny

But America is the greatest country on Earth! If we keep up this arrogance and ethnocentrism maybe it will come true!
Re:there are signs by Genda · 2012-07-18 14:24 · Score: 5, Funny

There's an old conversation about the word "Yankee". If you're in Mexico, anybody north of the border is a Yankee. If you're over the border, its someone from above the Mason-Dixon line. If you're above the Mason-Dixon line a Yankee is someone from New England. If you live in New England, you know a Yankee is some one from Maine. You go to Maine looking for a Yankee and they'll tell you its an old hard tack farmer out in the country. Finally, if you go up to Maine, find yourself an old hard-tack farmer, and ask him where you can find a Yankee? He'll tell you "Well, yuh take thet ruhd theh, noth 'bout 12 miles, till yuh come tuh the fok, n'beh right, go 'nother 8 miles till yuh get t'the end. When the ol gent with the shotgun comes out t'meetchuh, why thet's a Yankee. Eyuh."
Re:there are signs by puto · 2012-07-18 14:31 · Score: 2

As someone who is a dual citizen with Colombia and the US, and who has worked all over Latin America. An Americano generally means someone from the US, a gringo is a Canadian, a US citizen, and even in many cases white europeans. Candadians are always considered Gringos, despite what they think.

--
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:33 · Score: 0

Almost everybody knows that service dogs are an exception to the normal "no dogs" rules, because those dogs are extraordinarily well-trained, unlike most of the ones that people encounter.
You are right about the medical documentation, though. It wouldn't matter if it was an ordinary newspaper. The McDonald's staff have no right to tear up somebody else's property.
Re:there are signs by Isaac+Remuant · 2012-07-18 14:33 · Score: 1

It means both depending on context. A lot of times they will be referred to as 'yanquis' although that could be looked as derogatory. I've given up arguing about this though.
To avoid confusion, I mostly say USA instead of America but there's no simple alternative to Americans (in Spanish that would be 'Estadounidenses').
The thing that would sit nice with non USA Americans is that if, by chance, they refer to themselves as Americans, USA Americans don't come telling them that they're wrong.
We're all right and the meaning depends on context.

--
"Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
Re:there are signs by Dragonslicer · 2012-07-18 14:47 · Score: 1

These days, whenever someone is in New England and asks about Yankees, we kick their ass and send them back to New York.
Re:there are signs by korean.ian · 2012-07-18 15:17 · Score: 1

None of the Colombians (or Mexicans for that matter) I asked said "gringo" would refer to a Canadian - that's reserved strictly for Yanquis from my experience.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:17 · Score: 2, Interesting

Private security in France do NOT have the right to physically assault someone even if they did something like break some anti camera rule in a fucking fast food. The ONLY thing they can do is to call the police. They do not have any other right. And certainly NOT the right to destroy private property.
The only time violence is permitted for any group besides the cops themselves is when someone's in danger and you don't have any choice but make the assailant submit with physical means.
This isn't the Far West. This isn't America. This is civilized France. As a French myself I can guarantee that the McDonald's employees were in the wrong.
Guards in supermarkets and malls don't even have the right to search your bags if they suspect an act of thievery although they CAN make an attempt at stalling/preventing you from fleeing. But only a cop can search your bag. (there are a few exceptions but irrelevant in a day to day context.. those few exceptions being stuff like airports, ports...)
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:20 · Score: 1

New Guinea is part of Australia the continent? Reference please. Certainly not in common usage and definitely not known to most Australians (incidentally, Tasmania is part of the Australian continent and a State of the Australian Commonweatlh, not a separate country as many foreigners seem to think).
When I was in Ecuador, Yanks were 'Yanquis' and everyone else was a gringo. It's actually slightly different in the different countries of South and Central America as I understand it, but Australians definitely mean citizens of the USA when they say 'Americans'. However, we're much more likely to just say 'Yanks' anyway.
Re:there are signs by raddan · 2012-07-18 15:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

I commend you on your proper Maine dialect, particularly the spelling of 'fok'.

Funny story: when I was a sixth-grader, I made it all the way to the Maine state spelling bee, which was hosted at UMaine Orono. I was living in Castine at the time, so it was a big deal to go to the "big city" (Bangor... oh the irony). The winner got a college scholarship. Anyway, they made us draw straws to determine the order of the spelling bee lineup. I got #1.

So, we're standing there on stage, before the curtain opens and they decide to throw us a practice round. I get the word 'banana'. Piece of cake. B-A-N-A-N-A. After the practice round, they whisk open the curtains, say some things to the crowd, and then we're off. Again, I get the first word. The judge says "The word... is 'biggert'."

"'Biggert'?" I ask.

"Yes," say the judges.

OK, I've never heard this one before, but... here we go...

B-I-G-G-E-R-T

"Wrong. The correct spelling of 'biggert' is B-I-G-O-T."

I was crushed, and humiliated, because I was out on the first word in the first round. My mistake was twofold:

1. I should have asked for the word in a sentence, and
2. The Law of Conservation of R's means that New Englanders take the R's out of some words, but they always end up putting them back in somewhere. For example, "Law and Order" is pronounced "Lohr and Ohdah".
Re:there are signs by Kreigaffe · 2012-07-18 15:36 · Score: 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_(continent)

--
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:37 · Score: 0

Ah, the "-1, I disagree" mod. When you can't argue the point, you mod it down into oblivion. To repeat, for the sake of those who may value a differing opinion:

Here's the thing: It's a device he had implanted because he wanted it, not because he needed it. If I decide to implant a camera on my feet and then go walking around in sandals in a Catholic school that has a "no cameras aimed up a girl's skirt" policy, they would be in the right to kick me out. The guy has a history of being a jerk in order to promote himself, and this fits that history.
Re:there are signs by ag0ny · 2012-07-18 15:43 · Score: 1

Well, I'm Spanish, and "americano" has always meant "someone from the U.S.A.".

--
My site
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:44 · Score: -1

Yawn, English lesson, yes abreviation of country names are often used by people becasue, well, people are lazy.
United States of Mexico => Mexican
United States of America => American
Canada => Canadian
etc.
Judged in this context, "American" is a unique identifier out of all the names of countries in North or South America. I think Dominican is the only one that would actually be confusing.
Also, someone would not be from the continent of America. The would either be from North America, South America or the Americas (okay, ya got me, they could also be from Central America, go figure). But in any case, 'American' makes a non-unique, ambivelent continent identifier, but makes a unique country identifier.
Please stop this faux American are egotistical bastards for using the term Ameriecan BS. Americans have plenty enough egotistical, arrogant, and narsistic behavior already without having to make shit up.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:55 · Score: 1

Admit it, you hate New Englandahs! You biggert.
Re:there are signs by Culture20 · 2012-07-18 16:04 · Score: 4, Funny

how often do you really use, say, "Eurasian"?
Maine biggerts use it a lot when they see the mail ohdah brides they wah shipped.
Re:there are signs by joocemann · 2012-07-18 16:09 · Score: 1

Great story! Loved it.
Also, new englanders (when outside of natural habitat) turn on the heavy new england sauce when they wanna flirt with girls. It's hilarious.
Re:there are signs by Lando · 2012-07-18 18:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

I don't know the specifics about why this guy has a camera attached to his head, but it's a part of his day to day life and has medical documentation confirming that the device is attached to his head. I don't know what else the documentation says, but this is enough. Now, if the store in question didn't like it they should have asked him to leave, not tried to physical remove said item. Personally, I'd call the damage an assault and would press criminal charges.
Now, granted he may have wanted this device implanted for nothing more than his own amusement, no reason for physical assault by employees. Let's change the specs a bit based on a report I saw posted the other day on slashdot. What if the person assaulted was blind and the camera was used to generate a visual image that was sent directly to the optic nerve? What would it look like? Who's to say it wouldn't look just like this? So a blind guy goes into McDonald's using his augmented visual device where the employees destroy his device and throw him out of the resteraunt. No being this guy is from a foreign country and doesn't have a cell phone hooked into the local grid he's blind and on the side of the road asking for someone to locate some help for him. Next, since his glasses are now broken and are expensive 60K I believe to replace he no will spend months without vision while he files insurance paperwork to have the glasses replaced.
So your opinion is/would be, well he shouldn't have gone on private property knowing that someone might attack him? Maybe he shouldn't leave his house? Obviously this guy traveling to a foreign country is just a big loser, he should have stayed at home in order to protect himself. Yep, if that rape victim wasn't at the bar she wouldn't have been raped, it's all her fault.
Thanks for playing.

--
/* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
Re:there are signs by thej1nx · 2012-07-18 18:05 · Score: 2

They have the right to ask the person to leave the premises.
They do not have the right to physically assault him(forcibly trying to take off his glasses) or to damage his personal property(tearing off documentation). If you have problems grasping that, it seems to me that you are the jerk here.
Re:there are signs by thej1nx · 2012-07-18 18:07 · Score: 1

Or perhaps people just did not like your juvenile defense of illegal physical assault? What is wrong with just politely asking the guy to leave, instead of tearing off his documents and trying to grab his glasses forcibly?
Re:there are signs by wvmarle · 2012-07-18 18:11 · Score: 1

there are signs on every McDonald's across europe (no pictures/no dogs/no smoking)
Yes, restaurants usually hate dogs on premises, but even in France, a restaurant can be fined from 150 to 450 Euros for refusing service to a disabled person because of their service dog

Pretty much all over the world guide dogs are exempted from being "dog" so to say. They're allowed on public transport, in public buildings, in restaurants - anywhere regular pet dogs are not allowed.
And besides being very useful for the person they guide, these dogs are also always highly trained so not likely to cause any problems, this in contrast to your regular pet dog...
Re:there are signs by the_other_chewey · 2012-07-18 18:20 · Score: 1

The Germans don't call themselves German, in German. It's Deutschlander.
1) That's "Deutschländer". The umlaut is in no case optional.

2) No they don't.
Re:there are signs by Brett+Buck · 2012-07-18 18:24 · Score: 2, Insightful

Private security in France do NOT have the right to physically assault someone even if they did something like break some anti camera rule in a fucking fast food. The ONLY thing they can do is to call the police. They do not have any other right. And certainly NOT the right to destroy private property.
The only time violence is permitted for any group besides the cops themselves is when someone's in danger and you don't have any choice but make the assailant submit with physical means.
That is also the case in the US. Private security, AKA "rent-a-cops" have no rights beyond any other private citizen.

This isn't the Far West. This isn't America. This is civilized France.

Your knowledge of the US appears to be about as good as your knowledge of deodorant.
Re:there are signs by Mathness · 2012-07-18 18:37 · Score: 1

Except, of course, a police sign or badge.

--
Carbon based humanoid in training.
Re:there are signs by Kreigaffe · 2012-07-18 19:23 · Score: 1

it's optional on an American keyboard, because I can't be bothered to type one out. it's not on my keyboard = not worth my time for a /. post

--
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:26 · Score: 0

Just like in Old England :-) Being Scottish, it drives me mad. And don't get me started on how the shandy-drinkers pronounce "bath," "glass" and "path."
Re:there are signs by Aighearach · 2012-07-18 19:42 · Score: 1

Central America is just the narrow southern region of North America.
Re:there are signs by Aighearach · 2012-07-18 19:47 · Score: 2

None of the Colombians (or Mexicans for that matter) I asked said "gringo" would refer to a Canadian - that's reserved strictly for Yanquis from my experience.
I'm going to take a wild stab and guess that Yanquis are New Yorkers who move to Quebec?
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:53 · Score: 0

He shouldn't have gone on private property that has "no cameras" signs on all of the doors, and not left when he found out about it. He has, by this point in his life with his cameras attached for many years, presumably been to many establishments and noticed that "no cameras" is not that unusual. I'm currently poor and haven't eaten out much lately, but even my gym has no cameras signage. People can argue it's a dumb policy, but it's also dumb -- or intentionally aggressive -- to ignore the policy in an obvious fashion and think nothing will ever come of it.
Now, we don't really know exactly what happened here. McDonald's is currently investigating it and hopefully both sides make the footage available (at least to the authorities). If he was assaulted, of course that's wrong and possible criminal charges should be filed. Even if that happened, that doesn't mean he's not also in the wrong.

One interesting part is that Mann's main charges are that a guy "struck" the glasses. He also says it was a "grabbing-motion", which is what the photo shows. If a guy tried to grab regular glasses, nobody would give a shit. The other part of the assault is later being pushed out the door, which he doesn't seem to have a photo of, and again no one would normally give a shit about. I think it is an interesting point that this could legitimately considered an assault worth pursuing based on the inanimate object being attached to the person. However, I think it also is a warning:

Do not make implanted devices resemble non-implanted devices (if at all possible).
Your last two paragraphs descend into ridiculousness. What if one of the employees is an illegal refugee from a country where his people are being murdered, and is now going to be shipped back because Mann was looking to make trouble so he could get more publicity? Why don't we throw out a whole bunch of pointless hypothetical situations?
Re:there are signs by dunkelfalke · 2012-07-18 20:18 · Score: 1

DeutschlÃnder is a sausage brand. You mean Deutsche.

--
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Re:there are signs by DNS-and-BIND · 2012-07-18 20:20 · Score: 1

Medical documentation? For what condition? What is the malady that requires he wear goggles? Something wrong with his eyes? I've been asking this all over the place and nobody can tell me. What is the condition he suffers from that requires a medical appliance to cure?

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 20:43 · Score: 0

What if the person assaulted was blind and the camera was used to generate a visual image that was sent directly to the optic nerve? What would it look like? Who's to say it wouldn't look just like this?
It wouldn't look just like this - the one reported on slashdot was intended to fit inside the eye with no obvious external electronics - precisely because the commercial designers have learned from Mann's work that too many people would object for (usually spurious) security reasons.
Re:there are signs by Soluzar · 2012-07-18 21:01 · Score: 2

Excuse me? I would hope everyone would be just as outraged if a person tried to grab their regular glasses, assuming they wear them. It would be an assault.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:09 · Score: 0

I think we're going to have just leave the word to the Yanks and live without a word for someone from either the North or South Amercas.
If they from the North, other than the USA, they're Canucks. If they're from the South they're wetbacks. Sorted.
Re:there are signs by bryan1945 · 2012-07-18 21:22 · Score: 1

Oh, great, here we go again.

--
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
Re:there are signs by Shoe+Puppet · 2012-07-18 21:45 · Score: 1

In that case, you can replace ä by ae, ö by oe, ü by ue and ß by ss.

--
(+1, Disagree)
Re:there are signs by BeeRockxs · 2012-07-18 21:52 · Score: 1

Deutschländer is a brand of sausages. A German calls himself "Deutscher", as in "Ich bin ein Deutscher." = "I am a German."
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 23:03 · Score: 0

Correctly? (ducks quickly).
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 23:24 · Score: 0

Unless it's a badge.
Re:there are signs by Assmasher · 2012-07-18 23:25 · Score: 2

Hehe, EXACT thing happened to me in the 1985 San Diego County spelling bee. I got up there and (I have rather good hearing - though poor eyesight) the guy said clear as day "suet" and I thought to myself - "no way, that's a baby word" so I asked him to repeat it and he said it exactly the same way so I simply spelled "SUET, S-U-E-T, SUET" and he said "That is incorrect" and then spelled the word SUINT and then the son of a bitch (lol) even pronounced it properly by saying "Soo-int" insted of "Soo-it." A friend on the El Cajon all-star baseball team with me who was also in the bee told me everyone off stage freaked out thinking this guy was trying to trick people.
(I would have gotten my a** handed to me by later words anyhow, but that was embarrassing for me - the press picture they take of each kid on their first word shows me looking at him after being told what the actual word was and I have this "what you talkin' 'bout Willis?" look on my face.)

--
Loading...
Re:there are signs by Lando · 2012-07-18 23:37 · Score: 3, Interesting

Like I said, I don't know the specifics, but as far as glasses go, you take my glasses you are coming in contact with me. Even if I don't start spouting blood out of numerous wounds, it's assault, perhaps even theft. Since the glasses he was/is wearing are probably worth over a grand, I believe that is also a felony.
Seriously, I've worn glasses since I was 9 years old and I can't remember one incident where it's ever been acceptable for someone to take the glasses off my face without my authorization. Perhaps they just didn't do it when I was overseas because I was in the military and they didn't want me shooting a cruise missile at them? Or perhaps, it's not acceptable anywhere to grab someone's glasses from off there face, except of course in McDonald's at a certain location in Paris.
As posted in another message here, this isn't the first incident at this particular McDonald's either.

--
/* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
Re:there are signs by Lando · 2012-07-18 23:41 · Score: 2

Or perhaps he just wrote that comment because he was trolling since his original message wasn't moded down as far as I can tell. He appears to be just trying to stir up controversy.

--
/* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
Re:there are signs by Lando · 2012-07-18 23:47 · Score: 1

Your knowledge of the US appears to be about as good as your knowledge of deodorant.
+1 got a chuckle out of me.

--
/* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
Re:there are signs by f3rret · 2012-07-19 00:25 · Score: 1

ß by ss.
I thought they were gradually phasing out the ß out in favor for ss even in Germany.
I haven't taken German lessons for a long, long time though.

--
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
Re:there are signs by f3rret · 2012-07-19 00:32 · Score: 1

Medical documentation? For what condition? What is the malady that requires he wear goggles? Something wrong with his eyes? I've been asking this all over the place and nobody can tell me. What is the condition he suffers from that requires a medical appliance to cure?
This, I want to know this too.

--
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
Re:there are signs by f3rret · 2012-07-19 00:35 · Score: 1

there are signs on every McDonald's across europe (no pictures/no dogs/no smoking)
Yes, restaurants usually hate dogs on premises, but even in France, a restaurant can be fined from 150 to 450 Euros for refusing service to a disabled person because of their service dog
Pretty much all over the world guide dogs are exempted from being "dog" so to say. They're allowed on public transport, in public buildings, in restaurants - anywhere regular pet dogs are not allowed.
And besides being very useful for the person they guide, these dogs are also always highly trained so not likely to cause any problems, this in contrast to your regular pet dog...
They are also (at least here in Denmark) required to be clearly marked and documented, here it is usually done by having the dog wear a bright yellow vest with a little pictogram on it an the Danish words for "working dog", and the owner will usually carry around the dog's documents as well.
Now there is no law saying that the dogs have to wear that yellow vest or that the owner has to carry around the documents, they just can't be assured the same privileges if they don't.

--
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 00:49 · Score: 0

The Germans don't call themselves German, in German. It's Deutschlander.
That's wrong. No such word exists. It's "Deutscher" (masculine) or "Deutsche" (feminine).
Re:there are signs by umghhh · 2012-07-19 01:24 · Score: 1

.. The equivalent would be people from, say, the UK, calling themselves "European" in exclusion of everybody else in the same continent. ...
The sentence should read: The equivalent would be people from, say, France, calling themselves "European" in exclusion of everybody else in the same continent and it would fit reality especially as people in UK have such deep feeling for Europe that they digged a bloody moat between them and the rest of continent. I think they use term 'english channel' for it and silly enough they built a tunnel underneath - not sure what for - I mean they do not know much about trains anyway as the history of the eurostar proves every other winter....
Re:there are signs by rho180 · 2012-07-19 01:55 · Score: 1

I have no direct knowledge, but I was a grad student at U of T when Professor Mann first arrived in the department, and attended a talk or two about his research (also had friends who worked in his group). As I understood it, part of his research involves using himself as a test subject for his wearable computing devices. At that time, he was living most of the hours of the day with these devices on, and I recall from one of his talks that the visual input had become such a part of his daily experience that it was extremely disorienting to remove his glasses (and by disorienting, I don't mean just psychologically disorienting, but extreme physical disorientation etc.). Again, I have no direct knowledge, but I would suspect that his medical documentation says that he essentially needs his glasses in order to function normally.
Re:there are signs by Lando · 2012-07-19 02:45 · Score: 1

Point is that is just one device. Once the technology is established who knows what new products would be available and what they would look like.

--
/* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
Re:there are signs by RosebudLTD · 2012-07-19 03:24 · Score: 1

I've lived in New England all my life, and I've never heard that someone from Maine is a 'Yankee'. Heard them called plenty of other things (more than occasionally derogatory), but not 'Yankee'. 'Yankee' is a derogatory term for an American, from the colonial days; or a derogatory term for a northerner, said by a southerner; or a member of the ball club.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:30 · Score: 0

I smoke every day, it is part of my life, by extension i should not be denied smoking *anywhere* i please?
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:54 · Score: 0

N_GGERS
"People who annoy you"
Re:there are signs by DNS-and-BIND · 2012-07-19 04:10 · Score: 0

Oh, what a steaming load of bullshit. That's not a medical condition. That's a psychological problem. It's as I suspected, the guy has a huge hard-on for considering himself a "cyborg" and will go to great lengths to avoid shattering this illusion. Hint: he's faking it. It's all about ego. What a fucking tool.

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 04:24 · Score: 0

Well my point was that if you were having a convesation about what continent you came from, someone could say Central American. While not technically correct, it would work and everyone would know what they meant.
If someone said they came from the continent of America, well, then the best guess is that they meant North America and they were a graduate of the US's public school system.
Re:there are signs by the_other_chewey · 2012-07-19 04:41 · Score: 1

it's optional on an American keyboard, because I can't be bothered to type one out. it's not on my keyboard = not worth my time for a /. post
That sure is a weird keyboard.

Which of the characters in "ä" don't you have?
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 04:56 · Score: 0

And if you are in Canada, everyone south of the 49th is a Yankee. =P
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 05:44 · Score: 0

Psychology is no longer a medical field? Since when? I take it you must be a scientologist.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 06:13 · Score: 0

I didn't say it would be acceptable to take your glasses off, I said no one would give a shit. There's a difference. If someone were to try to grab your glasses off of you -- not to steal them, and you knew that -- and you went to the police, they'd be about as likely to investigate that as a missing dog case. You might get a tiny, tiny bit of press if you had pictures of a McDonald's employee trying to grab your camera, but not much. It wouldn't be on slashdot, for instance.
You are way, way too emotionally involved in this. Or else just prone to posing stupidly ridiculous hypothetical situations, which you managed to do in a second straight post. You've got a low enough ID to know to make more reasonable arguments in a discussion.
Re:there are signs by BeanThere · 2012-07-19 07:09 · Score: 1

So if I put a sign somewhere on my house (that visitors may or may not see) I am then legally and morally allowed to physically assault anyone on my premises who happens to have a camera? I don't think so.
Secondly, nearly every cellphone these days is a camera. Why aren't they manhandling and throwing out every customer with a cellphone? They 'de facto' don't apply that policy.
Re:there are signs by Critical+Facilities · 2012-07-19 07:42 · Score: 1

The ONLY thing they can do is to call the police. They do not have any other right

That is also the case in the US. Private security, AKA "rent-a-cops" have no rights beyond any other private citizen.
You are incorrect. While not the case for ALL private security companies, there are many that have been granted police powers. There are privately run prisons that are staffed by employees of that Security Company. Even internationally, we use private "security" companies with significantly more "police power" than your average citizen (i.e. Blackwater/Xe). I'm not saying I agree with this, just that it is indeed the case.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 08:21 · Score: 0

You bawstaad!
Re:there are signs by Hognoxious · 2012-07-19 08:42 · Score: 1

Perhaps I've watched too much Monty Python, I would have gone for "bight".
(It's a loop in a rope, or a similarly curved body of water).

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:there are signs by Kreigaffe · 2012-07-19 10:53 · Score: 1

that came across oddly so i'll assume the ä was supposed to be a character not supported by slashcode. 26 letters, that's all there is in English. no unlauts, no accent marks, none of that stuff. we just have letters. abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz -- that's all the letters on an american keyboard. there's a tilde key, but it's sort of a legacy thing -- it doesn't actually put a tilde over a letter, it's really only used to open a console in video games really. i never use it otherwise.

--
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
Re:there are signs by stephanruby · 2012-07-19 11:54 · Score: 1

Here's the thing: It's a device he had implanted because he wanted it, not because he needed it.
How do you know? It wouldn't be the first time a disabled person also happened to be the foremost expert (and self-experimenting guinea pig) in his own field.
Are you even a Medical Doctor? Must his Medical records be publicly posted somewhere on the Internet for everyone to see? The last I checked, Medical records were private, and if you have a disability/disease of some kind that's not immediately obvious, it's probably not a very good idea career-wise to let the entire World know about it.
In any case, coming back to my previous comparison. In France, service animals accompanied by a disabled customer are allowed in restaurants. In the US, it's even better. Service animals are also allowed to accompany their able-bodied keepers/trainers in restaurants to get them accustomed to the environment. If you ask me, that law in the US is actually much more complete than the French law. After all, what use is the legal protection of service animals to let them perform their duties if you don't even protect them enough to train them to perform those duties in the first place.

If I decide to implant a camera on my feet and then go walking around in sandals in a Catholic school that has a "no cameras aimed up a girl's skirt" policy, they would be in the right to kick me out.
Why suddenly the Chewbacca defense? Clearly, that's not what happened. If the intents of both parties are obviously completely different, then yes, the conclusion drawn may be obviously completely different as well.

The guy has a history of being a jerk in order to promote himself, and this fits that history.
The guy has a history of getting harassed for being different. That at least is clear. Is he outspoken? A complainer? And perhaps even militant? Yes, that's likely, but that doesn't make him wrong.
If it weren't for people like him opening up the way in this area, then what chance does an even more disabled and helpless person with newly created (most likely very ugly and very cyborg looking) eye prosthetics have against a bunch of young people with a power complex working at a fast food joint?
Re:there are signs by peterhoeg · 2012-07-19 16:25 · Score: 1

Eurasian is used to describe somebody half European, half Asian. It's quite commonly used here in Singapore.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 23:25 · Score: 0

And if the European Union were a nation, the citizens would be referred to as European
I can almost guarantee American /.ers would call them all "English".
Re:there are signs by angster · 2012-07-20 02:55 · Score: 1

I've always just called myself a USer.
Re:there are signs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-20 07:07 · Score: 0

Psychology isn't a medical field. Psychiatry is, though, and he would need a separate medical note from a psychiatrist to prove any psychological requirement for his glasses. Even his so-called medical note is probably just the doctor saying "Yep, he's got that thing screwed into his skull", because there is literally no medical requirement for a head-mounted display to be surgically grafted to your skull (not even Geordie's visor was).
Re:there are signs by JoeDuncan · 2012-07-20 10:18 · Score: 1

If you read this article (see page 2), it's clear that his medical condition is nothing more than the removal of his wearable computer:
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/14/technology/at-airport-gate-a-cyborg-unplugged.html
I bet his doctor is even the same guy named in the article.
Re:there are signs by Lando · 2012-07-22 02:43 · Score: 1

Pardon me, but like I said, I would give a shit.

--
/* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */

Yeah... by SomePgmr · 2012-07-18 12:29 · Score: 5, Interesting

Ok, McD's... let's see the security footage.

You're in the court of public opinion and it ain't lookin' good.

Re:Yeah... by sabri · 2012-07-18 12:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is a PR nightmare for McDonald's and they're only making it worse. Yes, it is a franchise operation and yes it is the responsibility of the local franchise owner to have his staff treat their customers with respect (even if they throw him out).

What they should do is promptly apologize and sent that staff on customer service training.

(But then again, what can you expect from McDonalds staff? If they were so smart, they'd have my job.)

--
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
Re:Yeah... by girlintraining · 2012-07-18 13:05 · Score: -1, Flamebait

Ok, McD's... let's see the security footage.
Camera footage without audio doesn't say much. Even when there is audio, you can't see from each person's vantage point. The Rodney King beating video, for example, was shown by various outlets as an example of police brutality. You can't see the gun he had on him in the video. Camera footage doesn't always tell the whole story; Which is precisely why camera footage doesn't mean anything in a court of law without witness testimony to back it up -- cameras can't be cross-examined.
Worse, the footage is likely low quality (320x280) and time lapsed; That is typical for security cameras. Most cameras in retail establishments are there to keep employees from stealing from the till.

--
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Re:Yeah... by careysb · 2012-07-18 13:06 · Score: 1

Ok, McD's... let's see the security footage.
Oh, and only WE are allowed to record.
Re:Yeah... by johnny+cashed · 2012-07-18 13:09 · Score: 3, Informative

Wait, Rodney King was armed during his beating? Really? Do you have some links that support this?
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:09 · Score: 0

You're in the FOOD court of public opinion and it ain't lookin' good.
There, fixed that for you.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:12 · Score: 4, Informative

No, this is a PR nightmare. And just like with super-sized drinks, removing it from their menu "had nothing to do with" this information hitting mainstream media.
Re:Yeah... by Johann+Lau · 2012-07-18 13:23 · Score: 4, Informative

Hey, it seems like you have some info Wikipedia is lacking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_King#Confrontation
Feel free to share whatever it is you got, or to retract. In the latter case you might also want to kick whoever told you that in the nuts, for making you seem like a racist to complete strangers :P
Re:Yeah... by EdIII · 2012-07-18 13:25 · Score: 5, Funny

Wait, Rodney King was armed during his beating?
Yes.. he had two of them.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:31 · Score: 0

PR nightmare, yeah right. For dorks that read 2 stories on /. Nobody else has heard of this dude.
Re:Yeah... by nazsco · 2012-07-18 13:42 · Score: 1

> implying people that eat at mcdonalds care about the company public image
yeah. right.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:52 · Score: 0

Oh, that's OK then.
Of course, if he was armed, they were fully justified in beating him. It was no more than he deserved. For being armed. Summary justice. Fully deserved. As meted out to all NRA members for instance. Without any consideration of race. Not all all. None.
I'm with Salvor Hardin myself.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:10 · Score: 0

You can't see the gun he had on him in the video
Pics or it didn't happen.
oh.... Or vagina.
Re:Yeah... by fredmosby · 2012-07-18 14:13 · Score: 0

Do you have a source to back up this claim, or are you just making stuff up? If he had guns on him the transcripts from the trial probably would have mentioned it.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:22 · Score: 0

Woosh!
Re:Yeah... by codegen · 2012-07-18 14:28 · Score: 2

Whoosh!!!

--
Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
Re:Yeah... by sapphire+wyvern · 2012-07-18 14:35 · Score: 2

Hey hey, no original research!
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

How does being wrong about the Rodney King incident make you a racist? Pretty sure it just makes you wrong.
Re:Yeah... by Genda · 2012-07-18 14:40 · Score: 4, Informative

I think I see your problem. He was on PAROLE for having committed a robbery armed with two weapons. He fled because he was drunk, because he knew that being caught driving under the influence would be a breach of his parole agreement. Though he did reach speeds of 115 mph, he was in fact unarmed (not counting the car he drove recklessly.) The LAPD reported that he was under the influences of PCP, that he was violent, aggressive and that they needed to taser him after he viciously attacked them. The video on the other hand showed that the officers tased him immediately on leaving the car, once on the ground, they kicked him in the head repeatedly, beat him with batons for over a minute, then tackled and cuffed him when he stopped moving. Later when his blood work came back there were no traces of PCP. Its an easy mistake to make, the way the story is written in some sources, the Parole Violation and chase get combined.
Re:Yeah... by westlake · 2012-07-18 14:55 · Score: 1, Insightful

This is a PR nightmare for McDonald's and they're only making it worse.

To the geek, its a PR nightmare.
For McDonald's patrons, perhaps, a reason to celebrate. The geek has --- no --- idea of how others perceive him.

But then again, what can you expect from McDonalds staff? If they were so smart, they'd have my job.
Re:Yeah... by tragedy · 2012-07-18 15:04 · Score: 0

There doesn't seem to be anything in the public record of the event to support this. There's certainly no sign of these guns in the well-publicized video. Even if he had them, it doesn't somehow excuse the beating. Of course, if he actually did have guns on him and the police were aware of them, and he didn't drop them, they would have shot him rather than beaten him. This simple fact makes your claim a little dubious.
Re:Yeah... by EdIII · 2012-07-18 15:14 · Score: 2

Whoooosshhh?
I would explain the joke, but I am laughing hysterically over here at how many people are not getting it.
Re:Yeah... by phantomfive · 2012-07-18 15:15 · Score: 1

True, it's not like McDonald's is unfamiliar with PR nightmares. They are constantly finding themselves in the news over some scandal, ever since I was a kid, and they've handled it fine. They're still here, bigger than ever. If the pink slime didn't do them in, what will?

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:15 · Score: 0

Everyone who cares can contact McD's and make a noise. A thousand noises and it may start to matter.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:16 · Score: 0

And if you look at the tape closely you will find the officers were helping him up and sending him on his way...
(If you play the tape backwards)
Re:Yeah... by girlintraining · 2012-07-18 15:43 · Score: 0

Feel free to share whatever it is you got, or to retract. In the latter case you might also want to kick whoever told you that in the nuts, for making you seem like a racist to complete strangers :P
What I got is a guy who was 2.5 times over the legal limit, fleeing and evading the police, while on parole for a previous robbery. He then blasted through several residential neighborhoods at up to 80 MPH, with two passengers. When stopped, the two passengers were taken into custody without incident. When he exited the vehicle, at gunpoint, with several officers surrounding him, he was giggling, pointing and laughing at the officers, and then reached for his back pocket.
There's your gun. Yes, there wasn't acually a gun there, but consider what would happen if you were faced with a 6 foot tall drunk guy who, with a gun pointed at his head, started giggling and reached for "something". The fact that he wasn't shot dead right there on the spot is amazing. I would not have been so generous.
Officers then swarmed him, tackling him to the ground. He threw two officers off him. Given previous behavior they withdrew and regrouped believing he was under the influence of PCP -- a substance known for it's ability to give its users almost superhuman strength, an inability to feel pain, and delusional thinking. They tazered him at that point. He remained combative, yelling and acting aggressively.
And it's right at this point that the video camera footage you saw comes into play..
So think about this: After endangering hundreds of lives in a high speed chase on residential roads, he's behaving erratically, reaching for his back pocket, manages to throw off two officers, and even tazering him does little to subdue him. You're the police officer. What do you do? You've tried everything else... and you've still got a guy who may or may not have a weapon on him, is acting like he's under the influence of drugs which make him impervious to being wrestled to the ground and similarly immune to your less-than-lethal use of a taser.
Feel free to share whatever it is you got, or to retract.

--
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Re:Yeah... by Johann+Lau · 2012-07-18 15:54 · Score: 2, Insightful

How does seeming like a racist make you a racist? I'm pretty sure it just makes you seem like a racist.
But you're right, make that "asshole". Why? A bunch of white cops brutalize a black dude, poster says "he had a gun on him" -- implying it was neither police brutality nor racism.
How would someone get this wrong via a honest mistake? Where would one get the idea from that Rodney King had a gun? They kinda have to be either into authority or against blacks, and cut their thought and evidence collection process short to accomodate that, hence "asshole".
When groups with power attack individuals without, you simply don't get to excuse the perps by being sloppy and repeating hearsay some asshole told you. In this case, it's so easy to find out I really have to wonder, and ask again, HOW could one get this wrong? I honestly wonder.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

Some people always choose a certain kind of incidents to be wrong about. We call those people racists.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:58 · Score: 0

This is how we could slide into a police state - people who are so scared that they can look at that tape and think this is how the police should react.
Your narrative is a bit inaccurate and filled with confirmation bias, but let's concentrate on one simple question: If King was so dangerous that he needed to be beaten without pause for such a long time, why are there only four officers trying to subdue him? There were several others at the scene, they didn't seem to be concerned at all.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 16:02 · Score: 0

It doesn't matter. What those cops did was not necessary. Dude was down on the ground. One could argue that the first blows were necessary to subdue the guy (I'd doubt that, but give the benefit of the doubt). It was all the ones after that which were criminal.
Re:Yeah... by ThatsMyNick · 2012-07-18 16:15 · Score: 1

He was hit multiple times AFTER he was tasered. Thats exactly what the video showed, and irrespective of the circumstances (hell he could have had a suicide bomb vest tapped under his shirt), the beatings were uncalled for.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 16:53 · Score: 0

And what if for the sake of argument the Professor is making it up, exaggerating or otherwise misconstruing the circumstances? Owning up to something that didn't ultimately happen is just as bad and can be very hard to undo.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 17:17 · Score: 1

Your first post:

You can't see the gun he had on him in the video.
Your second post:

There's your gun. Yes, there wasn't acually a gun there
Your first post now looks like a deliberate lie to make Rodney King look bad, and your second post looks like an attempt to weasel out of it.
Re:Yeah... by AmazingRuss · 2012-07-18 17:42 · Score: 3

Wrong + white = racist
Re:Yeah... by tragedy · 2012-07-18 18:18 · Score: 1

All right. Got me there. I think I can be forgiven a little since this was all in response to someone claiming that he had a gun that could be seen in the video and also the fact that the term "armed" pretty much never means possessing appendages in the upper torso but rather always means possessing a weapon. About the only exceptions to this seem to be when "armed is preceded" by something as in "one-armed", "hundred-armed", etc.
Jokes aside, the assertion that Rodney King was holding a gun is ridiculous on its face. Reality just doesn't support it. The very simple fact is that if a suspect has a gun and refuses to drop it, the police will not use tasers and batons, they will open fire with their own guns. That's just the way it is and, when it happens, most people have a hard time getting too upset about it. They may feel it's tragic, but they have a hard time actually blaming the officers. Beyond that, if Rodney King had been armed even with a knife the police would have been drawing as much attention as possible to that fact.
Re:Yeah... by tragedy · 2012-07-18 18:18 · Score: 1

Whoops, accidentally replied to my own post rather than yours.
Re:Yeah... by tragedy · 2012-07-18 18:23 · Score: 1

You specifically wrote:

You can't see the gun he had on him in the video
Now you know you're wrong and you're backpedalling by claiming he was reaching for his back pocket making it look like he had a gun. A simple "oops, I was wrong" would be a bit more dignified.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 18:28 · Score: 0

Potentially nothing. People have an unlimited capacity for stupidity, laziness, thrift, and especially self-destruction. Even if you're intelligent and well educated about a particular danger, it doesn't necessarily mean that you're going to make the best choice.
The most likely thing that would kill McD's would be if a vast majority of their customers woke up and realized that the food is bland and disgusting, not to mention incredibly unhealthy. Good luck with that campaign.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 18:57 · Score: 1

I think I see your problem: the person you replied to was making a "arm" pun.
Re:Yeah... by ArsenneLupin · 2012-07-18 20:40 · Score: 1

hehe...
Probably more people would get it if the initial question was not:

Wait, Rodney King was armed during his beating?
but:

Wait, Rodney King had arms during his beating?
or maybe then it would have been too obvious...
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 22:20 · Score: 0

Ok, McD's... let's see the security footage.
Oh, and only WE are allowed to record.
So what? YOU try walking into most businesses with a head full of video recording gear and see how much they like it. Their store, their rules, don't like it you can go somewhere else. Throwing a hissy fit and making bullshit claims about a "medical" device with no official paperwork to back you up is going to get you tossed out of damn near any establishment on the planet.
Oh, and just FYI the only reason the glasses don't easily detach is because he doesn't want them to be easy to remove.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:00 · Score: 0

Yeah, so where's the outcry at BK and TB for doing the same.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:00 · Score: 0

No. I saw the video. They did not start beating him immediately. They told him to get on the ground and he didn't do it. They asked him several times. When they forced him to the ground and he kept trying to get up. That's why he got beat. He's an idiot. The street is not a court of law. When the police tell you to do something you do it. Argue about it in court later. Google for the unedited video and see for yourself.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:12 · Score: 0

It wasn't racism. The police (IMO) did use excessive force, but it may have simply been because he was acting erraticly and they weren't sure what he might do. You have to remember that everyday they are out there they could die. There are people out there that would shoot a cop just because they can. The police never know if they're dealing with one of those looney toons or a law abiding citizen. I know they are trained to stay calm and cool, but the fact is that they're human. Rodney King would've never been beaten like that if he'd have got on the ground when they told him to. He was drunk, wanted to argue, was combatitive and found out what happens when you are a moron. The same thing would've happened if he'd have been white and done the same thing.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:33 · Score: 1

It takes a special kind of person to look at that video and think "kept trying to get up" instead of "kept trying to get away from a monstrous group of attackers".
Re:Yeah... by Johann+Lau · 2012-07-19 02:06 · Score: 1

It still wouldn't have happened if he had been moderately wealthy, I'd bet my life on that right here.
And cops get much more rarely shot for fun than they shoot for fun, heh.

The police never know if they're dealing with one of those looney toons or a law abiding citizen.
It doesn't fucking matter. Yes, disabling someone who resists isn't pretty and they're kind of asking for pain. But there's a difference between that and a "lengthy beating".
Plenty of cops ARE looney toons. And they don't know that either -- who's going to deal with them? The people who pay them mostly make excuses for them it seems.
Re:Yeah... by Johann+Lau · 2012-07-19 02:10 · Score: 1

making a strawman argument that's already been addressed = *pat on the head*
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 02:10 · Score: 0

That's right.
Tacos are much harder to make that burgers.
BOOYAHH
Re:Yeah... by Johann+Lau · 2012-07-19 02:16 · Score: 1

while on parole for a previous robbery

*the crowd tenses up*

while on parole for a previous robbery
*the crowd relaxes*

There's your gun. Yes, there wasn't acually a gun there, but consider what would happen if you were faced with a 6 foot tall drunk guy who, with a gun pointed at his head, started giggling and reached for "something". The fact that he wasn't shot dead right there on the spot is amazing. I would not have been so generous.
Oh get off it and over yourself. You said there was a gun that wasn't visible on the security camera, now you're going to just bait and switch? Fuck that.

Feel free to share whatever it is you got, or to retract.
Retract what? Pointing out the fact you made shit up, which you did, and then just repeated?
You really think some "I know you're wrong, but what am I?" bullshit is going to do it?
Re:Yeah... by AmazingRuss · 2012-07-19 02:38 · Score: 1

Thanks for addressing the "condescending Asian prick" requirement.
Re:Yeah... by crakbone · 2012-07-19 03:35 · Score: 1

Doesn't change a thing about McDonald's to me. Just makes me continue to have very opinionated and exaggerated views of the French.
Re:Yeah... by girlintraining · 2012-07-19 03:44 · Score: 1

Eat dicks. Explode from overeating. Moving on...

--
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 04:35 · Score: 0

Since this is the McDonald's on the Champs - Elysees, I'm guessin it's a corporate operation. If you've never been there, this is a nice and huge McDonald's on what's probably the most famous shopping road in the world. It's always packed and I doubt that, since it's a pretty important 'face' of McDonald's, it would be left to a franchisee to operate.
Also, I've been yelled at a couple of times for taking photos in other French McDonald's-es. It seems to be a pretty universal rule in France that doesn't translate to anywhere else I've been. One manager threatened to take my phone and not return it because I took a photo of a menu (which had some very un-american hamburger setups that I was just trying to document - I kept my phone by feigning a lack of knowledge of French). This rule even applies in most other stores. I was similarly scolded (although no phone confiscation was attempted) in Galleries Lafayette in Paris for taking photos of a candy spread.
The culture of preventing photos so aggressively in businesses around France lends a lot of credence to Dr. Mann's story.
Re:Yeah... by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 04:36 · Score: 1

Actually it is just "not funny."
The would be truly "not getting it" if were laughing as if it is a joking matter. But it isn't. So they don't.
Re:Yeah... by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 04:37 · Score: 1

making you seem like a racist to complete strangers :P
And to people who know him, too.
Re:Yeah... by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 04:40 · Score: 1

How does being wrong about the Rodney King incident make you a racist? Pretty sure it just makes you wrong.
Being an apologist for activities that have literally killed very large numbers of people (racism) and causes lots of death every year, and continues to divide society... yeah, it pretty clearly ties you to those activities, as one of the people who support it, who agree with it.
And laughing at the victim pretty well seals the deal.
Re:Yeah... by EdIII · 2012-07-19 04:45 · Score: -1, Flamebait

My +5 Funny would seem to indicate that it is indeed funny. Perhaps you are just being overly sensitive and serious? It's not like it is recent either.
Quick... What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza? Pizzas don't scream when you put them into an oven. Nothing? Man.. you have no sense of humor.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 04:49 · Score: 0

In this thread:
Original claim:

You can't see the gun he had on him in the video.
After bullshit called:

Yes, there wasn't acually a gun there,
A few weeks ago:
Original claim:

What happened after was laws were passed banning the use of synthetic diamonds in jewelry, and by 'happy' coincidence, their use in industrial process as well.
After people called bullshit:

The law was limited to certain jewelry manufacturers inducing the government to force anyone selling a diamond to disclose its manufacturing process; Specifically, whether it was created in a laboratory, or pulled out of the ground. So it was basically a labelling law (administrative), not a ban on the sale of them.
Just pointing out for anyone following this thread that girlintraining makes a habit of this sort of thing, and is a known and proven habitual liar.
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 05:13 · Score: 0

I can't wait for the BORG happy meals.
jr
Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 05:38 · Score: 0

Seriously? There are several cogent replies to your post in this thread, and you pick this one?
Re:Yeah... by Unkyjar · 2012-07-19 07:31 · Score: 1

It was a play on words or what one calls a bad pun. When he stated that Rodney King was armed, with two of 'em he was using armed as the alternate meaning for the word, like "the many-armed goddess Shiva".
A bad pun, but clearly a pun.
Re:Yeah... by tragedy · 2012-07-20 15:57 · Score: 1

Replying to my own comment here just to comment on the moderation. Someone tacked on a -1 Flamebait to my post. I'm curious if anyone can tell me what part of my post was flamebait? Is it the suggestion that the police would have shot him if he had a gun? That seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Maybe they thought he was the by slackware+3.6 · 2012-07-18 12:30 · Score: 5, Funny

Terminator or some other evil cyborg from the future.

Re:Maybe they thought he was the by Gravis+Zero · 2012-07-18 13:07 · Score: 1

Maybe they thought he was the Terminator or some other evil cyborg from the future.
That's it! I knew there was something fishy about those Canadian folks.

--
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Re:Maybe they thought he was the by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:25 · Score: 0

"I need your clothes, your boots and your motorcycle."

Do they really show staff ripping up his doc note? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:31 · Score: 0

Or do they show staff ripping up a piece of paper?

If you're prejudiced, it's very easy to see what's not actually there.

Nothing to see here folks by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:32 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Muslim gets away with being barbaric to civilized people, in supposedly a civilized nation, Corporation denies activity despite undeniable evidence to the contrary.

How you say, "News at 11?"

Re:Nothing to see here folks by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:05 · Score: 0

Muslim gets away with being barbaric to civilized people, in supposedly a civilized nation, Corporation denies activity despite undeniable evidence to the contrary.
How you say, "News at 11?"
Dude you can't call out Corporations like that... You already have a -1 because of some McDonald's Corporate shill!

I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:34 · Score: -1, Redundant

Sorry, I know this won't be popular, but I hate the thought of everyone recording everything at all times.

What's next, am I going to have to wear blur suits like in Scanner Darkly?

Re:I stand behind McDonalds by ThatsMyNick · 2012-07-18 12:37 · Score: 1, Interesting

Do you also stand behind assaulting customers?
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:38 · Score: 0

Running a pizza place very late, I have had to on a few occasions ;-)
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:46 · Score: 2, Funny

I stand behind the freedom for someone to claim they've been assaulted, and to concoct an unbelievable story in which they carefully avoid any description of what happened just before the alleged assault.
I stand behind their freedom to show pictures of people ripping up a piece of paper and to claim anything they want about what that paper said or who owned it.
I even stand behind their freedom to claim that, despite a description of a brazen attack and insistence upon the availability of evidence, police and other officials simply ignored their report.
But assault? No, of course I don't stand behind that. But I don't see what assault has to do with this story.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:47 · Score: 0

*I* hate the thought of drowning in an ocean of laws that prevent me from recording anything. Recordings are very important legal self-defense, and people should absolutely be allowed to do it when in public or in publicly-serving private establishments (like restaurants where people might be pooping in your food).
If you don't want to be recorded, stay home. When you are out in public, you have NO expectation of privacy, and you should just get over your discomfort about being recorded just as you must get over your discomfort about being seen at all. You could also wear face-covering clothing, of course, and if that makes you look like a putz, well to damn bad.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Namarrgon · 2012-07-18 12:47 · Score: 3, Interesting

But it's cool for McDonald's (and most retailers) to record you, with their own security cameras?

--
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by SJHillman · 2012-07-18 12:47 · Score: 1

Not sure if this is true, but the previous story about this said that the device does not normally record (for more than a few seconds anyway, before it's overwritten), but that the damage caused by the altercation made the images stay in its memory.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by DuChamp+Fitz · 2012-07-18 12:48 · Score: 2

Apparently, the device only starts recording when it's damaged.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:50 · Score: 0

Except I have a choice to walk into a store, I don't have a choice whether I pass one of you idiots on the sidewalk
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by cornfeed · 2012-07-18 12:55 · Score: 0

Then don't shop there?! I shop at plenty of places that only record the last 3 days or don't have cameras at all. Am I the only one that remembers all the pissed off people when Google Street View came out? I keep my blinds closed a lot more since then...I don't feel like that is fair that I have to be worried inside my own home.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:01 · Score: 0

Then why does he regularily save and update images from the device to his micro blog when no damage is done to the device at all?
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:07 · Score: 0

I've been reloading Google Street View every six hours on your house, hoping that Google will snap a photo late enough and with your lights on such that I can see inside. Boy are you ever going to be in trouble when I finally get that photo of you without a shirt on standing in front of your fridge!

But if you keep closing your blinds ... I guess we'll have to wait for Google Thermal View so that we can all finally see what it is you're doing at one second in time in your house.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by ThatsMyNick · 2012-07-18 13:23 · Score: 1

Despite pictures of the assault?
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-07-18 13:41 · Score: 2

Buy a ski mask or walk at night.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by bky1701 · 2012-07-18 13:43 · Score: 1

The restaurant was already recording you, FYI. It's just a question of who is doing the recording. Much like police: they will happily film you, brutalize you if you attempt to film them, and conveniently lose the tapes if one of their own cameras catches their corruption.

--
Great Intellect...
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by nazsco · 2012-07-18 13:44 · Score: 1

i can't stop thinking that yes, his device DOES store images in long term memory.
that IS recording. so he outright lied about not taking pictures with the device.
other than that, i think that their reasons were probably that they have illegal stuff going on at that store. like illegal labor or something.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by bky1701 · 2012-07-18 13:45 · Score: 2

And people couldn't, you know, have taken a photo of your open window and posted it on 4chan if it was really worth looking at, without the involvement of Google?

You're not as fucking interesting as you tell yourself.

--
Great Intellect...
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:52 · Score: 0

You could also wear face-covering clothing, of course, and if that makes you look like a putz, well to damn bad.
The Muslim nation frowns upon your shenanigans.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:59 · Score: 1

But I don't see what assault has to do with this story.
The camera is broken and it retained what it saw because it registered an impact. The camera was attached to this person's head and could not be removed without special tools. So we either have to imagine some quite elaborate deception on the part of the professor or he really did receive an impact to his head. I guess he could have fallen or something like that, but then why would he make up a story like this about something that happened in public so that it would be easy to prove that he was making a false accusation? Something that was probably recorded by McD's own cameras? While also claiming to have video of the act which would make it even easier to disprove once that video gets requested as part of any case. It makes NO SENSE at all for a professor to so publicly tarnish his reputation like this if there was nothing to what he was claiming. It might be what's going on here, but it's not a likely scenario.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:59 · Score: 0

His device stores images on a ring buffer. Presumably he can instruct it to save video but normally stuff gets overwritten in a couple of minutes. Smashing the camera froze the buffer as it was, with its last couple of minutes recorded.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:59 · Score: 0

Because he selectively requests the device to save those images. It doesn't record automatically unless damaged. It could record (like just about any camera, such as the ones the blind use for vision enhancement) at his command, of course.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:28 · Score: 0

What the hell is your definition of assault? Attempting to remove something screwed into someone's skull with enough force to break them, in front of his children at that, definitely qualifies as there was bodily and/or physical property damage.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Grishnakh · 2012-07-18 14:38 · Score: 1

Tough shit. Just like a tourist doesn't have to ask permission of thousands of people on the sidewalk when he takes a photo of a street in Manhattan, no one needs your permission to take a photo of you (or of the much more interesting thing behind you) when you're in public. Don't like it? Stay home. Inside your home is the only place where you have an expectation of privacy, and also perhaps inside restrooms. Anywhere else, you're fair game for photos.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Grishnakh · 2012-07-18 14:39 · Score: 1

The Muslim nation probably doesn't care too much about people taking photos of them since they're all unidentifiable in those burqas anyway. But Americans scream and bitch about anyone taking their photo instead of taking steps to avoid the problem.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Miamicanes · 2012-07-18 15:34 · Score: 5, Interesting

If you REALLY want to have some fun, try calling any major corporation (Comcast, Sprint, Microsoft, Marriott, whomever) and announcing to the CSR that you're recording the call for training and quality purposes. Assuming they don't hang up on you INSTANTLY, the conversation isn't going to progress beyond "I'm sorry, we can't continue until you stop recording."
Pointing out to them that THEY'RE doing the exact same thing to YOU will get you nowhere. Telling them that you'll discontinue recording when THEY do will get you hung up on. Telling them you'll quit recording when they tell you how to obtain your own copy of their recording later will get you hung up on. Simply put, no corporation will EVER voluntarily or knowingly allow you, a peon, to record your conversation with them, even though they feel perfectly entitled to record their conversation with YOU, and use it against you if it suits them.
There should seriously be a law granting consumers the automatic reciprocal right to silently record any conversation where the other party announces that the call is being recorded & makes it clear that you do NOT have the option of continuing the call unless you agree to let them do it.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by MikeBabcock · 2012-07-18 16:12 · Score: 1

You do indeed have a choice not to use sidewalks. Sidewalks are public space. They are not private space.
Look up 'expectation of privacy.

--
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by iamwahoo2 · 2012-07-18 16:18 · Score: 2

In some states you can go ahead and record all of the calls that you want and you do not have to tell anyone.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Lisias · 2012-07-18 18:45 · Score: 1

+1 Insightful.
The guy has a reputation to look for. He would not make a public statement without being sure to do not being exposed as a liar.
Not to mention a huge bill on lawyers, as McDonald's would sue him his pants off (I would, if innocent!).

--
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by _KiTA_ · 2012-07-18 19:11 · Score: 1

i can't stop thinking that yes, his device DOES store images in long term memory.
that IS recording. so he outright lied about not taking pictures with the device.
other than that, i think that their reasons were probably that they have illegal stuff going on at that store. like illegal labor or something.
Except you are thinking wrong. It does not have a long term memory. The device was damaged and froze up, leaving the buffer (which is overwritten every few minutes) intact due to the device having been bashed by a worker trying to remove it, then the motherboard having been damaged when he had a bladder failure from their assault on his person.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:28 · Score: 0

Earth to stupid jackass: Just because you "can't stop thinking" something doesn't make it true. And yes, that IS what you claimed.
So either provide hard evidence that his implant does in fact store images in long term memory AUTOMATICALLY BY DEFAULT, or admit that you are the liar.
Those are your ONLY possible choices. And yes, silence DOES count as an admission.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:31 · Score: 3, Insightful

The most common wording I've heard is "[Calls] may be recorded [for quality and training purposes]". Which then unintentionally gives you consent to record them.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:40 · Score: 0

Reading the article before hammering your keyboard is usually the best course of action.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by taylorius · 2012-07-18 20:27 · Score: 3, Interesting

Tell them you're recording the call at the same point their pre-recorded voice tells you "calls may be recorded...". Just say it back to the recorded voice.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 20:56 · Score: 0

The guy has a reputation to look for. He would not make a public statement without being sure to do not being exposed as a liar.
And this is why the court system tries so hard to get the jury to look at the evidence and to ignore their prejudices, yet still the jury sometimes fails.
Bright people with a good reputation can get away with some awful things.
Even if you dismiss the possibility that the man's an outright liar, it's also possible that he's thoroughly misrepresented the situation, exaggerating and omitting important information.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Higgs+Bosun · 2012-07-18 21:16 · Score: 4, Interesting

It sucks, but that's just the world today. In a related way. notice how employment contracts mention that you're liable for any damage you cause to company property, but they're not liable if they damage your property? Or how they expect you to consistently work unpaid overtime; expect you to be available on call when you're at home/on leave; and generally expect it to be no big deal to impose on your own time outside work. But if you have to spend some work time to deal with even an minor personal issue then suddenly there's a huge stink made about the impact it's having on business continuity; costing the company time etc. I'm talking about small things like phoning the doctor to make an appointment (using your own mobile!), personal conversations with other staff (they want team bonding, but you can only talk about things immediately relating to work?), being ten minutes late become of unexpected roadworks, etc.
It seems we're just here to be used by companies (either as customers or employers), we exist only to make other people wealthy.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:17 · Score: 1

Couldn't you just record it without telling them? Both parties are aware the conversation is being recorded already anyways, so I doubt that legally they have a leg to stand on if it goes to court and they claim they didn't know you were also recording. Besides, you could just claim your recording is a copy of theirs sent to you by a disgruntled employee.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by grahamm · 2012-07-18 21:38 · Score: 3, Interesting

And their normal (at least in the UK) notification to you that "calls may be recorded..." is giving you permission to record. If they did not want you to record then they should announce "WE may record calls..."
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by pne · 2012-07-18 22:21 · Score: 2

In some states you can go ahead and record all of the calls that you want and you do not have to tell anyone.
That's what I heard, too -- that in those places, there has to be the consent of at least one party for the call to be recorded.
So you can't just wiretap random strangers speaking to each other... but if you're calling a company, and you (as one of the participants to the call) give consent to recording the call, then record away!

--
Esli epei etot cumprenan, shris soa Sfaha.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Culture20 · 2012-07-18 22:47 · Score: 1

You could always restate dully what they say. "This call is being recorded" If it sounds to them like you're confirming their statement instead of making one of your own, that's their fault. You notified them...
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by oreaq · 2012-07-18 23:31 · Score: 1

Inside your home is the only place where you have an expectation of privacy
Complete and utter bullshit. European Convention on Human Rights.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by f3rret · 2012-07-18 23:56 · Score: 1

Perhaps the thing has a button marked 'save picture', that he can press to save pictures that can then be posted on his microblog.

--
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Iamthecheese · 2012-07-19 00:36 · Score: 1

I have the choice of doing business with these places or not. They're walking on us because we're lying down.

--
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by tehcyder · 2012-07-19 00:44 · Score: 1

then the motherboard having been damaged when he had a bladder failure from their assault on his person.
He keeps the motherboard in his underpants?

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by burris · 2012-07-19 01:40 · Score: 1

It is legal for you to record such calls in every state because every party to the conversation is aware that it is recorded. No need to make an announcement because they have already announced that they are recording.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Agent0013 · 2012-07-19 02:33 · Score: 1

In the one-party states, only one party to the conversation needs to be informed that the call is being recorded. In these states you could record any conversation you wanted. In the other, two-party states, both parties to the conversation need to be informed that the call is being recorded. My question is this: if they announce to you that the call is being recorded, then both parties are already informed that the call is being recorded so there is no need for you to inform them of your own recording. Now I must state that IANAL and this is just my thoughts on how to twist the situation to suit my own needs.

--

-- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by pyneiii · 2012-07-19 03:06 · Score: 1

That's really interesting. I wonder if the same goes for telemarketers?
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 04:21 · Score: 1

Do you have a particular section you'd like to point out to us? I'm not going to read through the whole thing.
Plus, surveillance in public (mostly by private entities, not the government) is ubiquitous in the UK, so it's not just the US where you have no expectation of privacy in public. You can't walk anywhere in London without being on someone's camera.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Existential+Wombat · 2012-07-19 06:11 · Score: 1

Listen to the pre-call announcement which usually says 'this call may be recorded for '.
It usually doesn't say 'by us, not by you'
I take that as permission for myself to record also. No need to tell them.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by oreaq · 2012-07-19 06:12 · Score: 1

Do you have a particular section you'd like to point out to us
Article 8 establishes privacy as a fundamental human right. One consequence of this is the Data Protection Directive.

Plus, surveillance in public (mostly by private entities, not the government) is ubiquitous in the UK
That's one of the reasons I found it important to point out the right to privacy in the EU: it is under constant attack.

You can't walk anywhere in London without being on someone's camera.
Do you agree that this is not desirable?
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 06:21 · Score: 1

Do you agree that this is not desirable?
No, I don't. If you ban surveillance, then you also have to ban all photography in public, which is utterly ridiculous. Are you saying tourists shouldn't be able to walk around London and take photos of Buckingham Palace, Big Ben, or any random street, unless there's precisely zero people present? I certainly wouldn't want to live in a world where I'm not allowed to take a photo when I'm walking around some city streets, or anywhere else in public for that matter.
If you don't want your face seen in public, don't go out in public. It's that simple.
Note that this is not the same as government surveillance. I'm NOT ok with the government surveilling citizens constantly. However, I don't have a problem with random private individuals taking pictures wherever they want in public (except obvious exceptions, like public restrooms, or following a certain person wherever they go, which is stalking).
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 06:35 · Score: 0

Idaho is one of those states. It's called single party consent.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by oreaq · 2012-07-19 07:22 · Score: 1

There is a pretty obvious gap between constant surveillance and tourists taking pictures.

If you ban surveillance, then you also have to ban all photography in public.
No, of course not.

If you don't want your face seen in public, don't go out in public. It's that simple.
I'm sorry but "simplicity" is just an incredibly stupid argument. If you wan't to go out in public, don't take any pictures. It's that simple. See how retarded that argumentation is?
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 08:13 · Score: 1

Sorry, but I don't see the difference. How exactly are you going to define the threshold between "surveillance" and someone taking a video with their cellphone, or with a video camera? Are you going to set some time limit on it or something? How are you going to get cops to enforce that? Have them watch people taking videos and use a stopwatch to make sure they're not recording for too long at a time? That's insane.
And proposing a law banning people from taking photos in public is just plain stupid.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by oreaq · 2012-07-19 08:51 · Score: 1

You gave a couple of examples in your post above; I'm sure you could come up with others if you tried. This is essentially a black list. You could also do white listing or mix the two. I'm not arguing that finding good criteria is going to be easy but it is definitely not impossible and in my opinion it is worth trying. Your approach seems to be to just give up because it looks difficult.
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by GofG · 2012-07-19 12:44 · Score: 1

doesn't care about photos? i thought they cared a great deal about images made of their likeness.

--
GFA/M/S d-- s: a--- C++++ UBL++$ P+ L+++ !E- W++ N+ !o K- w--- !O !M !V PS++ PE Y+ PGP+ t+++ 5- X+ R tv@ b++ DI++++ D+ G
Re:I stand behind McDonalds by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 12:57 · Score: 1

I think you're confused. They don't like images in the likeness of Mohammed (never mind that no one knows that the heck he looks like anyway, probably partly because of this same prohibition). I don't think they care much about images of themselves, especially not while wearing burqas. I do remember a ridiculous case a while ago of some muslim woman in Florida who tried to make a court case out of driver's license photos, because she refused to have her photo taken without a burqa, and the DMV refused to issue her a driver's license without actually seeing her face (after all, what's the point of a photo ID if the person is wearing a mask that covers their whole head?).

obviously by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:34 · Score: 1

It's open season on McDonald's workers since they've got carte-blanche to attack you. Get them first with as much blunt force trauma as possible and see if those cocksuckers at the corporate office stay the fuck quiet. Hint - most close really late. Should be easy to disable their cars and pick them off.

Re:obviously by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:34 · Score: 0

That's right. Vigilante justice against innocent 3rd parties is always the answer
Re:obviously by Lisias · 2012-07-18 18:52 · Score: 1

Vigilante justice is better than no justice at all.
I'm glad the (original) Tea Party didn't thought as you at that time.

--
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
Re:obviously by Culture20 · 2012-07-18 23:04 · Score: 1

The franchise doesn't care what happens to store employees. The franchise sells a brand to the individual stores.

I record everything I see and hear by Ichijo · 2012-07-18 12:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

...using organic video and audio sensors, onto a storage medium consisting of neurons and synapses. Does this mean they would throw me out, too?

--
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.

Re:I record everything I see and hear by circletimessquare · 2012-07-18 12:41 · Score: 4, Funny

how old school
what a luddite

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Re:I record everything I see and hear by Trogre · 2012-07-18 12:56 · Score: 4, Insightful

Not likely, since any footage captured by your "recording device" cannot be reliably played back.

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Re:I record everything I see and hear by kperson · 2012-07-18 13:21 · Score: 1

Prove it, send me a copy.
Re:I record everything I see and hear by nazsco · 2012-07-18 13:44 · Score: 1

alright, print that and we're game.
Re:I record everything I see and hear by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:47 · Score: 0

What's old school is the word "luddite", grandpa. We call them organics these days, or just meatbags.
Re:I record everything I see and hear by circletimessquare · 2012-07-18 13:57 · Score: 1

keep your cyberspace out of my meatspace! (shakes cane)

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Re:I record everything I see and hear by mark-t · 2012-07-18 14:36 · Score: 2

... yet.

--
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Re:I record everything I see and hear by westlake · 2012-07-18 14:46 · Score: 0

I record everything I see and hear..using organic video and audio sensors, onto a storage medium consisting of neurons and synapses. Does this mean they would throw me out, too?
Perception and memory are notoriously unreliable.
You leave McDonald's with no clear picture of what happened there.
From the simplest of magic tricks, parlor games and puzzles, to elaborately staged classroom exercises in law and psychology, the basic principles have been known and understood for generations.
Eyewitness: How Accurate Is Visual Memory?
I can't help but think that the geek's ever-recording electronic eye is an obscene intrusion into the life of others. When augmented reality meets the real world expect "the almighty augmented" to take some hits --- from this direction at least.
Re:I record everything I see and hear by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:15 · Score: 0

I'd say keep your meatspace out of my cyberspace, but I think without all that pr0n there wouldn't be much cyberspace left.
Re:I record everything I see and hear by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:22 · Score: 0

Playing back is not a requirement for a recording device.
Re:I record everything I see and hear by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:27 · Score: 0

Playing back is not a requirement for a recording device.
Well I record everything to /dev/null. Works every time!
Re:I record everything I see and hear by Ginger+Unicorn · 2012-07-18 22:17 · Score: 1

This is how I picture the altercation at mcdonalds. His memory is admissable as evidence you idiot!

--
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
Re:I record everything I see and hear by JigJag · 2012-07-19 01:18 · Score: 1

Just thinking about it, wouldn't it make a fabulous plot for Sci-Fi authors? Right now, we don't allow recording at certain places (movie theatre, court of law, museums ...) but what are the implications of being able to perfectly extract the content of your wetware?
JigJag

--
"The hallmark of humanity is the ability to move beyond sensory inputs" - Mary Helen Immordino-Yang
Re:I record everything I see and hear by pantaril · 2012-07-19 01:46 · Score: 1

Probably yes, you will also have problems with copyright holders if you later try to replay some of your... copies.
You are probably joking but brain-computer interfaces undergo big progress in recent years. We have bionic eyes which can bring eysigh to the blind for example. How will copyright groups handle those technologies? Will they insist you erase part of your memory after visiting cinema? This is one of the fundamental flaw copyright has. It tries to control creation of copies but fails to notice you create copy the first time you hear or see something.
Re:I record everything I see and hear by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 04:51 · Score: 1

I'd like to apologize for cousin circletimessquare, don't let his youthful looks deceive you, he really does have early onset Alzheimer's. And he just ate all my meds again, how am I supposed to get the kids off the meatlawn without my meds??

Get real by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:36 · Score: -1

Only an academic would expect "I had a doctor's note" to mean anything.

Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:38 · Score: -1

or a lawyer, faggot. Mmmmmm that yummy penis faggot? Suck it gooooood. Lick it clean!
Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:42 · Score: -1

There is no way for a McDonald's employee to know that is a real note!
They can't look it up in public record!
Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:51 · Score: -1

Mmmmmm yummy cummy jizz. It's so warm and good. Lick that cock clean motherfucker! Yummy cock!
Re:Get real by broginator · 2012-07-18 13:01 · Score: -1

Jesus Christ what is wrong with people.

--
s/[stupid comments]/[intelligent discourse]/gi
Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:12 · Score: -1

MMMMMmmmmm fat throbbing sweaty penis tastes good doesn't it motherfucker? Let the cum drip down the back of your throat faggot. Yeah, suck it good bitch!
Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:22 · Score: -1

Welcome to the internet.
Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:31 · Score: 0

Too bad for them then.
Try kicking out a blind person of a store you own because you have a "no dogs" policy, and then tell the judge, once you are sued for discrimination based on disability, "I thought it was not a real assistance dog and had no way to be sure it was real".
In cases like this, it's up to you to prove that the person you want to kick out is faking a disability or other medical condition. If you don't have that proof and choose to take the risk of assuming they're faking their condition, well you'll have to pay the price if it turns out you're wrong.
Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:57 · Score: -1

And clearly it's a single troll polluting this thread. So clearly it's not "What is wrong with people?" but rather "What's wrong with that 14 year old boy besides he's in denial of his own homosexuality and projecting it at random strangers on the internet?" My guess is Mommy's a raging whore and too broke to pay for the therapy little Jimmy so desperately needs.
Don't worry kid, you'll come to love yourself one day... or go on a shooting spree at your highschool, either or...

Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:39 · Score: 5, Funny

I always thought of the McDonalds experience as follow:
1. You know their food is shit before you start.
2. It tastes like shit while you eat.
3. You feel like shit afterwards.
4. (They) Profit

Now they've apparently added steps:
1.5 They treat you like shit while in store

Nice to see they're still working to grow the general shity-ness of the experience.

Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:40 · Score: 0

4.5 Say customers a lying shits.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:13 · Score: 0

5. Streisand Effect (more profit)
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:35 · Score: 1

>1.5 They treat you like shit while in store
May be they are just adding the shitty "French Waiter" experience to the fast food service?
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Grishnakh · 2012-07-18 14:43 · Score: 1

Unfortunately for this guy and many, many other parents, their kids don't agree with numbers 1-3, and won't shut up until they're taken to a McDonald's to eat.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:14 · Score: 0

Disclaimer: Unhealthy food often tastes awesome.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by joocemann · 2012-07-18 15:57 · Score: 1

To build on that point, retards were criticizing so-called "san francisco libraghls" for banning McD from putting toys (incentives) in unhealthymeals.
If you ask any parent out there whose kids don't notice 1-3, they will agree tht 1-3 has been replaced in the child-mind with "I want the toy!"
Take any kid that isn't solely habituated to fast food, take the toy out, and chances are they want to eat something else that is highly likely to be healthier.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by MikeBabcock · 2012-07-18 16:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

You aren't a parent I take it.
My daughter loves mcd's chicken nuggets. When she was still very young, she got tired of only getting 4 in the children's happy meal, and upgraded to the adult size nuggets instead without fries (she doesn't like fries). The toy's inclusion was immaterial.
Sure some kids go for the toy, but the truth is, mcdonald's food is prepared to be very palatable and generically tasty without any strange flavours a simple palate won't recognize.

--
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 16:26 · Score: 0

Unfortunately for this guy and many, many other parents, their kids don't agree with numbers 1-3, and won't shut up until they're taken to a McDonald's to eat.
Try saying no?
That's one of the few times where saying no has actually worked (and consistently!) with a 5 yo. I know (parent).
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by White+Flame · 2012-07-18 17:39 · Score: 0

Sure some kids go for the toy, but the truth is, mcdonald's food is prepared to be very palatable and generically tasty without any strange flavours a simple palate won't recognize.
Translation: Their food is simply flavorless then loaded with sugar to appeal to kids' taste buds. Congratulations on getting your kids hooked on their "flavor".
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by mSparks43 · 2012-07-18 19:54 · Score: 1

That's because the meals are rammed with sugar, nothing like a highly addictive substance to bring in the kids.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:21 · Score: 0

Hey, Mike. Nice to meetcha. I'm a parent. Three kids.
Next time you're in McD's, take the breading off of one of those "nuggets". Notice all the bubbles in the meat? Notice the lack of identifiable meat fibers?
The bubbles are from air trapped during the shaping process. The lack of identifiable fibers is due to the fact there are none. Why? Those "nuggets" are pure pink slime (chicken) extruded from a machine, dipped in batter and deep fried.
All your kid really cares about is taste. I'm willing to bet that if they worked at it long enough, they could get sewage to taste great.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:23 · Score: 0

Almost right. It's designed to be _bland_ for the reasons you list. Tasty is not a word I'd associate with McDonalds. Next time you're in one, compare the faces of your fellow diners with those of a visit to a good restaurant. People tend to eat McDonalds mindlessly, faces vacant. I've never heard anyone actually comment on the food. From outside looking in McDonalds is quite scary, no one is ever smiling or showing any real pleasure.
What the food is designed to be good at, is giving you a massive fat and sugar hit that makes your body want more. Your daughter didn't get "tired" only having 4 nuggets, she has trained her body to expect more calories in any given meal. The feel good chemicals released by the high kilocalorie count are, essentially, addictive. You become used to them. She is slowly becoming addicted to high energy food.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 22:22 · Score: 0

AC here. Actually I am a parent, and my son eats whatever we eat: including indian, asian, mexican, italian, whatever. So he has a very developed palate, and he's only just turned 18 months. Tonight he had ravioli in a olive tomatoe and red wine sauce. Pretty yummy.
We're trying to set in some good eating habbits (not implying you don't) and wide food experience. We hardly ever eat processed food. Not because of any buring belief - we just like our own cooking (about 80% of the meals) or cooking from authentic ethnic resturants (remaining 20%).
My wife eats McDs occasionaly and likes it. Me: not going near it. Each to his/her own.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 23:16 · Score: 0

You aren't a parent I take it.
My daughter loves mcd's chicken nuggets. When she was still very young, she got tired of only getting 4 in the children's happy meal, and upgraded to the adult size nuggets instead without fries (she doesn't like fries). The toy's inclusion was immaterial.
Sure some kids go for the toy, but the truth is, mcdonald's food is prepared to be very palatable and generically tasty without any strange flavours a simple palate won't recognize.
How fat is she now?
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by f3rret · 2012-07-19 00:01 · Score: 1

Sure some kids go for the toy, but the truth is, mcdonald's food is prepared to be very palatable and generically tasty without any strange flavours a simple palate won't recognize.
Translation: Their food is simply flavorless then loaded with sugar to appeal to kids' taste buds. Congratulations on getting your kids hooked on their "flavor".
You mean congratulations on getting his kids hooked on the body's primary source of energy?
You should totally cut out all those carbs, glucose metabolism be damned!
Did you ever stop to think that maybe we humans really like sugar because we kinda can't live without it?

--
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 00:06 · Score: 0

I solve this by making sure my daughter doesn't enter a McDonalds. Ever.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 00:27 · Score: 0

I feel sorry for your daughter.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:18 · Score: 0

Yes I am a parent, but kids don't know what's good for them. That's why they need parents.
Kids will stay up until after midnight if you let them. Kids would rather play than work. Kids would rather watch TV than read. Kids would rather hang out with rebellious troublemakers than helpful and thoughtful kids. They need direction. When they don't have it they gravitate to everything that is bad.
Once in a while it's ok to eat fast food, but it's not that nutritious and as a parent I'd rather my kids eat stuff that's good for them.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 02:28 · Score: 0

There's an amazing word. As a parent, it's my favorite word in the world. My children know this, I have opined on the wonderfulness of this word to them at length. They understand it's meaning and know that continued badgering will only get them grounded, while rational discourse may change my mind. What is this magical word you might ask?
No.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 02:37 · Score: 0

Best reply ever posted for this story on the web.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 02:53 · Score: 0

Yes, but the good thing about this: It tastes like the same shit everywhere.
When I'm in another country without the slightest idea where good food is and also don't have the time to test it, I usually go to McDonalds because I know what I get there. No surprises, no nothing, everywhere its the same, and thats awesome.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:04 · Score: 0

You're doing a disservice to your child by taking them to McDonalds. Period.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by ravenscar · 2012-07-19 03:18 · Score: 1

I'm a parent. My kids have never asked to go to McDonald's because of the toy. They have asked to go because of the indoor playspace. I live in Seattle where it rains frequently for 9 months out of the year. I'll occasionally take my 4 year old to McDonald's on the weekend. She'll have half a cheeseburger, some apple slices, a few fries, and some milk. She'll then tear around in the playspace for 45 minutes to an hour while I work or surf the web on the free wifi. At the end of that time we're both in a good mood and ready to move on to the next thing. I really can't complain about any aspect of that experience for the $4 it costs.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 04:55 · Score: 1

When she was very young, you had already habituated her to unhealthy food so much that she had developed narrow and specific preferences about her unhealthy-meal. Gee, what a great parent, everybody should listen to your insights!
Or, not.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 08:57 · Score: 0

If you where a good parent your daughter chouldn't even know how they taste. Ok, She should know that they taste like chicken, kind of the same way crocodile does.
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by joocemann · 2012-07-19 12:24 · Score: 1

I have 2 kids. They aren't habituated (I think you missed that part of my point) to junk food and usually don't really like it.... unless there is a toy...
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by joocemann · 2012-07-19 12:46 · Score: 1

Did you ever understand biochemistry from a more in-depth perspective, or just reference the high-school level basics in arguments?
Natural metabolism is fat-oxidizing with low glucose-from-food/stomach-in-blood sourcing for energy. In a natural state, the evolved human species (and our primate relatives) have regular access to vegetables, some protein (animal/plant), and some/scarce fruits; none contain high levels of sugars, and most contain complex sugars that require extra metabolic processing beyond amylase (the enzyme in your spit that breaks sucrose into 1glucose/1fructose) This is why the most informed and healthiest diets exclude none of the basics, but are modeled more closely to what would naturally be available to us without farming/processing technology. Note: There is evidence that 'cooking' food has played a role in our evolution over the last 100k years, allowing for a shorter small intestine, but the advent of higher technology has *not* influenced our evolution.
Glucose is the mediating energy source for the krebs cycle, but to maintain a standard level of that glucose, very little actual sugars from food is required. The rest are stored. Where does natural glucose for the krebs come from? Fats and proteins are converted at the cellular level in muscle/fat tissues to blood-soluble intermediates, travel to the liver, and there are processed to regenerate blood glucose. This is the conversion of the stored energy back to the required energy if/when the low rate of sugar-from-food extinguishes.
The glucose levels available in junk food are so high that almost all of it goes to storage: the liver/pancreas will maintain glucose levels very effectively and rapidly convert to fat storage. This means that had you chosen a healthier diet with more micronutrients and fiber, less sugar/glucose, the available proteins/fats in that diet would easily suffice and likely generate less 'stored energy' (aka fat body), while not flooding the blood with spiking glucose.
-------------
We really like sugar because without technology we would not find sugar-rich sources of energy in the wild as frequently as we now have available with grains/cane/processing/etc ---- so we have evolved not only to have an acute sense of smell for sugars, but also a heightened sensitivity to sugars in edibles, a natural response to drive a primate with limited access to 'stock up while its available'. Sugar drives appetite, protein/fiber/fat satiates.
But since our modern tech lets you stock up whenever you want, and you don't appear to understand metabolism beyond the simple krebs/citricacid cycle (yeah I know it looks complex, but that is actually a small component in a very complex system), maybe you could take some notes here and live a healthier life? I hope you don't get defensive regarding this post, however pedantic I may 'sound' as text on a screen, and will feel driven to further understand nutrition, metabolism, and biochemistry to better yourself and your family.
Cheers
Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-20 09:19 · Score: 0

Child abusers take many forms and are usually people they know from their own family.

Live in Reality by Frosty+Piss · 2012-07-18 12:40 · Score: 4, Insightful

This is a PR nightmare for McDonald's and they're only making it worse.

Nonsense. I read a number of newspapers and Internet news sites, and this is the first I've heard of it, and like most people, really don't care that much. I frequent Burger King (Home of the Whopper), but I think that realistically, only a very tiny number of McDonald's customers know about this, and of those, few care.

Your first paragraph is entirely hyperbole.

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.

Re:Live in Reality by SJHillman · 2012-07-18 12:45 · Score: 3, Insightful

I'd have to agree with you. It's not changing my feelings towards McDonalds in general - mostly towards that one location. Every franchise has locations with great employees and locations with the laziest, dumbest idiots you'll ever meet.
Re:Live in Reality by sabri · 2012-07-18 12:48 · Score: 0, Troll

Nonsense. I read a number of newspapers and Internet news sites, and this is the first I've heard of it, and like most people, really don't care that much. I frequent Burger King (Home of the Whopper), but I think that realistically, only a very tiny number of McDonald's customers know about this, and of those, few care.

Your first paragraph is entirely hyperbole.
So, you read a number of newspapers? Wow, you are one of the few who actually still read tree-based news. Either way, just put "mcdonalds staff assult professor" in Google, and you'll see hundreds of hits.

This is a PR nightmare for McD. If it were not, Corporate would not have been involved. Stop trolling.

--
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
Re:Live in Reality by MrHanky · 2012-07-18 12:55 · Score: 1, Insightful

So who the fuck enters 'mcdonalds staff assault professor' into Google on random now then? Similar with 'Dr Mann McDonalds'. The first hit is The Register, the others seem to be geek sites as well. It hasn't reached the mainstream media, and no one cares.
Re:Live in Reality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:59 · Score: 0, Insightful

Nuke them all. From orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Re:Live in Reality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:13 · Score: -1

Game over, man! Game over!!
Re:Live in Reality by Eevee · 2012-07-18 13:21 · Score: 4, Interesting

For what it's worth, the story is hitting Bing's "Popular Now". So anyone curious why "Human cyborg" is trending is getting to see Cyborg Steve Mann details alleged McDonald's assault as the top story.
Re:Live in Reality by postofreason · 2012-07-18 13:31 · Score: 0

I just Googled the word "McDonalds" and it was the 7th selection in my list. Try it out!
Re:Live in Reality by bky1701 · 2012-07-18 13:41 · Score: 1, Informative

I would love to say it changed my opinion, but I have not been to a McDonalds in at least 7 years. Hard to change much.

--
Great Intellect...
Re:Live in Reality by FatLittleMonkey · 2012-07-18 13:58 · Score: 5, Informative

I read a number of newspapers and Internet news sites, and this is the first I've heard of it,
MSNBC: http://www.technolog.msnbc.msn.com/technology/technolog/cyborg-steve-mann-details-alleged-mcdonalds-assault-889595
Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/07/17/cyborg-discrimination-scientist-says-mcdonalds-staff-tried-to-pull-off-his-google-glass-like-eyepiece-then-threw-him-out/
The Huff: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/steve-mann-attacked-paris-mcdonalds-digital-eye-glass-photos_n_1680263.html
NYT Daily: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/cyborg-professor-claims-assault-paris-mcdonald-digital-glasses-article-1.1116246
Canadian news: http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2012/07/17/tech-mann-digital-eye-glass-assault.html and a few others.
Plus El Reg, CNET, Network World, and the usual tech news sites. And the story is the second top google-news results for "McDonald's".
It's also the second article on Slashdot itself about the incident. http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/07/17/0335227/man-physically-assaulted-at-mcdonalds-for-wearing-digital-eye-glasses

--
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
Re:Live in Reality by iamhassi · 2012-07-18 15:46 · Score: 1, Interesting

This is a PR nightmare for McDonald's and they're only making it worse.
Nonsense. I read a number of newspapers and Internet news sites, and this is the first I've heard of it, and like most people, really don't care that much.
actually... I didn't care much either, until McDonald's replied to it and McDonald's confirmed Mann was ejected from premises.

See, that's the rub, Mann claims he was physically assaulted, McDonald's claims he was... what, politely asked to leave and he got up and said "Oh very well then I shall be off on my way thank you very much for the meal good sirs!"

Come on McD's! That's hard to swallow (ha!). You're telling us you DID kick him out but he's completely lying about the manner in which he was kicked out?

I don't buy it.

McDonalds there was only TWO ways of solving this:
1) Completely deny ANYTHING happened. All of it, never happened, complete lie. Not the best way, see 2)
2) Apologize PROFUSELY over what happened, promise to "fully compensate Mann for the destruction of his property and any mental anguish he endured", and promise to launch a "FULL investigation".... and then do nothing... well, negotiate paying Mann over the next few months until story blows over and then give him a fraction of what he's really deserved. Makes McD look good and costs very little.

Really people public relations is not that hard. Confirming what happened and then claiming "Oh we didn't ASSAULT Mann, He freely chose to stand up and leave" looks really bad.

whoever is your public relations should be fired for making a non-story into a story. It was better before being just one sided. Open mouth insert foot.

--
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
Re:Live in Reality by MikeBabcock · 2012-07-18 16:10 · Score: 1

I've frequented several excellent McDonald's locations in my travels. There's one near me however which always serves stale food and has given me at least a dozen free meals due to minor errors over the years. That specific McD's happens to be staffed by morons.

--
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Re:Live in Reality by iamwahoo2 · 2012-07-18 16:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

Once again, An innaccurate headline fools most of the slashdot readers. Seriously folks, click on the article and just scroll down to the full McDonald's letter. It is seven sentences long and says essentially that the employees deny Dr. Mann's account but that McDonald's is still investigating. Dr. Mann has not yet responded to their queries. Nowhere is it even implied that they are denying Dr. Mann's claims.
Re:Live in Reality by KramberryKoncerto · 2012-07-18 17:32 · Score: 1

No. They denied all responsibility and wrongdoing, while failing to acknowledge evidence represented against their claim. In the best case they did not care to investigate properly, worse they are lying out of their teeth. If you believe Steven Mann's story, it should tell you that even McDonald's France is run by dumb idiots. There is no guarantee they will properly regulate and monitor the restaurants about customer treatment until a number of other people fall victim to these various idiots in other locations. But indeed, it's not a PR nightmare, because most don't care, for now.
Re:Live in Reality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 17:33 · Score: 0

whoa, you use bing! are you spiderman?
Re:Live in Reality by Rhaban · 2012-07-18 19:47 · Score: 1

It has been in all major french newspapers.
Since it happenned in Paris, it makes sence that it only hit national mainstream media.
Re:Live in Reality by ArsenneLupin · 2012-07-18 20:23 · Score: 1

It's not changing my feelings towards McDonalds in general - mostly towards that one location.
Agreed, if by location you mean Paris, rather than this particular outlet.
Re:Live in Reality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 20:34 · Score: 0

It looks like burger king and mcdonalds are fighting each other in winning customers:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/328837
Re:Live in Reality by aaaaaaargh! · 2012-07-18 20:37 · Score: 1

I do care, I appreciate it a lot if McDonald's personel ripps people's digital eyepieces off. As far as I'm concerned, I'd be happy if they'd also confiscate iPhones and tablets.
However, as others have pointed out, going to McDonalds in France, not to speak of Paris where there are some of the world's best restaurants, is simply inexcusable.
Re:Live in Reality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:15 · Score: 0

And anyone just typing "mcdonalds" into google will get the story about half way down the list after the usual info sources like mcdonalds homepage, the wikipedia entry, etc.
Re:Live in Reality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:24 · Score: 0

So who the fuck enters "McDonalds" into Google every week/months? Imagine doing that for the top 500 multinational companies, plus say 500 local/national companies and 500 celebrities/politicians, 204 countries etc.
(McDonald's is ranked 403 in revenue)
Re:Live in Reality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:59 · Score: 0

See, that's the rub, Mann claims he was physically assaulted, McDonald's claims he was... what, politely asked to leave and he got up and said "Oh very well then I shall be off on my way thank you very much for the meal good sirs!"

That's basically what Mann said on his blog. It seems the "assault" was one guy trying to pull off the glasses, much like you'd slap a camera out of the hands of a Paparazzi who is filming you. It's not legal to film somebody without consent in France in many situations, just FYI. And they tend to be more than a little pissy when foreigners come to their country, break the laws, and then get uppity about it.
But anyhow, the guy tried to get the glasses off, Mann told him they don't come off and the guy quit trying. Mann's story, not McVomit's. Then they all stood around reading his paperwork, the guy got pissed about the paperwork, tore it up, and told Mann to leave. Which he did.
Couple of things to keep in mind. This is assault in the same sense that Justin Bieber lightly pushing a much larger Paparazzi is assault. What he's calling a "doctor's note" is just a note saying that yes, the device is real and yes, it is physically attached to his body. It's not an excuse, it's not official paperwork, it doesn't give him any exemptions or special consideration or treatment- it's informational only.
Now, Mann is a media whore. He really likes to talk about himself and act like he's some kind of crusader, in fact he pretty much calls himself one. He even takes the time in his blog post to talk about how some dumbass reporter once called him the "future of cybertechnology" or some similar crap.
So here's my take on what happened. The workers at McPuke's saw some crazy fucking tourist from America. Keep in mind if you're not French Canadian then in France you're lower than someone from the US. Anyhow, this guy is all rigged up with camera gear and electronic equipment, and starts filming people. In a typical fashion, Frenchy gets his panties knotted up in a bunch, and in a typical Froggy fashion he goes to slap the shit off the face of this arrogant fuck who is shitting on his precious country. Except the glasses don't come off, the guy starts throwing a tantrum like a child, waving around a note which he seems to think gives him some kind of special rights. But upon closer examination, it's just a piece of paper from some no-name doctor in some other country who isn't even licensed to practice in France. It's no better than toilet paper (which they don't use) so he shows this fucking puke exactly what the note is worth by tearing it to pieces. Then he tells the guy to get the fuck out of his store, and the guy leaves.
I'm really, really trying hard to feel bad for Mann, but I just can't. He's an arrogant prick and an attention seeking whore who thinks far too highly of himself, and expects people to be deferential to him, especially a Plebian who works at a fast food place. After all, he's a Research Scientist with an actual paper degree from a University! He's been on the news (in similar circumstances, interestingly enough) and has been getting electronics screwed to his body for no good reason for decades.
Here's the thing- there is no good reason for the glasses to not detach. In fact, one of the first things you'd put into such a product is a safety release mechanism, there's absolutely no need for much of his gear to be hardwired to his body, other than his personal desire to be a cyborg and the ability to make a scene when people try to unhook the stuff.
And if you want a citation, try reading slashdot. We saw this story yesterday, nothing's changed other then McCrap having issued a denial of the assault and confirmation that he was kicked out.
Re:Live in Reality by only_human · 2012-07-18 23:47 · Score: 1

So who the fuck enters "McDonalds" into Google every week/months?
Someone traveling. One day I really wanted to be home. The McDonald's breakfast I ate was consolation.
Re:Live in Reality by shaitand · 2012-07-19 04:17 · Score: 1

How is this a troll? It's on story topic and within context to the statements in this thread about this being a PR nightmare. Sorry but any story that is only on the geek sites is NOT mainstream and the mainstream public doesn't know or care about them.
Re:Live in Reality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 05:51 · Score: 0

I'd have to agree with you. It's not changing my feelings towards McDonalds in general - mostly towards that one location. Every franchise has locations with great employees and locations with the laziest, dumbest idiots you'll ever meet.
If they were just lazy there would be no articles, it's when they start physically attacking you there is a problem. Also, now you know that if they do the franchise management will just say you're lying.
Re:Live in Reality by Legion303 · 2012-07-19 09:09 · Score: 1

I'm having trouble seeing how only one McDonalds could have stale food when every one of them uses the exact same bland, flash-frozen shit.
Re:Live in Reality by rhalstead · 2012-07-20 04:20 · Score: 1

And I know two out of three locally where many of the idiots are in management. Most of these are not the type of people I want handling my food. But yes, I do eat there when pressed for time. (Maybe a couple times a month at most)
Re:Live in Reality by iamhassi · 2012-07-21 04:20 · Score: 1

Once again, An innaccurate headline fools most of the slashdot readers. Seriously folks, click on the article and just scroll down to the full McDonald's letter. It is seven sentences long and says essentially that the employees deny Dr. Mann's account but that McDonald's is still investigating. Dr. Mann has not yet responded to their queries. Nowhere is it even implied that they are denying Dr. Mann's claims.
Forbes article confirms Mann was asked to leave
"Update: A McDonald’s spokesperson confirms that Mann was in fact asked to leave the restaurant,"

So McDonalds is confirming that they did tell Mann to leave, just like I said, now they're arguing over the manner in which he left. Mann provided this photo which confirms it was physical.

--
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
Re:Live in Reality by MikeBabcock · 2012-07-24 00:50 · Score: 1

Considering the bread for the muffins is baked fresh at your local McD's and the buns for other sandwiches are not frozen, only the meat, just like at your supermarket, the assumptions you're making are completely wrong.

--
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)

McD in Paris? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

Weigh all the evidence before leaping to judgment. This is the last "restaurant" I would consider for any meal in Paris. Perhaps he had tastebud implants, too?

Re:McD in Paris? by outsider007 · 2012-07-18 13:10 · Score: 5, Funny

I would eat there. But only so I could order a 'royale with cheese'

--
If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
Re:McD in Paris? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:19 · Score: 0, Interesting

This is the last "restaurant" I would consider for any meal in Paris.
I guess you haven't traveled for weeks on end to places where the much-vaunted local food either tastes like shit or costs €80 for a tough cut of flank steak, two pieces of cool asparagus, and a "salad" consisting of a slice of tomato (albeit artfully arranged in the shape of a broken ukelele.) After a couple weeks of staying drunk enough to choke down the strained sink-basket-leavings sold as soup, McD's looks like a beacon of comfort food.
And then he gets typical French service anyway. Not sure what he expected over there, really.
Re:McD in Paris? by ArchieBunker · 2012-07-18 15:19 · Score: 1

Are you aware that Paris is arguably the culinary center of the world and the French are also some of the largest consumers of meat in europe? Sounds like you never heard of Yelp or hell even google.

--
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Re:McD in Paris? by chrismcb · 2012-07-18 17:19 · Score: 2

You have two children in tow... You are in one of the most expensive sections of town. Your children want to eat at McDonald's. You can A) take your children to the relatively inexpensive McDonald's, where they want to go. B) take them to a VERY expensive restaurant, where they'll sit and whine about not going to McDonald's.
What do you do?
Re:McD in Paris? by _KiTA_ · 2012-07-18 19:13 · Score: 2

Weigh all the evidence before leaping to judgment. This is the last "restaurant" I would consider for any meal in Paris. Perhaps he had tastebud implants, too?
IF you are an American, perhaps Canadian tourist, McDs has a subconscious connotation in one's mind at being:
1. Fast
2. Relatively cheap
3. Somewhat filling
Which is why they place them in tourist areas. Mentally, the decision is McDs (Fast, Cheap, Filling) vs "French Food" (Good, Slow, Expensive).
Re:McD in Paris? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:20 · Score: 0

Tell your kids to shut up, stop whining, and obey their parents. Then you go to a nice brasserie and eat some real food.
Re:McD in Paris? by citizenr · 2012-07-18 22:44 · Score: 0

You have two children in tow... You are in one of the most expensive sections of town. Your children want to eat at McDonald's. You can A) take your children to the relatively inexpensive McDonald's, where they want to go. B) take them to a VERY expensive restaurant, where they'll sit and whine about not going to McDonald's.
What do you do?
Give them up for adoption because you failed at parenting (Your children want to eat at McDonald's)

--
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
Re:McD in Paris? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 22:47 · Score: -1

We call it the "Royal Cheese", not "Royale with Cheese"
http://www.mcdonalds.fr/produits/sandwichs/royal-cheese
Re:McD in Paris? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 22:52 · Score: 0

C) buy a real sandwich with French bread for less than €3
Don't surrender to your kids...
Re:McD in Paris? by gnasher719 · 2012-07-18 23:38 · Score: 1

You have two children in tow... You are in one of the most expensive sections of town. Your children want to eat at McDonald's. You can A) take your children to the relatively inexpensive McDonald's, where they want to go. B) take them to a VERY expensive restaurant, where they'll sit and whine about not going to McDonald's.

Story that I heard from a very expensive restaurant: Parents and young son are supposed to order their meals. Son says loudly "I want sausage and chips". Chef sends an employee to the nearest butcher to buy sausages, cuts the potatoes for chips, kid gets sausage and chips.
Re:McD in Paris? by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 04:57 · Score: 1

Indeed, if you already have your children habituated to cheap unhealthy food, it will seem normal to them and they will demand it. Not really a good excuse, though.
Re:McD in Paris? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 09:07 · Score: 0

I guess you haven't traveled much either. Hamburgers are everywhere, even places where McDonald's isn't.

footage of th conflict with the french cowslingers by circletimessquare · 2012-07-18 12:45 · Score: 0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8yjNbcKkNY

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it

Or maybe they were trying to save his life... by DuChamp+Fitz · 2012-07-18 12:46 · Score: 2, Interesting

by keeping him from eating McDonald's.

An Ridiculous Policy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:46 · Score: 5, Interesting

MacDonald's hostility to photography, like that of Starbucks, is ridiculous.

Modern digital cameras easy to conceal. Besides, anyone with genuine interior design talent could visit one of their business, eating a burger while seeming to be doing no more than casually glance around. They could then go away and recreate what they saw almost as precisely as a photograph.

These blunders are probably the result of lawyers getting involved. A lawyer will attempt to deny anything that he thinks the other side can't prove. MacDonald's lawyers apparently aren't aware of just how much got recorded.

One suggestion to Slashdot readers. If you're in a situation like this, do your best to use your phone to record what's happening without being noticed. That'll help the good guy in the dispute. You might even practice what you should do, from starting up a camera app to perhaps slipping it in a shirt pocket with the lens able to see everything that's happening.

--Michael W. Perry, author of Untangling Tolkien

Re:An Ridiculous Policy by couchslug · 2012-07-18 12:54 · Score: 2

"One suggestion to Slashdot readers. If you're in a situation like this, do your best to use your phone to record what's happening without being noticed. That'll help the good guy in the dispute. You might even practice what you should do, from starting up a camera app to perhaps slipping it in a shirt pocket with the lens able to see everything that's happening."
Good idea, and you might even get a viral video out of it.

--
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by stephanruby · 2012-07-18 13:37 · Score: 1

MacDonald's hostility to photography, like that of Starbucks, is ridiculous.
You're only saying that because you haven't seen what really goes into french burgers.
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:48 · Score: 1

Dear Mitchell M. Percy,
Please take note of the spelling of "McDonalds" as it appears in the article summary. These blunders are probably the result of insufficient attention being paid to what you've read, and make you sound like a cretin.
Yours,
A. Hilter, Esq., Grammar Inspector
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by TheGratefulNet · 2012-07-18 13:52 · Score: 1

aye, and when I'm in scotland, I'll keep all that in mind!

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by k(wi)r(kipedia) · 2012-07-18 14:21 · Score: 1

First time I've heard of such a policy, since I rarely eat at McD. But what about those kiddie parties with all those creepy mascots? Are children banned from making memories?
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by aztracker1 · 2012-07-18 14:21 · Score: 2

There's all kinds of tasty critters in the world...

--
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by JazzHarper · 2012-07-18 15:21 · Score: 1

One suggestion to Slashdot readers. If you're in a situation like this, do your best to use your phone to record what's happening without being noticed. That'll help the good guy in the dispute.
Of course, if the "good guy" turns out to be the employee of a designated "evil corporation", you should delete the recording, immediately.
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by westlake · 2012-07-18 16:03 · Score: -1, Troll

MacDonald's hostility to photography, like that of Starbucks, is ridiculous.
It may not be ridiculous to their patrons.
The geek's sense of entitlement is bottomless --- if he has the tech he can do whatever he wants with it.
I don't know how to get the message across that this is a very bad attitude to take and wins him no friends.
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by MikeBabcock · 2012-07-18 16:16 · Score: 1

I was on a scavenger hunt once, we had to interview people and ask them specific questions to win. I went straight to walmart for the widest variety of people as quickly as possible. Security had me leave the store within 2 questions for having a camera in the store.

--
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 17:07 · Score: 0

A PETA ad?!? Really?
PETA kills 95% of the animals they "rescue."
And if that's what is in French burgers, then America ought to be invading because that's seriously fucked up and needs to stop. She could have been a perfectly good hooker.
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by taustin · 2012-07-18 18:46 · Score: 2

You should, however, be familiar with various laws regarding such things where you are. In the US, laws vary a lot, but generally, the inside of a store isn't a public place, and if they have a policy against photography/filming, you could possibly face criminal charges if you're caught.
And in some states, audio recording (which your cell phone will likely do by default) without advance persmission from everyone is a felony.
You may not agree with the law, but you know as well as I do you're not ready to go to prison to protest is.
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by silentcoder · 2012-07-18 19:52 · Score: 4, Insightful

>I don't know how to get the message across that this is a very bad attitude to take and wins him no friends.
This is a prosthetic sight and memory augmentation device he wears due to a medical condition ! Throwing that out is no better than throwing out a paraplegic because you worry his prosthetic leg may scratch the floor tiles. As it stands, the device he uses doesn't even keep recordings for more than few seconds, what it does is to simply slow down the world a bit so he has time to process what happens. It's like a slow-motion-replay for reality. Just because he designed it himself doesn't make it any less a medically apt prosthesis.
In fact, it wouldn't normally have HAD recordings of the event- except that when they broke the device they disabled the onboard computer, which meant the cleanup algorithm that would have wiped the pictures couldn't run.
They themselves turned a medical prosthesis from a slowdown device into a permanent recording of the very breakage by which they changed it's nature.

--
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:28 · Score: 0

First time I've heard of such a policy, since I rarely eat at McD. But what about those kiddie parties with all those creepy mascots? Are children banned from making memories?
If they're lucky.
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by JoeDuncan · 2012-07-19 05:01 · Score: 1

This is a prosthetic sight and memory augmentation device he wears due to a medical condition ! Throwing that out is no better than throwing out a paraplegic because you worry his prosthetic leg may scratch the floor tiles.
No, this is a false analogy. The only "medical condition" Mann has is NOT wearing the device - the alleged disorientation he experiences when the device is removed. This is allegedly caused by his using the device nearly constantly for 13 years. However, as has been pointed out elsewhere in this discussion, and in other articles about Mann, many of his students have routinely seen him get along just fine without wearing it during this period.
A better analogy would be tossing out someone who wears powerbock shoes constantly, and claims that because he has worn them for many years, not wearing them is a medical condition which reduces his mobility and speed.
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 05:04 · Score: 0

Retarded rules like that is why you do any photographing, video taping, or audio recording secretly, and then release it to as many online resources as possible later, and let the Streisand effect do its job.
Re:An Ridiculous Policy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 08:34 · Score: 0

He has no medical condition whatsoever. This is something he wears because he thinks it's nifty.
Compare prescriptions glasses to plastic Kanye louvred shades.
People with legitimate medical devices get actual government paperwork to confirm that they, indeed, require that device. If you are handicapped or use an oxygen tank, or whatever, you can find out what paperwork you need from either the agency that issues visa's in the country you plan to visit, or your embassy in that country.
A note from Dr Noodles, Small Town Ontario Family Doctor, is not proof of anything.
Everything in this mans blog post is a lie.

Re:Do they really show st ripping up his doc note? by Hognoxious · 2012-07-18 12:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

yeah, it's obviously one of the thousands of pieces of paper that McD employees routinely tear up during any normal shift.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

Hate Crime! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:53 · Score: 0

He was going to the mens room with a fucking webcam on his head that he has no medical necessity for.

He got kicked out. McD's guy was probably a dick about it.

Then he was so upset about it that he pissed his pants in the street, and that is what destroyed his glasses and iPhone.

"Hate Crime Against Worlds First Cyborg!"

Re:Hate Crime! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:33 · Score: -1

webcam on his head that he has no medical necessity for.
"No medical necessity"? Even the summary of both of these stories says that he had a note from his doctor explaining the need for the device. Do you know better than the actual doctor that has studied his case and has in fact signed a letter attesting to that very necessity?
I expect that with your self-evident level of retardation, you've probably spent much of your life having your microscopic brain studied by doctors who can't explain how, despite your dearth of neurons, you have managed to keep breathing all these years. Here's a tip: being a lab specimen doesn't make you a doctor via osmosis.
Re:Hate Crime! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 16:30 · Score: -1

It's not a need its a stupid cosmetic toy he invented for himself to wear.
It does not treat or diagnose any medical condition. It's not a pacemaker. He's not blind or vision impaired and not part of any protected class of citizens. It's just for show and something he's doing to prove a point, and the point is provoking people in retail situations by filming them back.
The note read "This jackass has screwed a webcam on his head as an art project. Dr Magoo, PhD".
No doctor would risk their license by issuing a prescription to wear a webcam on your head so you can microblog without a cell phone.
And he pissed his pants at McDonalds. In front of his kids. Then flipped out about it on his blog. Now it's this. lol.
My hero, the cyborg.
Re:Hate Crime! by _KiTA_ · 2012-07-18 19:16 · Score: 1

Don't fall for the trolls. If you have been reading the replies en mass, you'll note there's an AC with this "Writing style" replying over and over with very similar, inflammatory points, trying to rile people up. It's just some luddite kid trying to piss off the "nerds," don't give him attention.
Re:Hate Crime! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:45 · Score: 0

Before slapping your meat against your keyboard, to prevent appearing like an idiot, it might be prudent to read the actual article first.
Re:Hate Crime! by f3rret · 2012-07-19 00:10 · Score: 2

Dude did piss his pants apparently.
http://blog.laptopmag.com/exclusive-cyborg-steve-mann-on-alleged-mcdonalds-assault

--
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.

Re:footage of th conflict with the french cowsling by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:56 · Score: 0

You making a movie about anti-tea party zombies? That would be great!

Re:footage of th conflict with the french cowsling by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2012-07-18 12:58 · Score: 1

That explains everything!

--
#DeleteChrome

Re:Do they really show st ripping up his doc note? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 12:59 · Score: 0, Redundant

So, that's it? That's your evidence? "They were tearing up a piece of paper, therefore they must have been tearing up the guy's doctor's note, therefore they also assaulted the guy."

For a criminal conviction, the burden of proof is on the prosecutor. That means they have to prove *everything*. In particular, that means that you cannot start by assuming that anything that the alleged victim says is true.

Try putting your hatred for McDonalds or love for this "MIT professor" aside for a moment. Imagine that the roles were reversed: a McDonalds member of staff posts a story about being assaulted and claims it was this professor doing it. He writes a "report" and posts a picture of the professor e.g. wiping his nose with a red handkerchief as evidence of a fight. How would that make you feel?

The company hasn't explained by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2012-07-18 13:00 · Score: 2

The company still hasn't explained why Mann was removed from the restaurant

It's pretty obvious - we've all seen the photo of Mann and his headgear. That McDonalds obviously has a "no shirt, no shoes, no service" policy in place.

--
#DeleteChrome

Re:The company hasn't explained by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:20 · Score: 0

As McDonald's "denies that there was a 'physical altercation' with staff", I wonder who actually ejected Mann from the premises. Has McDonald's staff found a way to eject people without any physical altercation, or is it their claim he was ejected by some third power?
Re:The company hasn't explained by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2012-07-19 02:51 · Score: 1

They made withering comments until he fled.

--
#DeleteChrome

These are both reasonably plausible expla by mooingyak · 2012-07-18 13:11 · Score: 2

nations.

--
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.

DPA by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:14 · Score: 4, Interesting

Why doesn't he do a Data Protection Act (all EU members have one) request on the CCTV footage, he will have to pay a small fee but he can get any footage he appears in.

Re:DPA by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:30 · Score: 1

You're muddling the UK's Data Protection Act with the EU's Data Protection Directive. Either way, unless they somehow associate some personally identifiable data with your face in the video, it's not covered.
Data Protection is about allowing you to review and limit the scope of use of collected personal data. A video stream isn't covered.
Re:DPA by Inda · 2012-07-19 00:57 · Score: 2

Sorry AC, but that's wrong. I saw a program on the BBC where they tested the CCTV retrieval process using the DPA.

--
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.

This guy is a crybaby. by outsider007 · 2012-07-18 13:15 · Score: -1, Troll

Boo hoo I violated a no-recording policy and was treated badly. Wait till he wanders into a girly bar or a casino with that thing.

--
If you mod me down the terrorists will have won

Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:26 · Score: 0

Yup, now that I've heard the other side of the story I can see the dude is an entitled bitch. Fuck him.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by bky1701 · 2012-07-18 13:48 · Score: 1

Suck that corporate cock. Some guy did something that didn't really even violate the policy of a fast food restaurant and got beaten up - obviously it was his fault!

In a civilized society, people would be in jail right now.

--
Great Intellect...
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Kreigaffe · 2012-07-18 14:08 · Score: 1

his headgear does not regularly record images. no more so than, oh, i don't know. anyfuckingbody who has a cell phone.
the device has the capability, but I don't see people being tossed out for pulling their phone out. they COULD be taking a picture, you never know do you?

--
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by outsider007 · 2012-07-18 14:39 · Score: 1

Except that it did violate the policy, and he was warned several times. The smart thing would have been to pick up his ranch wrap and take a hike. Instead he chose to provoke an altercation to raise awareness of his imaginary medical condition.

--
If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:39 · Score: 0

Having a policy doesn't generally give you license to assault someone.
If they believed that his high tech vision aid violated their policy the proper response is to politely ask him to leave, not to assault him.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Grishnakh · 2012-07-18 14:47 · Score: 2

The responses from all the asshole ugly Americans here doesn't surprise me one bit. This country (USA) isn't civilized anyway, it's more like what you'd get if Zimbabwe won the lottery.
What surprises me is that this happened in France. I guess France isn't as civilized as I thought.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:32 · Score: 0

Except that they did ask him nicely and he ignored them
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Osgeld · 2012-07-18 17:18 · Score: 1

his headgears sole purpose is to record images and to process them, and he wears them 24/7
just being there he recorded every moment of the transaction, its not like he said stop a moment let me whip out my celphone, fumble with a few buttons, get out of the sunlight so we can see whats going on
the dude has a HD camera affixed to his head dumbass
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:37 · Score: 0

Either you don't know how the device works, or you're lying about it. Which one is it? Because no other possibility exists.
Hint: it doesn't automatically record everything he sees to long-term memory. The only reason those images could even exist now is because of the illegal assault on him by the criminals working at that store.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by _KiTA_ · 2012-07-18 19:53 · Score: 1

his headgears sole purpose is to record images and to process them, and he wears them 24/7
just being there he recorded every moment of the transaction, its not like he said stop a moment let me whip out my celphone, fumble with a few buttons, get out of the sunlight so we can see whats going on
the dude has a HD camera affixed to his head dumbass
Actually, it doesn't record them at all. It would be like someone being thrown out of a business because he was wearing glasses, and as we all know, lenses made out of glass are the devil's work.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by DogPhilosopher · 2012-07-18 22:07 · Score: 1

The responses from all the asshole ugly Americans here doesn't surprise me one bit.
Yes, the comments to this and the first post are somewhat lacking in empathy. A disabled person gets humiliated and beaten up by restaurant staff - in front of his family no less- and the responses range from "attention whore", "the elitist jerk had it coming" to "they must have been blacks or arabs". Way to go..

What surprises me is that this happened in France. I guess France isn't as civilized as I thought.
It didn't surprise me in the least. I've been there a dozen times, worked there for a few months, and imho it just isn't a very civilized place. Of course I've met plenty of friendly, polite people, but antisocial behaviour, mysogeny, verbal abuse, threats and even physical violence just seem part of daily life there - and not just in Paris either.
I'll spare you my stories, but this should give you an idea: I know a french woman who came back after a few years abroad, and only now does she realize just how bad it is. She witnessed an assault on a shop owner, an old woman, already in the first week, and that was just the start. I guess people accept such things as normal if they see them every day and have never experienced different ways of life.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 22:58 · Score: 0

Don't give them ideas!
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by thej1nx · 2012-07-18 23:32 · Score: 2

Which allows you to call the police and get him arrested for trespassing. It still does not however allow you to assault someone.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:27 · Score: 0

The responses from all the asshole ugly Americans here doesn't surprise me one bit. This country (USA) isn't civilized anyway, it's more like what you'd get if Zimbabwe won the lottery.
What surprises me is that this happened in France. I guess France isn't as civilized as I thought.
This story is about a man from Canada visiting France.
You sir are an idiot.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:35 · Score: 0

Its not fair judging a country based on one fast-food chain store (managed following principles laid out by an american comapny no less :-)
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 04:17 · Score: 1

You sound like you've been around to a fair number of countries. In your opinion, what are the most civilized ones? How do the other western European nations fare?
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 04:43 · Score: 0

I guess France isn't as civilized as I thought.
Three people in France.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 05:26 · Score: 1

When one person acts violent by himself (on the street somewhere), that can be assumed to be an oddball. When three people act violent in concert, it's cause for mild concern. When three people, on the job in a position that requires dealing with the general public every day, act violent in concert, and then the police have no interest in investigating, it's indicative of a society with a serious problem.
Notice also that another poster here, who's lived in France, testifies that this behavior is actually quite normal there.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 07:27 · Score: 1

You're an idiot if you think that people should tolerate being "treated badly" for violating somebody's "policy."
Grow up and learn some history, if you don't have an expectation not to be treated "badly" then you will be treated badly, and that treatment will expand constantly to new conditions.
Having civilized society requires civilized society to continually identify and end violent and oppressive measures, especially when they are adopted as policies.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 07:29 · Score: 1

Perhaps your anonymous dismissal of his complaint, even using abusing language, is a sign of an entitled anti-social adolescent.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 07:30 · Score: 1

French civilization still exists thanks to us, perhaps France hit the lottery that civilized countries band together to protect it.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 07:32 · Score: 1

his headgears sole purpose is to record images and to process them
Are you really sure it is just a camera with image post-processing? You either don't know and claim to, or...

dumbass
See above.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Osgeld · 2012-07-19 11:30 · Score: 1

glasses bolted to ones head as it records and processes images, people seem to think that computer imaging is passive, like the computer just does things without storing it in memory first
If I need to take my glasses off I can no problem, and I actually need them
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by DogPhilosopher · 2012-07-19 11:31 · Score: 1

In your opinion, what are the most civilized ones? How do the other western European nations fare?
Ok, these are personal opinions, completely subjective and highly biased of course, and excuse the cliches:
I've been to Germany about a dozen times as well and despite one or two incidents I always enjoyed it. I like Berlin, open and relaxed atmosphere (except on Walpurgis Night). Older people may not understand English, but nobody expects foreigners to speak German. It is very much appreciated if you do, though.
I've lived in the UK (London). Obviously there's a formal culture where people stick to social norms and are polite, on the other hand it's (still) a hierarchical, class-based society, so you get inequality and the class warfare that goes with it (London riots anyone?). But overall a positive experience, you can go to the pub on the corner and have a quiet drink or chat with complete strangers. People there are quite sociable.
I've lived in Belgium (Flanders), and it's doable. The surreal national politics don't affect everyday life at all, but I have to say the mentality tends to be a bit parochial. Also, people learn to accept authority and stick to the rules from an early age, so they're not used to assertive behaviour and may mistake it for arrogance. People don't always speak their mind, so you have to decode non-verbal cues.
I don't mind the Netherlands, but that may be home bias. The mindset is very individualistic though, and something like UK pub culture is almost non-existent, so it may be hard for an outsider to make friends. I have only limited experience with Scandinavia, but I have a positive impression.
Visited Italy half a dozen times and worked there a few months. It really depends on where you go and who you meet, but my impression is that foreigners may get more respect there than the Italians, who compete among themselves for basically everything. Getting through life can be a bit like being in an opera buffa, and may require some moral flexibility (cliche, I know). Especially the politics are surreal, the Italians themselves are very much aware of this and tend to dislike their country. There's a reason so many go abroad (where they only hang out with other italians).
Been to Portugal a dozen times, imho it's a bit like France (arrogant waiters, speeding, nepotism and the other cliches) but even more conservative, not as regulated, and without most of the neurosis/paranoia/aggression. The locals have little contact with foreigners outside the tourist hotspots, it's not the most dynamic or cosmopolitan country. They dislike Germans for some reason, and regard the British as snooty and arrogant.
An assault by McDonalds staff seems unthinkable in any of these places. Maybe in a very dodgy UK restaurant staffed by hooligans, but it would be shut down in the blink of an eye. Paris on the other hand.. years ago, a friend of mine was dragged out of the Virgin Megastore by the hair for sitting on the stairs, for example. French security guards are easily provoked.
Btw, the roughest place I've been to is possibly St Petersburg, but that city is in a league of its own.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Grishnakh · 2012-07-19 11:58 · Score: 1

Wow, thanks for the informative post. What's your impression of Spain? Or how about the Basque area, that seems like it might be different? Or some places in eastern Europe like Czech Republic or Croatia? Can you elaborate on St. Petersburg? How about Ireland?
Just in case I ever decide to move to Europe, I'd like to know which places are good and which places to avoid, so this is actually very helpful, so thanks again.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by _KiTA_ · 2012-07-20 08:26 · Score: 1

glasses bolted to ones head as it records and processes images, people seem to think that computer imaging is passive, like the computer just does things without storing it in memory first
If I need to take my glasses off I can no problem, and I actually need them
I know you're just trying to make a luddite point ("the nerd is just being a spoiled creep" style thing) but he's worn these Augmented Reality systems for over 20 years, he now literally needs them to be able to function, per the old articles on when the TSA harassed him, if he takes it off he has vision problems and becomes disoriented.
Re:This guy is a crybaby. by Osgeld · 2012-07-20 11:14 · Score: 1

" if he takes it off he has vision problems and becomes disoriented."
so do many people that require glasses, they dont bolt them to their skulls like a retard. the guy has been doing this for 20 years for only one reason, attention, and whenever he gets some he acts like a bitch
let me just cry my little heart out so he can so "jhonny look at me" feels better

Post hoc ergo proper hoc? by zippthorne · 2012-07-18 13:16 · Score: 3, Informative

Didn't McDonald's remove pink slime about 3 months before the story became mainstream?

--
Can you be Even More Awesome?!

Re:Post hoc ergo proper hoc? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:02 · Score: 0

propter hoc, not proper hoc. I sincerely hope that was a typo and you're not just pretending to know a latin term to sound intelligent
Re:Post hoc ergo proper hoc? by rhalstead · 2012-07-20 04:21 · Score: 1

And pink slime is actually good meat.

No Kidding! by chrismcb · 2012-07-18 13:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

They asked the "perps" individually, and they all said they treated Mr Mann with the utmost respect. No Kidding! What did you expect them to say? "Oh yeah, we beat that customer up."

Re:No Kidding! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:28 · Score: 2, Funny

'Did you physically or verbally accost Mr. Mann?'
'... man .. hm. man? Don't recall a man. Beat the shit out of punk-ass robot though'
Re:No Kidding! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:53 · Score: -1

They said they talked to 7 people. As if McDonalds clerks are all so close knit as to lie for each other.
He was kicked out because he was wearing a camera against their wishes. And he basically makes a living off of being a dick with a camera. By his own account, he was "attacked" when walking to the mens room with a webcam strapped to his head.
By attacked, he means the "perp", which is his loaded word for "person", tried to snatch the webcam off his head. Because following people into the mens room with a webcam on your head is frowned upon there.
He defended himself with a fake doctor note that must say something absurd like "beep boop this guy is awesome-o beep boop signed dr noodles", because he has no legitimate medical need to wear a webcam on his head, as neat as he thinks it is.
He did not get beat up, at worse he got pushed out the door when he refused to leave. This is his words again. The guy in the picture is clearly security, and not a burger flipper.
His computer broke when he pissed his pants and got piss on his computer. Because he couldn't hold it. Again, this is his story.
Yeah, really.
Re:No Kidding! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:19 · Score: 0

And he basically makes a living off of being a dick with a camera.
This is a lie. You are a liar.

By attacked, he means the "perp", which is his loaded word for "person"
It is his absolutely and objectively correct word for "criminal". And you know it.

tried to snatch the webcam off his head
Which is unquestionably assault, and cannot be legally or morally defended under any circumstances. So you have already shrieked your irrevocable confession that he was in fact attacked, and that all claims to the contrary, particularly your own, are craven lies told by filthy, gutless losers who piss their pants in terror when confronted with anything unfamiliar. Also, it isn't a "webcam", and you are lying again by calling it one.

He defended himself with a fake doctor note that must say something absurd like "beep boop this guy is awesome-o beep boop signed dr noodles"
Again you lie by calling it a "fake doctor note" when you know for a fact that it isn't. You cannot make the case that it is fake, because you don't really believe that it is. You just wish it were, and hope that if you scream that lie enough times it will magically become true. It won't, but you'll keep trying it because you are too stupid to realize that even with me telling you.

His computer broke when he pissed his pants and got piss on his computer. Because he couldn't hold it. Again, this is his story.
That is your story. Nothing in the article or his post says anything about that at all.
Now humiliate yourself further with pathetic attempts to deny the absolute truth of everything I just said about you. You might try the "oh I was just trolling" defense; it won't actually work because your lies and stupidity are in complete earnest, but it is marginally less embarrassing for you than anything else you could ever think of.
Re:No Kidding! by thej1nx · 2012-07-18 23:31 · Score: 1

So are you perp#1 or perp#2?
Re:No Kidding! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 00:36 · Score: 0

I think that to a Parisienne the concept of "treating the foreigner with the utmost respect" is different from that of most Americans. It's quite possible that the treated him like they would any foreigner.
dom
Re:No Kidding! by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 07:36 · Score: 1

They said they talked to 7 people. As if McDonalds clerks are all so close knit as to lie for each other.
You've obviously never had a job. Yes, 7 random workers involved in an "incident" will cover each other's behinds, especially if any of them that saw the incident didn't say anything, and even more, if a co-worker violated policy, they saw them do it, and didn't want to fill out a form "ratting them out." Or in many cases, simply because it hadn't seemed like being worth the paperwork at the time, and then later it is "too late" because "why didn't you report this right away?"

Virtual Person vs. Cyborg. by o_ferguson · 2012-07-18 13:18 · Score: -1, Flamebait

"If you think I've come all this way to watch two niggers beat the shit out of each other, you've got another think coming." -Hunter S. Thompson

--
- In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.

There is a policy against recording by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:19 · Score: 3, Interesting

At least when I was there...

I was in a Paris McDonalds in 2005, and pulled out my camera to take a photo of the menu board. Before I could even focus a man tapped me on the shoulder, point at the camera, and shook his head. He had on a McDonalds uniform but I think was security. He didn't leave my side while in the store. I just wanted my Royale with Cheese photo!

Re:Yeah...see this by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:23 · Score: -1

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=446456838718334&set=a.229161623781191.63906.215410238489663&type=1&ref=nf

You got see this L.E.D. Zeppelin

policy against recording by frovingslosh · 2012-07-18 13:31 · Score: 4, Interesting

The company still hasn't explained why Mann was removed from the restaurant, but Mann has speculated that it has a policy against recording.

Not sure about the arches (have refused to eat there for the last 36 years - that's my right, don't mod me down because you eat there), but I've seen a sign on company owned Burger King restaurants that forbid customers from using cameras on the premises. This warning is on the same door sticker that advises customers that the store is recording them! I asked the manager and he said, yes, it does apply ever to someone wanting to record a child's birthday party there. When I said "It makes you wonder and worry about what the company is trying to hide" he just laughed and said "Yea.".

--
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.

Re:policy against recording by wvmarle · 2012-07-18 18:37 · Score: 1

Not sure about the arches (have refused to eat there for the last 36 years - that's my right, don't mod me down because you eat there)
I have just had my lunch there, but would mod you UP in admiration of your steadfastiness instead!

McDonalds Brouhaha Aside... by caranha · 2012-07-18 13:45 · Score: 1

From TFA:

"Google-glass like computer eyepiece".

No, you're doing it wrong - it is the other way around :-/

Steve's credibility problem by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:47 · Score: 5, Interesting

I am skeptical of Steve's side to all of this.
Note the following:

*I see many commentors claiming that Steve's apparatus is screwed to his skull and is necessary. Many of Steve's students have routinely seen him walking around without a computer. I have never seen any evidence that he has any sort of implants, and am pretty certain he doesnt have stuff screwed to the skull. Notice how he doesnt clairify these things.

* As far as I can tell, his single entry blog is the first place I've seen him refer to his HMD as Eyetap Digital glass. This is undoubtadley for him to associate with the Google Glass project.

*Take a look at his wikipedia entries under "gloggee". He has a penchant for making up neologisms an claiming to ha e invented things that he wasnt really involved with.

Re:Steve's credibility problem by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 05:00 · Score: 0

*I see many commentors claiming that Steve's apparatus is screwed to his skull and is necessary. Many of Steve's students have routinely seen him walking around without a computer. I have never seen any evidence that he has any sort of implants, and am pretty certain he doesnt have stuff screwed to the skull. Notice how he doesnt clairify these things.
No one claimed that the glasses cannot be removed - his claim is that they cannot be removed without special tools. Obviously he himself have those tools, while a McD employee would not. The electronics may be screwed to his skull, but I think it's more likely that they are attached in some less invasive way. Why would you put screws in your skull if you don't need to?
Re:Steve's credibility problem by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 09:42 · Score: 0

1) People may have seen Mann without his computer, but that doesn't change anything. Being attached and being non-removable are different things. If someone tries to pull a piercing off it will cause injury, but it can still be removed if done properly. As for how the computer is attached, the version I saw several years ago had sub-dermal EEG electrodes -- not permanent, but certainly not something you want anyone yanking at.
2) A single blog entry? Citeseer has 35 papers that discuss the EyeTap by name. The eyetap.org site has existed since at least 1995. The earliest published reference to the EyeTap I can find of it is in the ACM from 1999 (http://www.sigmobile.org/MC2R/v3n4_abstracts.html)

A Ridiculous Policy (there I fixed it) by frovingslosh · 2012-07-18 13:48 · Score: 4, Insightful

anyone with genuine interior design talent could visit one of their business, eating a burger while seeming to be doing no more than casually glance around. They could then go away and recreate what they saw almost as precisely as a photograph.

But that couldn't serve as evidence against health code violations (or proof of customer assault). When a company forbids taking pictures at their store (even for a kid's birthday party) but also says that they are recording you, one should wonder what they are trying to hide.

--
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.

Re:A Ridiculous Policy (there I fixed it) by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:17 · Score: 0

They're trying to protect themselves from Michael Moore style lies.
Re:A Ridiculous Policy (there I fixed it) by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 04:35 · Score: 0

One should wonder why they still have customers... seriously people. I mean even if you don't care about your own physical health and are going to eat greasy fast food there are always locally owned small restaurants serving equally unhealthy and cheap food.
Re:A Ridiculous Policy (there I fixed it) by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-20 09:20 · Score: 0

The law is a weak defense compared to the court of public opinion.

Br by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:53 · Score: 5, Funny

av

--
o

If I ate there... by Zemran · 2012-07-18 13:55 · Score: 1, Insightful

...I would boycott them. Really, he ate in MuckDonalds in FRANCE!!!! He deserves to get beaten.

--
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.

Re:If I ate there... by MojoRilla · 2012-07-18 14:35 · Score: 1

I have no idea why he chose McD's in France, but I do have kids, so this is remotely understandable.
Re:If I ate there... by Cesare+Ferrari · 2012-07-18 18:17 · Score: 1

Isn't that the wrong way around? Aren't you supposed to not eat in McDs because you have kids, like not smoking because you have kids?
Re:If I ate there... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 20:30 · Score: 1

I'm kinda getting sick of this particular brand of bollocks being posted on every version of this story on the internet.
On the sin of visiting McDonalds: We get it. You are so much better than him because you don't eat at McDonalds. Doesn't matter that he has spent much of his life trying to push the boundaries of technology and enhance the human condition you don't eat in fast food restaurants. You are a far more worthwhile individual. Congratulations on your monumental achievement. Be sure to tell everybody.
As to the sin of going to Paris and eating junk food: Perhaps he had eaten nothing but fine Parisian cuisine non-stop for 3 days and just fancied a burger. Perhaps he was in a hurry, was hungry and just happened to be walking past a McDonalds. Perhaps his kids were whining about wanting a McDonalds and after a long day he gave in or let them have it as a treat. Maybe he just wanted a burger and pretentious twats on the internet should just shut the hell up.
The idea that any of this warrants a physical assault just puts glitter on your douchbag name tag. And no, I don't care if you were trying to be funny.
Re:If I ate there... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:33 · Score: 0

They're your kids. Don't blame them because you trained them to eat shit.
Re:If I ate there... by MojoRilla · 2012-07-18 21:41 · Score: 1

You clearly aren't a parent. Try convincing the kids they don't want McDonalds, especially if they are in a foreign country and miss home. Hell, many years ago I ate in a McDonalds in Hungary (back when it was behind the iron curtain) because I was homesick.
Re:If I ate there... by Cesare+Ferrari · 2012-07-19 05:01 · Score: 1

Actually I am a parent, and my son hasn't had a McDonald's, or a Pizza Hut, or a KFC. How come? A combination of luck (he prefers japanese) and the fact that I haven't eaten at these places either. I did go in a McDonald's once though.

Here is a better question .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:57 · Score: 0

... if the guy has video of the guy ripping a piece of paper ...

WHERE IS HIS VIDEO of him physically assaulting him?? After all he was wearing the cam and if he took a 10 sec video, where is the rest of the video before an after the 10 secs???

Can you say "selective editing"??

Re:Here is a better question .... by Kagetsuki · 2012-07-18 14:21 · Score: 4, Informative

He hasn't released detailed video because he wants to give McDonalds the chance to respond first. He's only posted some images with the faces edited out and basically made the threat to release the rest.
And I hope he does release the rest now.
Re:Here is a better question .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:27 · Score: -1

Yeah, he's hoping they'll settle out of court! This is worse than that bitch who spilt coffee on herself and then sued McDonalds. Fuck this guy.
Re:Here is a better question .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 18:40 · Score: 0

McFagging is spreading...
Do you really think that being assaulted to a point of having your stuff broke is the same as spilting yourself with hot coffe?
Re:Here is a better question .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:49 · Score: 0

He specifically said he doesn't want money, you moron. Also, "that bitch who spilt coffee on herself and then sued McDonalds" is not the poster child for frivolous lawsuits that ignorant pissants like you make it out to be. So either you're repeating stupid urban legends, or you're lying.
Re:Here is a better question .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 21:15 · Score: 0

Wow, could he be any more against the principles of natural justice?
If he refuses to go to the law and instead wants to carry out the trial in the court of public opinion, he should at least present all his evidence (blurring out faces if necessary). There is no reason whatever to release evidence in a trickle like this, playing with a game with McDonalds and hoping for it to settle or something. Maybe they'll even write to or pay him simple to get him to go away, but McDonalds have done far worse things and kept up the fight.
Since what he has released so far is no evidence of anything, the descriptions being uncorroborated and the pictures all having plausible innocent explanations, I look forward to seeing what he has left. I am sure he will have found a way to take it out of context too.
It appears this guy is enjoying the full Reiser effect: people can't stand the idea that someone they look up to could do anything wrong. And, given his behaviour, I wouldn't believe any claim that he "doesn't want money" - although it's more likely an ego trip and that he wants some sort of capitulation. Perhaps he simply wants to make a high-profile point about the social impact of prosthetics, and thinks he's engineered the perfect backstory.
Re:Here is a better question .... by hkmwbz · 2012-07-19 11:15 · Score: 0

Also, "that bitch who spilt coffee on herself and then sued McDonalds" is not the poster child for frivolous lawsuits that ignorant pissants like you make it out to be.
I strongly disagree. I have read all the arguments trying to claim that it isn't, but I don't buy it. You simply don't handle hot beverages that carelessly! She only has herself to blame. The lawsuit was frivolous and ridiculous.

--
Clever signature text goes here.

Mandingos for Jesus by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 13:59 · Score: -1

Oh please slurp my nugget juice. Just drink it all up Jesus! Swallow my manhood and then I'll shove it up your ass, just like one of your disciples. Then you can lick my dongle clean of your fecal matter! Praise the bungholio!

Too Bad I Don't Eat That Shit Anymore by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:10 · Score: 0

McDonald's food always does one of two things to me, whether I eat a salad or a sammich:

Makes you shit your brains out for 2 days
Plugs you up for two days to where you can't shit at all
- Must be all the petrochemicals in their food: http://www.examiner.com/article/mcdonalds-fast-food-toxic-ingredients-include-putty-and-cosmetic-petrochemicals

Free WiFi by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:11 · Score: 1

McDonalds advertises that they have 11,500 (US) restaurants that provide free WiFi. I've often used a netbook to check my email, sometimes while waiting at the counter for the order to be served.

Considering how many webcams there are, the policies seem a bit inconsistent. How would they know? I use Skype, and no doubt have make video calls from there.

Mc Lawyers by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:24 · Score: 0

If I were Mann, I'd be worried about Mc Lawyers.

In England, Mc Donalds sued a man (and won), because he held a sign stating that Mc Donalds food is not healthy, and they pay their workers low wages. Both demonstrably true, but man was found guilty of liable, and forced to pay Mc Donalds substantial damages.

I hear that if your statement is published in England, you can be sued in the British courts for liable, so even the event occurring in France may not protect him from Mc Evil Corp.

Re:Mc Lawyers by 91degrees · 2012-07-18 18:50 · Score: 1

The "McLibel" case. McDonalds won on a number of points but not all of them. This was also under UK law which is universally agreed to be too strongly biased in favour of the plaintiff. Specifically, that the defendants would have to prove all of their allegations were true not to be found liable. there were 11 allegations made, including one that McDonalds promotes starvation in the third world, and exploits children in its advertising.

I dare say McDonalds will shy away from another expensive libel case. While they may have prevailed in court, it's not true that they won. They spent tens of thousands, possibly millions, suing people who had no money, and won Â£40,000 which they were never going to collect. More importantly, this was a PR disaster.
Re:Mc Lawyers by tehcyder · 2012-07-19 00:34 · Score: 1

>quote> This was also under UK law which is universally agreed to be too strongly biased in favour of the plaintiff. Specifically, that the defendants would have to prove all of their allegations were true not to be found liable
Look, I hate McDonald's and other big companies as much as anyone, but there's not much point in having libel laws if you can just say any defamatory thing you like about someone and not have to show it's true.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:Mc Lawyers by makomk · 2012-07-19 02:53 · Score: 1

Actually, under UK law you don't just have to prove all of your allegations are true - you also have to prove that the worst possible misinterpretations of your allegations that the person suing can convince the judge are plausible are also true.
Re:Mc Lawyers by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 23:31 · Score: 0

Actually, under UK law you don't just have to prove all of your allegations are true - you also have to prove that the worst possible misinterpretations of your allegations that the person suing can convince the judge are plausible are also true.
Actually, theres no such thing as UK law.

Wrong again by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:31 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Trespassers will be shot.

Re:Wrong again by Fjandr · 2012-07-18 19:31 · Score: 1, Insightful

The sign doesn't legalize the assault; the law that allows the sign to be posted and followed through without legal repercussions legalizes the assault.
Re:Wrong again by bky1701 · 2012-07-19 18:00 · Score: 1

Even in the US, that is quickly becoming attempted murder. Try it. Have fun.

--
Great Intellect...

Mickey D is definitely *NOT* alone by Taco+Cowboy · 2012-07-18 14:32 · Score: 1

McDonald is definitely not alone in having episode whereby their employees roughing out customers

Watch the following youtube vid :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0jdtfksbgc

--
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !

Re:Mickey D is definitely *NOT* alone by iamhassi · 2012-07-18 15:27 · Score: 1

they didn't touch this guy but they did call the police on him when McDonald's refused to give him his food or his money back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJlkdCbysYw

Then again it's in the US so maybe different policy?

--
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
Re:Mickey D is definitely *NOT* alone by starworks5 · 2012-07-18 15:34 · Score: 1

Ironically I've been to that KFC before.
Re:Mickey D is definitely *NOT* alone by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:58 · Score: 2, Funny

Ironically I've been to that KFC before.
Alanis, is that you?!?
Re:Mickey D is definitely *NOT* alone by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 17:19 · Score: 1

Thats not ironic, it's coincidental.

2nd Report of Getting Physical at Same Location by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:36 · Score: 5, Interesting

This is the 2nd report of physical assault by McDonald's staff at that same location to hit the news:

http://onyoursi.de/2011/08/whats-your-problem-assaulted-for-taking-a-photo-of-le-menu/

McDonald's insists Sheldon wasn't touched during the confrontation. But Sheldon remembers it differently.

"She grabbed me by my arm and jacket and threw my back against the open door, all the while grabbing at different parts of my coat with one hand and pinning me there with another," Sheldon told me.

And McDonald's explanation of what occurred does not match the photo. If lying about the situation seems to work, then of course the employees at that location are never going to feel like assaulting customers has any consequences.

Re:2nd Report of Getting Physical at Same Location by Lando · 2012-07-18 18:19 · Score: 2

I love this response from McD's from the article.

I checked with McDonald’s and it said an investigation was underway. But today, you received a reply from McDonald’s France that said your version couldn’t be substantiated. Interviews with employees and a client suggest you had nothing more than a polite disagreement with the employee.
And then a few paragraphs later.

But she also said the confrontation shouldn’t have happened, and that a manager at the restaurant “had a conversation with the employee in which he emphasized that crew members are to remain calm and professional at all times, in all circumstances.”
Which strikes me as odd, if it was a polite disagreement why did the manager have to have a conversation with the employee?

--
/* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */

Crush The Heads Of McDonalds With A Baseball Bat by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:44 · Score: 0

Looks like McDs 'I'm Loving It' is Shit On A Stick.

So, Stick the heads at McD.

Beat them up, Bash them up, Leave them for dead. That will teach them in Paris, Moscow and Mobile Alabama. Shit Heads at McD - Your 'I'm Loving It' days are numbered.

Nobody cars if a McD employee, CFO or CEO is left for dead on a back 'cocaine alley' of New York, New York.

LoL

You'd think he'd have learned by O'Bunny · 2012-07-18 14:45 · Score: 1

He got attention for similar stuff in 2002 http://it.slashdot.org/story/02/03/14/2051228/airport-security-vs-cyborg-steve-mann Indications are that he uses this stuff for augmentation of reality, not for regular day-to-day life.

Re:You'd think he'd have learned by _KiTA_ · 2012-07-18 19:55 · Score: 1

He got attention for similar stuff in 2002 http://it.slashdot.org/story/02/03/14/2051228/airport-security-vs-cyborg-steve-mann
Indications are that he uses this stuff for augmentation of reality, not for regular day-to-day life.
Yes, he should have learned. That if he's different, people will assault him. And get away with it. Because he's different. ... What is he supposed to have learned, exactly?

bourgila by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:46 · Score: -1

http://kora-watch.blogspot.com

Amen! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 14:58 · Score: -1, Troll

This is nothing but yet another LIEBERAL attack against the job creators. One has to wonder if Hussein Obama, King of Kenya, is behind this somehow.

This isn't the first time by abarrow · 2012-07-18 15:05 · Score: 5, Interesting

Dr. Mann has had this sort of thing happen to him his entire professional career. Here's one from 2002
http://it.slashdot.org/story/02/03/14/2051228/airport-security-vs-cyborg-steve-mann

Re:This isn't the first time by slashmydots · 2012-07-18 16:02 · Score: 1

C4 shaped like glasses frame with wires sticking out of it and a power supply could blow a hole in a plane, just FYI. Dunno if you cyborg freedom hippies considered that or not.
Re:This isn't the first time by Nemyst · 2012-07-18 16:23 · Score: 1

Seeing how that turned out for a legitimate use, I don't exactly see what terrorist would think this to be a good idea, and please don't bring up some backwards reverse psychology explanation.
Terrorism is the new "think of the children", even though the latter's never disappeared.
Re:This isn't the first time by spongman · 2012-07-18 18:48 · Score: 1

yeah, because terrorists like to wander around with their explosive in plain sight with suspicious looking wires dangling from their heads. rather than, say, stick them down their underpants or hide them in their shoes.
Re:This isn't the first time by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 19:56 · Score: 0

Are you wearing shoes?
Well? Are you?
You damn terrorist with your explosive shoes!
Re:This isn't the first time by dunkelfalke · 2012-07-18 19:59 · Score: 1

Totally reminds me of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxYuBriNT7U

--
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap

Re:Do they really show st ripping up his doc note? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:22 · Score: 1

yeah, it's obviously one of the thousands of pieces of paper that McD employees routinely tear up during any normal shift.

you make it sound so bad, but what else would they use as pie filler? sawdust? the ground bones of orphans? The fact that they use human labor just means more jobs for the economy.

Doctor's note? by DNS-and-BIND · 2012-07-18 15:24 · Score: 1

So...I asked this in the other story and got modded down to -1. Why the hell does this guy have a doctor's note? What medical condition requires him to wear goggles? Or is it just that he is a "cybernetic organism" and to remove his goggles would be to "kill" him? How about a scan of this document? What are the credentials of the physician that wrote it and what is this guy's relationship to him? Did he just get a buddy to write it so he wouldn't have to take off his precious goggles and become a mere human like the rest of us?

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!

Re:Doctor's note? by Mashiki · 2012-07-18 16:51 · Score: 1

It's considered a prosthetic. And an experimental technology all rolled into one, as such, a "doctors note" would cover both. And explain why, what it is, what it does, why it can't be removed, and so on. Much like the way some other types of experimental prosthetics can't be removed. Don't worry, I'm sure you'll figure out the rest on your own.

--
Om, nomnomnom...
Re:Doctor's note? by DNS-and-BIND · 2012-07-18 18:39 · Score: 1

What is the medical condition that requires him to wear a prosthetic? Missing arm? Eye that doesn't work properly? I'm curious to know.

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Re:Doctor's note? by Lisias · 2012-07-18 20:31 · Score: 1

Researching can be a good reason to wear prosthetics, you know...

--
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
Re:Doctor's note? by DNS-and-BIND · 2012-07-19 01:42 · Score: 1

You don't need a note from a doctor to be a researcher. Still waiting for the explanation of what his medical condition is.

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Re:Doctor's note? by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 07:48 · Score: 1

It is often offensive, when presented with evidence of a doctor's prescription, to second-guess or publicly attempt a non-professional diagnosis.

Jesus Christ by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:27 · Score: -1

Seriously? Nobody fucking cares.

Mann is full of shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:29 · Score: -1

I can honestly not even begin to imagine a scenario where mcdonalds employees would attack and throw a man out just for wearing those glasses things, and no other reason at all. Its complete horseshit. Even the dumbest of mcdonalds employees wouldnt see him and yell "Its the terminator! Kill it!".

I would dare say mann did something he isnt fessing up or provoked being thrown out. And I highly doubt his equipment was damaged on purpose, if at all. He is just throwing that in for some extra lawsuit padding and so he sounds more innocent and more like the babe in the woods.

If I went out right now and I verbally provoked a couple guys into kicking my ass and had the beating on video, then I told the cops I was just innocently walking around minding my own business and suddenly these guys beat me and showed him the footage they would coddle me and thrown them in jail. If said the same thing to my friends they would side with me for being the innocent poor victim of senseless violence despite the fact I was the one who caused it all.

Besides I have a hard time that they would just suddenly get violent and pissed off because of his headgear.

I have a hard believing they would just start tearing up his doctors note for whatever the hell reason.

I have a hard time believe employees would just suddenly start damaging his equipment.

I have a hard time believing they would just throw him out after assualting him "for no reason at all".

I have a even harder time believing that mcdonalds employees would do where they work, infront of others while being recorded.

They didn't need a reason by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:43 · Score: 0

They're Parisian. They assault all the senses, although it's strange that they chose sight first this time.

sure - it's publicity, but it's a stunt for Mann by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 15:53 · Score: 0, Interesting

He's done this sort of thing before. I have personally witnessed the way he behaves with his 'apparatus'. The real story here is why this only happens once in a while. Most people I've met want to punch him after only about 2 minutes of being around him.

This isn't hard by slashmydots · 2012-07-18 15:58 · Score: 2

The glasses either are damaged or they are not. The end. This is not hard.

The company still hasn't explained why Mann was removed from the restaurant, but Mann has speculated that it has a policy against recording.

Now that's where his credibility falls off a cliff. Let me reinact his version that would reach that end result: "Sir, we're asking you to leave but we're not telling you specifically why. Try to speculate on why it may be while you're in the parking lot."

Here's my version: "So...this paper says it can take pictures? GTFO, perv! You can't covertly snap photos of people with a camera hidden in your glasses, it's making our customers uncomfortable."

Which sounds more reasonable to you?

Re:This isn't hard by Nemyst · 2012-07-18 16:24 · Score: 0

If you want him away, you call the police. Wearing a McDo's t-shirt does not imbue you with the power to enforce the law.
Re:This isn't hard by slashmydots · 2012-07-18 17:09 · Score: 0

The law also say that things being called food have to be made out of food. That doesn't stop them either. By the way, I also think that crap about random sudden physical damage to their chassis results in taking a photo is complete and utter BS. He probably just started snapping photos like crazy to piss them off and post about later in a 1-sided, misleading blog post or whatever. By the way, it looks like he counted 2 "possible witnesses" however my estimates off the photo come up with more like 20-30 so I think the truth will come out pretty darn soon.
Re:This isn't hard by 91degrees · 2012-07-18 18:40 · Score: 1

Your version seems most reasonable. Whether they articulated it so well is another question.

Also I'd say it was more a case of "It's weird and it's making me [the manager] uncomfortable".
Re:This isn't hard by gl4ss · 2012-07-18 19:45 · Score: 1

from what it seems it keeps a circular buffer of photos. you stop it, you end up with the buffer.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:This isn't hard by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 20:02 · Score: 0

So, the first manager allowed him access so his staff had someone to throw out?
Aww, I'm sorry, did you leave that part out intentionally?
Re:This isn't hard by thej1nx · 2012-07-18 23:26 · Score: 0

Right! So if I don't like something you are doing(even if it is completely legal), I and my friends can jump you and kick the shit out of you and damage your stuff? Good to know.
Re:This isn't hard by slashmydots · 2012-07-19 02:03 · Score: 1

Your version seems most reasonable. Whether they articulated it so well is another question. Also I'd say it was more a case of "It's weird and it's making me [the manager] uncomfortable".
You know they're French, right? lol.
Re:This isn't hard by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 04:40 · Score: 0

Reasonable to me: McDonald's has a lot to hide and didn't like the bad PR from Super Size Me. And the French are pricks.
Re:This isn't hard by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 05:13 · Score: 0

So.... you're saying that Mann broke his own eyewear afterwards, and then proceeded to CGI a realisitic video showing employees attacking him?
Why yes, that DOES sound quite reasonable.
Re:This isn't hard by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 06:29 · Score: 0

Judging from the photo evidence and what he said his version is, I'd say neither.
Re:This isn't hard by Aighearach · 2012-07-19 07:53 · Score: 1

I disagree entirely, and I don't think you even tried hard. When there is a way to parse the words so that it makes sense, and is still valid English, you should favor that reasoned explanation.
Clearly, since public photography is legal (and protected) in France, the true reason for the attack was something else. He pointed out that they said something about recording, but that is clearly not all there is to it. At a minimum it would also be a lack of training combined with a violent and anti-social nature. Most people given that combination would not identify the claimed "reason" as the true reason, but the lack of training combined with violent tendency.
If somebody in a comes up and says, "you looked at me wrong!" and punches you, what is the reason for the assault? Most people in modern society would say that he punched you, "for no reason." And they might also add, "he said something about the way he looked."

"Our goal is to provide..." by Lisias · 2012-07-18 16:04 · Score: 2

"Our goal is to provide a welcoming environment and stellar service to McDonald’s customers around the world."

No shit! =]

Mr. Mann saw stars for hours after visiting a McDonald's ! =P

--
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org

Re:"Our goal is to provide..." by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 23:51 · Score: 0

:-D

It's googles fault by dinther · 2012-07-18 16:45 · Score: 1

Increasing intolerance to public cameras. No violence even has been documented plenty of times before. However, the contraption on this guys face looks more like a prosthesis rather then a camera. I bet that before the presentation of Google Glass that this guy was seen as an invalid of some sort and given the respect of not mentioning that device on his face.

But now people have all seen a similar device the penny drops and suddenly this guy is no longer an invalid but a peeping tom. Never mind that cameras are the size of a pin head and can be concealed absolutely everywhere.

Shopping in an electronics store I took a picture of a price tag so I could looking the model number online for reviews. I mean this is 2012. Why write the number down when you can take a picture. A sales rep reprimanded me for taking the picture. After I explained why I took it, he cooled down a lot. But there certainly was an over reaction as if I was walking out with the stores trade secrets.

Re:It's googles fault by Wolfrider · 2012-07-19 06:32 · Score: 1

--He probably thought you might be working for " the competition ", and didn't want to get into a pricewar.

--
.
== WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??

Maybe by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 17:11 · Score: 0

They "attacked" him for being a douche

Re:Maybe by BeanThere · 2012-07-19 07:32 · Score: 1

Sounds like you are speaking from experience.

that is not recording by aepervius · 2012-07-18 17:11 · Score: 1

Unless you invented a way to transcribe what your synapse saved onto an electronic emdium sharable and viewable by anybody youa re using a weird version of recording used by nobody else.

--
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org

LOL...deleted from FB page in 5 mins! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 17:24 · Score: 0

I've just posted the link of this news on the Facebook page of McDonald's and was waiting to see how long it takes for them to remove it...and the result is 4 min 36 sec...very efficient...LOL

"even something from the day before"? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 18:08 · Score: 0

In my experience food poisoning usually takes about 24 hours. So it's nearly always "something from the day before".

A crowd of Borg-goggled pantless customers . . . ? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2012-07-18 18:09 · Score: 1

So what will they do if a massive crowd of Borg-goggled pant-less customers show up? And mumble, "We have come for your pants!" And then quickly disappear, before the cops show up? A few "plants" among the customers might even surrender their pants to the Borgy folks.

Witness descriptions would be useless: "Well, ma'am, can you describe the, um, Borg man?" "Yes, he was wearing Jar-Jar undies."

Geek catalogs are full of hidden pen-cams, sunglasses-cams, dorky-hat-cams, etc. Expect to see some videos of wacky things happening in McDonald's. The good 'ole Mentos in your soda, a jumping frog burger or feathered fried chicken parts . . . with beaks.

--
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!

I believe them by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 18:45 · Score: 0

When was the last time the French won a violent confrontation?

It is France! by ChodaBoyUSA · 2012-07-18 18:53 · Score: 0

Good grief! It is France. What else do you expect from a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys? WHY would anyone want to go there?

Re:Do they really show st ripping up his doc note? by 91degrees · 2012-07-18 19:00 · Score: 1

What do you think the piece of paper was?

This isn't a criminal trial. Casting doubt is not enough. We don't need the protection of "beyond reasonable doubt" because we don't get to punish anyone. We're trying to work out what we think happens. Even if we were, we'd assume that witness statements are true unless someone finds reason to suggest otherwise.

So what's your hypothesis? What do you think happened?

Supersize Me by catchblue22 · 2012-07-18 19:26 · Score: 4, Informative

In regards to their policies against video recording, I suspect they don't want a recurrence of the movie "Supersize Me" which did great damage to their image around the world. It was about a film-maker who spend an entire month (or more?) eating only McDonalds food. Whenever they asked him if he wanted supersize, he had to agree. The health results were predictably grim for the film-maker.

--
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)

Re:Supersize Me by L4t3r4lu5 · 2012-07-18 23:16 · Score: 1

Check out Don Gorske. 25000 Big Macs, Cholesterol of 140 and no know health problems. He was in Super-Size Me too, but I don't think McDonalds mind about that one :)

--
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Re:Supersize Me by RatherBeAnonymous · 2012-07-19 01:21 · Score: 3, Informative

Don Gorske never orders the fries.
Re:Supersize Me by HArchH · 2012-07-20 06:55 · Score: 1

The movie was ridiculous from the word go and anyone that tries to eat the food from any restaurant exclusively for several weeks gets what he deserves. The movie is more funny than anything, showing just how stupid some people can be.

do they have something to hide? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 20:17 · Score: 0

Why are they afraid of recordings? There's no secret recipie being made in front of customers, and no market for a dvd of mcd's.

So what do they have to hide?

McD's in Beijing didn't like my camera either by thisisauniqueid · 2012-07-18 20:19 · Score: 2

A couple of years ago, I tried photographing the menu board in a McDonald's in Beijing, because so many items on the menu were so incredibly bizarre. A store manager came over and was very unfriendly to me about it, asked me to delete pictures from my camera, and basically told me he would throw me out of the restaurant if I kept trying to take pictures. I wonder if there is some corporate policy that inspires this sort of behavior?

so someone from central america? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 20:29 · Score: 0

Oh, they'd be american too.

Shit, man, you own a small part of it, were too damn lazy or stupid to put a proper damn name on your country and then demand that an entire damn hemisphere is therefore yours.

By the way, the EU is not a country. You don't know what they'd be called if it were. But european includes all living in europe. Just like american includes canadian (cf french), mexican (cf spanish), brazillian (cf portugese), etc.

Get yourself a proper name for your country, or just make up a non-ambiguous countrymen name. It's only covnention that had them matched. You can keep USA but find something less inaccurate than american, or allow mexicans in as they too are american.

Re:sure - it's publicity, but it's a stunt for Man by Ash-Fox · 2012-07-18 21:04 · Score: 1

He's done this sort of thing before. I have personally witnessed the way he behaves with his 'apparatus'. The real story here is why this only happens once in a while. Most people I've met want to punch him after only about 2 minutes of being around him.

[citation needed]

--
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.

Recording customer service calls by pne · 2012-07-18 22:19 · Score: 2

My experience in Germany is that the announcement is along the lines of "We listen in to or record selected calls for quality control and training purposes. If you do not wish this, please say so at the beginning."

Now, this could be because German companies care more about your privacy (or about the PR effects), so they make this explicitly opt-out. Or it could be legislation.

Perhaps you could try influencing legislation where you live to demand an opt-out approach to call recording?

--
Esli epei etot cumprenan, shris soa Sfaha.

You've clearly never worked in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 22:44 · Score: 0

You have a problem believing in lots of things don't you? You've clearly never worked in McDonalds. I have, and believe me most of us just didn't care, it's the Primark of jobs, you do it, get bored and throw it away. You'd be amazed at the crap people did there.

Why didn't he just leave? (includes summary) by gnalle · 2012-07-18 23:09 · Score: 1

The guy went to a restaurant that had a policy against recording.
He was told to leave, but he chose to stay and record.
He is angry that they tried to make him go.
His glasses may or may not be damaged.
Why didn't he just leave?

Re:Why didn't he just leave? (includes summary) by thej1nx · 2012-07-18 23:16 · Score: 1

Dear idiot, he was "recording" from the beginning, so as to speak. If McDonald has a policy against it, they could only enforce it *before* they took his money. So you are a jerk, who is fine with the "recording" till the point you take my money, and *then* you kick me out without even allowing me to finish eating? It makes you sound like nothing more than a thief and a first class jerk! And irrespective of what your "policy" may be, as a public business place you are only allowed to call the police. You cannot physically assault customers.

Cops beat up former armed robber by Viol8 · 2012-07-18 23:11 · Score: 0

Seriously, who gave a **** apart from the usual gh3tto troublemakers?

Google Glass by RivenAleem · 2012-07-18 23:14 · Score: 1

I wonder what will happen in a few years time when more and more people have wearable devices capable of recording.

Or looking at it without playing the race card... by Viol8 · 2012-07-18 23:16 · Score: 1, Informative

... a bunch of cops immobilise a drunk former armed robber who was trying to flee from them at over 100mph.

And I'm supposed to have sympathy ... why exactly? Because of the colour of his skin?

Paris. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 23:32 · Score: 0

Started to get all righteously indignant, then got to the part where he was in France.

Par for the course.

boycott by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 23:40 · Score: 0

that's it.. i'm boycotting McD for 3 days! that will teach them.

french fast food by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-18 23:56 · Score: 0

This guy is in Paris, one of the great gastronomic centers of civilization, and he takes his family to McD's?!

Not cool McDonalds... by kiriath · 2012-07-18 23:59 · Score: 1

Not cool. I already DESPISE your restaurant for any number of other reasons, must you pile on the woe?

And you claim to sell "Happy" food.... pssh.

Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 00:27 · Score: 0

or does he look like a right twat asking for a slap?

What medical condition? by westlake · 2012-07-19 00:54 · Score: 1

This is a prosthetic sight and memory augmentation device he wears due to a medical condition !

What medical condition?

The general impression I have of Steve Mann is that is he is capable of spectacular self promotion.

Steve Mann can sound strange."For two years, I had 30,000 people inside my head, watching what I did every day, altering my reality, offering suggestions on what I should do next," recalls the University of Toronto professor. "I finally had to shut it down, though. My head space got a little too crowded."No, Mann's not crazy. From 1994 to 1996, while a grad student at MIT in Boston, he streamed live video directly. 2000-03-26.

EyeTap

Mann, a 41-year-old engineering professor at the University of Toronto, spends hours every day viewing the world through that little monitor in front of his eye -- so much so that going without the apparatus often leaves him feeling nauseous, unsteady, naked.

Mann has created performance art by shooting video in stores that prohibit it, using handheld cameras more noticeable than the "EyeTap" ocular computing system he normally wears. When employees tell him filming isn't allowed, Mann points to the stores' own surveillance cameras behind darkened domes in the ceiling.

Then he tells the employees that "HIS manager" makes him film public places for HIS security -- how does he know, he tells them, that the fire exits aren't chained shut? -- and that they'll have to talk to HIS manager.

His behavior in such showdowns generally provokes hostility, confusion or resigned shrugs.

Computer's eye view

Where are the god damn photos? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:01 · Score: 0

I didn't see anything, there are only a couple of photos showing no assault at all, so, where are the assault photos?

Livimg out your Cyborg Fantasies by westlake · 2012-07-19 01:06 · Score: 1

I don't know the specifics about why this guy has a camera attached to his head, but it's a part of his day to day life and has medical documentation confirming that the device is attached to his head.

He has never worn these glasses all the time.

They are not attached to his head. Computer's eye view

Currently the EyeTap consists of the eyepiece used to display the images, the keypad with which the user can interface with the EyeTap getting it to perform the desired tasks, a CPU which can be attached to most articles of clothing and in some cases even a WiFi device so the user can access the internet and online data.

EyeTap

Re:Livimg out your Cyborg Fantasies by Lando · 2012-07-19 02:48 · Score: 1

That article was published 8 years ago. According to the original submission the employees attempted to remove the device from his head which cannot be done without special equipment which in turn damaged the equipment and caused him pain.

--
/* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */

Re:Or looking at it without playing the race card. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:23 · Score: 0

Why? Because the next time LAPD is bored and wants to keep beating someone well past the point of trying to enforce anything ... they may pick you.

Paris, people, PARIS by Rogerborg · 2012-07-19 01:28 · Score: 1

He probably just forgot to approach the counter on his knees, humbly begging messieurs' permission for disturbing them.

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.

PR disaster in the making by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 01:53 · Score: 0

Sigh. I dont know why big corps do this. Entrench, I mean.
Give the dude his apology and a 10K for his trouble and give the goons in Paris some training on how not to be a cnut. Easy.
But nooooo. Deny, deny, deny, in spite of video evidence.
And an academic out with his family for the day, too. "The father of enhanced reality no less".
I mean FFS.

Next stop for this: CNN. It's gonna cost Mac a lot more than 10K to clean their fan once the brown stuff hits it.
Jesus H Christ on a Blue Bike, MacDonalds. If a UNIX geek can see this more clearly than your "PR Professionals" then I respectfully recommend you get a new set of PR Professionals.

If this guy's got any sense he will already have a web page and a Paypal account hoovering up donations to "fight the clown".

A convenient fix (was:A Ridiculous Policy) by davecb · 2012-07-19 01:56 · Score: 1

One suggestion to Slashdot readers. If you're in a situation like this, do your best to use your phone to record what's happening without being noticed.

As I'm in Toronto, I have the 1.4 (early) release of the "Crimestoppers" app on Android. It gives me the option to record a video, a picture or find the nearest police station, etc. The tips are submitted semi-anonymously to the "crimestoppers" organization, who can pass them on to the police or courts.

--dave

--
davecb@spamcop.net

Read the statement by Quantum+Jim · 2012-07-19 02:03 · Score: 3, Insightful

Am I the only one that read the statement? It seems to me that they are collecting information. In fact McDonald's doesn't deny they attacked him, they only state that their employees denied it. It's an important distinction. Their employees are quite naturally saying, "We're innocent!" while Mann's saying "They're guilty." Mann provided proof that one of their statements - namely that they didn't damage any of his property - is incorrect. But it doesn't seem McDonalds, as a whole, is calling Mann a liar. Here's the statement:

We share the concern regarding Dr. Mann’s account of his July 1 visit to a McDonald’s in Paris. McDonald’s France was made aware of Dr. Mann’s complaints on July 16, and immediately launched a thorough investigation. The McDonald’s France team has contacted Dr. Mann and is awaiting further information from him.
In addition, several staff members involved have been interviewed individually, and all independently and consistently expressed that their interaction with Dr. Mann was polite and did not involve a physical altercation. Our crew members and restaurant security staff have informed us that they did not damage any of Mr. Mann’s personal possessions.
While we continue to learn more about the situation, we are hearing from customers who have questions about what happened. We urge everyone not to speculate or jump to conclusions before all the facts are known. Our goal is to provide a welcoming environment and stellar service to McDonald’s customers around the world.

--
It is impossible to enjoy idling thoroughly unless one has plenty of work to do.
- Jerome Klapka Jerome

Re:Or looking at it without playing the race card. by Johann+Lau · 2012-07-19 02:08 · Score: 1

what has making up that he was an armed robber has to do with "not playing the race card"?

And why do you think I care what some random, anonymous fuck has sympathy for? Prove you're not a sociopathic shit first, please. Like, do a little dance or something, anything.

Re:Or looking at it without playing the race card. by Viol8 · 2012-07-19 02:20 · Score: 0

Awww , diddums , don't throw your toys out of the pram.

FACT: He was an armed robber on parole.

FACT: He was driving at high speed while drunk trying to evade the cops because he was breaking his terms of parole.

Excuse me if I don't cry into my girly pink hanky like you about the police getting tough with him.

wtf insightful? by sl4shd0rk · 2012-07-19 02:25 · Score: 1

What's really bad about this is that a fast-food restaurant like McDonald's should, in theory, be the last place you might get food poisoning.

The reddit people must be here. this post is so far off topic it got modded insightful.

--
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!

No, not wrong at all by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:07 · Score: 0

Putting up a sign doesn't magically grant extra rights. In a given jurisdiction, shooting trespassers is either illegal or it isn't. The absence or presence of a sign doesn't change that.

McD's Fries! Re:Steps in a McDonalds experience by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 03:45 · Score: 0

I love those fries -- now i'm hungry... :( Darn boycott!

There is no such thing as "stomach flu" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 04:13 · Score: 0

You are mistaken. There is no such thing as "stomach flu". http://www.webmd.com/parenting/features/the-truth-about-stomach-flu
If you have a sudden onset of nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea then you have gastroenteritis which is most often caused by food born bacteria.

Re:There is no such thing as "stomach flu" by Dahamma · 2012-07-19 05:13 · Score: 1

Duh. And when you have the "Hershey squirts" there isn't actually molten chocolate coming out of your ass. It's just a common figure of speech, big deal.
And actually, norovirus (as a previous poster pointed out) is the most common cause, *not* bacteria. And it's contagious enough that you don't have to ingest food to get it, touching objects/surfaces an infected person has touched, etc, will spread it just fine.

Re:sure - it's publicity, but it's a stunt for Man by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 04:39 · Score: -1

He's done this sort of thing before. I have personally witnessed the way he behaves with his 'apparatus'. The real story here is why this only happens once in a while. Most people I've met want to punch him after only about 2 minutes of being around him.

[citation needed]

cite for causing a ruckus in public when he's acting obnoxious with his gear? Here it is, from another poster above

http://it.slashdot.org/story/02/03/14/2051228/airport-security-vs-cyborg-steve-mann

cite for witnessing his behavior? First person reference - years ago at MIT I got the joy of experiencing him on a regular basis. It was never a pleasant experience, and from the people I spoke with, I was not alone in my assessment

What constitutes as recording? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 07:55 · Score: 0

Dear certain technologically illiterate sirs/madams of /. with a hint of a reading comprehension problem:

His device takes input data and stores it into a circular buffer for processing. Once the incoming data fills to the end of the buffer, data then starts getting written to the beginning of the buffer. This is done because there is no way for data to be processed instantaneously.

If the above can be constituded as recording, then consider these:

- Digital cameras (including ones in cell phones) are always accepting input from the lens, the only difference when they are off is that data MAY not be written into memory, and if data is being written into memory, it may not necessarily be processed and saved for any meaningful duration. So then, simply carrying a powered cell phone with a digital camera could constitute as a violation of a no recording policy.

- The optic nerve in your eyes takes information from your retina as electrical signals and delivers it to your brain for processing. So then, simply having eyes could constite as a violation of a no recording policy. Unless of course, you really truly believe that your brain processes the information from the nerve instantaneously with no possibility of storing it. If you truly believe in the latter, I will have to mock you before I go on my merry way.

rest of the story? by phasmatid · 2012-07-19 08:25 · Score: 1

Here's another way to look at it: imagine that you, owner of a business, establish a no-photography policy in accordance with the laws of your country. You clearly post signs explaining this policy to inform customers in the official language of your country. A person enters your business and uses an unusual device that appears to be a camera, pointing it at employees, customers and all around your business. You explain to him the policy, ask him to stop using the device. He confirms that it's a camera, then hands you a piece of paper written in a foreign language and refuses to stop using it, in fact filming you while you talk to him. I am no expert in the laws of France, but, having worked as a bouncer, I would be surprised if there is not legal justification for attempting to stop him from filming. Almost certainly the business owner has the right to refuse further service, at which point he is trespassing and can be physically removed. That being said, not a positive step for customer relations.

Re:sure - it's publicity, but it's a stunt for Man by Ash-Fox · 2012-07-19 08:27 · Score: 1

cite for witnessing his behavior? First person reference - years ago at MIT I got the joy of experiencing him on a regular basis. It was never a pleasant experience, and from the people I spoke with, I was not alone in my assessment

I'm afraid the fact you won't even reveal simple details like your name, never mind being able to locate other published citations on this person being obnoxious makes it hard to just accept at face^H^H^H^Hno-face value.

--
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.

jings, crivens & helpmaboab the noo by Hognoxious · 2012-07-19 08:48 · Score: 1

Do you watch Newsnight and The Review Show, hosted by Kirrasty Worreck?

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

Attention Whore by ameoba · 2012-07-19 09:20 · Score: 1

Mann's a fucking attention whore. Period.

This isn't evidence of some rampant campaign against the disabled, it's one guy getting hassled at one store out of over thirty three thousand, the majority of which are fucking franchises. Even from his own incredibly slanted report, he did nothing to deescalate the situation when some ignorant dumbfucks took issue with his gear. Yeah, what happened to him was bullshit, but to try calling out the entire corporation because a few minimum wage monkeys at a single store fucked up is ridiculous.

--
my sig's at the bottom of the page.

Re:Do they really show st ripping up his doc note? by hkmwbz · 2012-07-19 11:14 · Score: 1

I don't hate McD. In fact, I don't blame McD for this incident at all. I would only blame the people who actually did something wrong. And I'll happily eat at McD in the future.

And with that out of the way, let me tell you that you are an idiot. You're going bananas over people pointing out that they tore up a piece of paper, and trying to convince people that it probably wasn't a doctor's note.

Take a break. You are going insane.

--
Clever signature text goes here.

Dude, GET A LIFE. by Frosty+Piss · 2012-07-19 12:48 · Score: 1

Dude, NO ONE cares. At least, no one that counts to Micky D's. In other words, GET A LIFE.

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.

The assumption of CCTV by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-19 18:14 · Score: 0

I find it slightly disturbing that so many commenters assume that there is CCTV footage available. Why would there be? Where I live it is almost impossible to get permission to put up surveillance cameras in restaurants, cafés and bars, and rightly so in my opinion. And even if there are cameras, you need a second permit to be allowed to record, as opposed to just watch live.

Done and done by Captain.Abrecan · 2012-07-20 00:34 · Score: 1

We already know what will come of this: people will learn, who haven't already, that the French are assholes. They would do this to a person with prescription eyeglasses in a veteran's uniform if they felt like it.

Paris by Psychophrenes · 2012-07-20 01:17 · Score: 1

I don't know what the fuss is all about, that's just the way waiters treat customers in Paris...
Nothing to see here, move along!
(And before anyone attacks me for my "anti-french" comment, please note that I am French and I do leave in Paris. Or close enough for my taste, at least...)

Charlie Todd's Next Great Project by BobSteinVisiBone · 2012-07-20 04:49 · Score: 1

ImprovEverywhere needs to organize a mob of camera-wielding agents. The Parisian restaurant of late infamy would be ideal of course, but honestly, any old McDonalds would do. If they used solid state devices with stroboscopic illumination, then it would be a

... wait for it ...

Flash mob flashing on flash with flash.

--
Bob Stein, http://bobste.in

Recording Policy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-20 04:59 · Score: 0

If tha policy is true, that means that nowan can go in with a cell phone with camera because we could get kick out?

McDs Food poisoning in UK by stoatwblr · 2012-07-20 06:42 · Score: 1

Maccy Ds has had to pay out multiple $large_sums to customers with food poisoning over the years and in at least one case a customer died. The culprit? Franchising McD cooking times are precisely calculated to ensure the food is safe. Franchisees in several of busy London branches during the 1980/90s were cutting corners to speed things up and one of the corners cut was cooking times (others included improper freezer temps, selling cooked food past its drop dead time and taking things out of the freezer then letting them sit around too long before cooking.) Unsurprisingly, most of the branches in question are now directly owned by McDonalds UK.

assult by peawormsworth · 2012-07-20 07:24 · Score: 1

Never forget that McDonalds employees did tear up a note and Mann said this note was from a doctor. Unless McDonalds answers to this action, they are guilty in my book. Please sue McDonalds Mr.Mann!!

reverse typo by zippthorne · 2012-07-20 16:08 · Score: 1

My finger remembers hitting the key, so I'm going to go with "autocorrect" over typo.

The point, though, is that I'm very suspicious of McDonald's hiring a PR firm to let them do some marketing scumbaggery. Especially as many articles specifically went out of their way to mention both McDonald's and the fact that they banned it from their restaurants.

--
Can you be Even More Awesome?!

of course, there is the question... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 09:56 · Score: 0

...what on earth was he doing eating in MacDonald's when in Paris, for heaven's sake? Who can trust someone who would make such a basic error of judgment?

Slashdot Mirror

McDonald's Denies Prof's Claim Staff Attacked Him For Wearing Digital Glasses

627 comments