Slashdot Mirror
McDonald's Denies Prof's Claim Staff Attacked Him For Wearing Digital Glasses
Sparrowvsrevolution writes "In an update to a story posted on Slashdot earlier this week, McDonald's has responded to the claims of Steve Mann, a University of Toronto professor and augmented reality pioneer who says McDonald's staff in Paris assaulted him tried to pull off a computer eyepiece he's worn for decades, then threw him out of the restaurant. McDonald's confirms that Mann was ejected from the premises, but denies that there was a 'physical altercation' with staff or that they destroyed any of his property. That last claim is especially dubious, since Mann has posted photos taken from his eyepiece that show McDonald's staff ripping up a doctor's note that he showed them to explain his need to wear the device. The company still hasn't explained why Mann was removed from the restaurant, but Mann has speculated that it has a policy against recording."
release the security cams!
And looks like someone failed hamburger college!
Ok, McD's... let's see the security footage.
You're in the court of public opinion and it ain't lookin' good.
Terminator or some other evil cyborg from the future.
...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.
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.
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.
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
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."
I would eat there. But only so I could order a 'royale with cheese'
If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
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.
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.
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."
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?
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.
No sign legalizes physical assault.
Great Intellect...
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.
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.
av
--
o
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.
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."
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.
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
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".
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.
how often do you really use, say, "Eurasian"?
Maine biggerts use it a lot when they see the mail ohdah brides they wah shipped.
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 */
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)
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.