Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

eyetap.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 470 posts

Re: Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

#381

Post by nakkiel »

spitx wrote: post #317
nakkiel wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's only one thing I'm sure of. Visitors coming to France certainly don't visit to meet your likes.

What I find elusive is this polite society's fevered need to stomp down any finger-pointing in the direction of certain sections of society. If one were to take a look at their irrational phobia of discussion concerning these sensitive topics it would appear that this brand of furiousness at the very mention of something disagreeable is nothing but an outward veneer to fend off further pointed & valid accusations. It…

Essentially you are admitting that you are racist and tired of being dismissed as such. You mention that our points are baseless and ignore tangible facts (which you have by the way failed to provide) and I'd like to bring to your attention that this is basically what racists are commonly accused of.

I would like you to understand that when in doubt and facing two choices one should always prefer what favours human beings over any sort of ideology or other minor consideration; no matter the price (I mean it this way).

But I find your way of reversing things funny and will dismiss you as being a troll and wish you good luck on your road. It's certainly a difficult one.

Re: Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

#382

Post by mkr-hn »

thenomad wrote: post #376
vixen99 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also no place for gratuitously throwing around words like fuck and dick. Try extending your vocabulary.

What does the size of one's vocabulary have to do with whether you use expletives? Sorry, I know this is off-topic, but I've never really understood the "only uneducated people use swearwords" argument.

Some educated people reel in horror at the thought that they aren't all that different from normal people aside from the number of things they've crammed into their head.

Re: Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

#383

Post by Natsu »

chris_wot wrote: post #248
waffle_ss wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There must be something in the water there because we had eggs thrown at us from an upper floor apartment walking down some sidewalk in Paris (I guess our speaking English to one another was offensive?). We always spoke French when interacting with francophones. Visiting the more rural places in France was pleasant though, and the people were more friendly.

Parisians are famed for their rudeness. Whether that is fair I cannot judge, when I went there we didn't seem to have any problems!

Except for one rude shopkeeper, everyone I met in France was nice.

Re: Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

#384

Post by pyre »

nakkiel wrote: post #233
pyre wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of Moroccans in Paris, from what I understand. Wasn't that what those riots a few years back were about? The Moroccans immigrating but not integrating?

Well, the more people wonder whether French of Moroccan extraction really are French or Moroccan, the less French they are. I'm French, of no extraction. Please stop. French of Moroccan extraction are French. Regarding the riots, that's also not relevant to the discussion but because you ask, those riots where the results of 40 years of bad policies, social rejection and latent racism.

  > the more people wonder whether French of Moroccan
  > extraction really are French or Moroccan, the less
  > French they are
I'm not saying that it's right to try and exclude them. It's just as stupid as the people in American that want to shutdown immigration to 'dirty foreigners' (forgetting that their ancestors were 'dirty foreigners'). Someone that was originally from Morocco shouldn't be consider 'less French' than someone whose ancestors have been in France for generations, but you can't force this to happen by pretending that people have no past (i.e. country of origin).

Maybe the term 'French-Moroccan' has bad cultural connotations in France that you're trying to get rid of by burying the term, but the term itself, or the facts surrounding it are not inherently bad. If someone is "Chinese-American" or "Japanese-Canadian" or "Mexican-American", the term doesn't make them any less American/Canadian.

  > Regarding the riots, that's also not relevant to the
  > discussion but because you ask, those riots where the
  > results of 40 years of bad policies, social rejection
  > and latent racism.
I only bring up the riots with respect to where I got the information that Paris has a large French-Moroccan population.

Re: Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

#385

Post by randallsquared »

rmc wrote: post #371
randallsquared wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a US person, and on a recent trip in the US South took photos inside a (public) bathroom on more than one occasion, when I saw something entertaining. Not photos of people, of course, but there were other people in the bathroom on both occasions, and no one seemed shocked or worried. I'm confused about how this aversion to cameras can possibly hold when nearly everyone is carrying one or more cameras at all times…

Not photos of people, of course Exactly, "not of people (in the bathroom)". Would you take photos of people in a bathroom. If you're male, would you take photos of men at the urinal? Does everyone in Europe avoid using their smartphone except in the privacy of their own home? No of course not.

If you're male, would you take photos of men at the urinal?

I am male, and no, that would seem weird to me. On the other hand, I wouldn't feel that I could legitimately assault someone who was.

No of course [people don't avoid using smartphones in public]

You say "of course", but I can't figure out how universal cameras are consistent with a culture that fears cameras in public.

If a dozen people on a subway car are using smartphones (and therefore could be taking video or photos right now), how do others react?

Does the answer change when a dozen people are wearing Google Glass?

Also, why do people seem dismissive of questions like these? :)

Re: Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

#386

Post by betawolf33 »

antoinevg wrote: post #291
scoot wrote: post #132

"when the computer is damaged, e.g. by falling and hitting the ground (or by a physical assault), buffered pictures for processing remain in its memory, and are not overwritten with new ones" This sounds bogus. The stills presented in the post suggests they were taken by design rather than some random stills "remaining in memory" after the alleged assault. There are frames from earlier in his McDonald's visit that it…

What he is trying to explain is that he is NOT making a permanent video record of everything he sees. Any computer vision system is going to have an image buffer. When you break the system it's going to stop overwriting that buffer with new images. If he had been left alone the images on his blog would have been overwritten with new images. Does it make more sense to you now?

Consider how long ago these events are in his narrative. He gives a still of 'Possible Witness 1' who he met and talked with as he entered the store. Presume that that image is at the end of their conversation (as it will have been pretty long).

He then describes going to the counter and ordering food. That is to say, his daughter ordered food in French. That's a minute or two of activity, at the least.

Then he goes and sits down to eat his food. Assuming really prompt service and that he was attacked almost as soon as possible in the narrative, that's at least another half-minute to take a seat and unwrap your sandwich.

There are then a series of images and a description of him trying to reason with several people who 'deliberated on [his documentation] for some time' before pushing him out. That, to me, is at least five minutes of confrontation.

I can't see why his image buffer would be over seven minutes long.

Re: Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

#387

Post by GFischer »

pyre wrote: post #384
nakkiel wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the more people wonder whether French of Moroccan extraction really are French or Moroccan, the less French they are. I'm French, of no extraction. Please stop. French of Moroccan extraction are French. Regarding the riots, that's also not relevant to the discussion but because you ask, those riots where the results of 40 years of bad policies, social rejection and latent racism.

> the more people wonder whether French of Moroccan > extraction really are French or Moroccan, the less > French they are I'm not saying that it's right to try and exclude them. It's just as stupid as the people in American that want to shutdown immigration to 'dirty foreigners' (forgetting that their ancestors were 'dirty foreigners'). Someone that was originally from Morocco shouldn't be consider 'less French' tha…

The "country of origin" is very debatable. I consider myself Uruguayan because I was born here, but my great-grandparents were German. However, someone in Tuscany was asked, and he said "my family has only been here for four centuries". Should someone like Zidane be considered French, or "French of Algerian extraction"?

By the tuscanian's perspective, there are no Americans, only "American of Irish extraction" and so on, while over here we all consider ourselves Uruguayans.

Something you don't understand is that those terms ("Chinese-American") are an US cultural thing.

Many of my fellow countrymen (I'm from Uruguay) are extremely shocked when they go to the U.S. ... we've learned about at most 3 races, and you people have 16 !!! One of my teachers likes an anecdote where, when filling a form at San Diego University, he had to ask the clerk what "race" he was - the clerk decided he was "Hispanic", and then there was a sub-category "White Hispanic" or "Black Hispanic". However, he's descendant from Spaniards and probably the exact same racial composition as racists from California that despise "hispanics" (there was a genocide here in Uruguay and we don't have native blood, we're all descendants of spaniards, italians and other european countries, plus some descendants of slaves).

Re: Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

#388

Post by rmc »

randallsquared wrote: post #385
rmc wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not photos of people, of course Exactly, "not of people (in the bathroom)". Would you take photos of people in a bathroom. If you're male, would you take photos of men at the urinal? Does everyone in Europe avoid using their smartphone except in the privacy of their own home? No of course not.

If you're male, would you take photos of men at the urinal? I am male, and no, that would seem weird to me. On the other hand, I wouldn't feel that I could legitimately assault someone who was. No of course [people don't avoid using smartphones in public] You say "of course", but I can't figure out how universal cameras are consistent with a culture that fears cameras in public. If a dozen people on a subway car are…

When you're using a smartphone, you're usually pointing it towards the ground / 45° angle. You're not in a position to take good photographs of people. So others know you're not taking photos.

Re: Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

#389

Post by Zenst »

grimboy wrote: post #156
Zenst wrote: post #18

Complain to the Olympic board as McDonalds are a sponsor of the Olympics and the Para-Olympics. In parallel write/email to the newspapers etc. Also talk to your embassy who can advise how to proceed in other ways. You have a vision problem and need a visual aid to combat that disability. McDonalds not only commited assualt but also did it systematicaly and premeditated way indicating they are not a suitable sponsor f…

Drifitng off topic, but the Paralympics are already sponsored by ATOS, the company the UK government has put in charge of taking social security from the genuinely disabled. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/may/21/paralympic-games...

Indeed and ATOS IT recently were crying they needed more pay and were shouting about it. Now if they were told there appeal for more money would take at least a year to be heard and in the meantime that they would not get paid anything until that appeal for more money. Then that would of been karma and a fair approach.

Ironicly I know of three people who attended a ATOS medical. One had cancer (turned out to be terminal), one had MS and the other had phsical injury including 2 fingers missing. They were all deemed fit for work apart from the one who could clearly not hold a long-bow due to the missing fingers, least thats the funny take on it. Do wonder if the French are still pissed that we let so called pesants goto war with longbow's and is the origins of the two finger jesture in the UK as a sign to the French we can still use the long bow. Those captured by the French would have there bow fingers cut off and thus a display of those two fingers was born as a in your face gesture towards the French.

Back onto the offtopic subject you may be intersted to look up how many of those deemed fit for work have died shortly after there income was cut off. If it was in any other country it would be called genocide etc.

This brings us nicely back on-topic in saying that descrimination of disabled people in any shape or form is more of a issue than race descrimination thesedays. If people are asked about Hitler and World War II and gas chambers then they go on about the victimised Jewish people and how bad it was for them (and it was a bad thing). Nobody mentions how disabled people were also given the same treatment. Church's, many still accepted forms of estabilshments have and some still do descriminate against disabeled people. Even hospitals. This I have witnessed many times personaly and it is utterly disgusting. There is one small plus side though. That is you can more easily identify genuine people from those who operate such double-standards and in that can avoid them.

ATOS is mearly a knife edge away from being audited at a level that will embarass and shame them. McDonalds are no better but sadly don't cash in on Goverment contracts so in that are sadly immune to alot of bad PR, historicaly they have done some major crimes.

Post reply on HN