Live data from Hacker News

Physical assault by McDonald's for wearing Digital Eye Glass

eyetap.org

181–190 of 470 posts

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

#181
post #26

No one at an ordinary McDonald's would even notice such a device. Ergo this was not an ordinary McDonald's, but one with security people looking for cameras. Why would a McDonald's have security people looking for cameras? Possibly because it was a mafia front. If you wanted to launder money, a fast food restaurant in a popular location would be a good place to do it. The way the employees behaved is consistent with…

I took this picture in a Paris McDonalds about 2 weeks ago (near the Hotel de Ville, not the Champs Elysees location): http://cl.ly/image/1g1b3Q0j152V

Notice that the employee is covering her face. She yelled at me after I took the pic - "you can't take pictures here!". Why was she upset? Well in my case the girl covering her face in the pic was very pretty, I took it that she might be a fashion model or aspiring actress. When I ordered her co-worker was very pretty as well and was wearing what was obviously a wig.

Just a hunch, but the Paris McDonalds might offer their employees protection against cameras from tourists to protect the identity of their employees.

Edit: also found this article, this case does not seem to correlate with my hunch - motivated by menus / prices: http://www.pixiq.com/article/woman-claims-she-was-assaulted-...

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

#182
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that fails Ockham's razor. I worked for Steve Mann about 15 years ago. Calling him the father of wearable computing is an understatement -- he was the father before it was even possible to create, and yet managed to make it happen essentially on his own a decade or more before it should have existed -- the JFK Apollo of wearables out of his own pocket. However, he is probably not the least suspicious person w…

The incident at Logan airport was big news in Boston in 2007. It involved an MIT undergraduate wearing a piece of art on the front of her shirt that consisted of a circuit board and LED attached to a battery. It freaked out some airport staff, and the Massachusetts State Police came very close to shooting her: http://tech.mit.edu/V127/N40/simpson.html

Also - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Boston_bomb_scare

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

#183
post #26

No one at an ordinary McDonald's would even notice such a device. Ergo this was not an ordinary McDonald's, but one with security people looking for cameras. Why would a McDonald's have security people looking for cameras? Possibly because it was a mafia front. If you wanted to launder money, a fast food restaurant in a popular location would be a good place to do it. The way the employees behaved is consistent with…

I dont' think the average Micky D's makes enough dough for that.

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

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Christ, that's some quick victim-blaming. There's no justification for trying to take away someone's property, even if it's a camera in your business. Physically assaulting someone over a camera is even worse. All attempts to excuse this sort of behavior immediately fall flat given that "possible witness 1" was given documentation of the device and apparently accepted it, and the perpetrator was also given the docume…

I am not prejudiced at all. It's common sense. Also, why would I automatically have empathy for him when I don't know the whole story. What if he was a complete jerk? You don't know this and I certainly don't either so let's not take sides unless and until the facts are known. If he was, in fact, assaulted without any provocation whatsoever it was a criminal act that the law should deal with in the strongest possible…

He said he did go to the police and they did in fact ignore him.

I feel empathy for him because I find it very hard to believe that he said or did anything that would warrant physical assault. Indeed, there is nothing that justifies physical assault outside of self defence or temporary insanity.

Do you really think that a quirky famous academic out for a meal with his daughter attacked these employees? Seriously? Because that's the only way you can reasonably side with the McDonalds employees here.

Speaking about common sense, I think it's pretty clear that you don't go ripping up formal documentation and hiding your identity badge if you really think you are acting in the right. That's some common sense that transcends most cultural boundaries.

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

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find it really hard to believe that Steve Mann would have some kind of medical condition that would lead a normal Dr. to prescribe that Steve Mann wears the computer vision glasses that Steve Mann invented. Not necessarily as huge a coincidence as you seem to think. If Steve Mann has a medical condition that is not easily rectified by existing technology, and assuming Steve Mann is reasonably intelligent, then it…

True, but the crux of the matter is that no doctor would prescribe such a device.

Maybe, maybe not (I'm not a doctor and don't want to speculate) but they would absolutely write a letter to document/certify a visual disability and describe potential accommodations that might be used.

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

#186
post #52
post #26

No one at an ordinary McDonald's would even notice such a device. Ergo this was not an ordinary McDonald's, but one with security people looking for cameras. Why would a McDonald's have security people looking for cameras? Possibly because it was a mafia front. If you wanted to launder money, a fast food restaurant in a popular location would be a good place to do it. The way the employees behaved is consistent with…

But why would the Mafia care if you took photos? Money laundering would happen behind the scenes, in the accountants office. Definitely agree that something is shady though. Not sure what, but this reminds me of a recent article on 'The Big Mac' index, which is used as an alternative measure of inflation. Perhaps McDonald's is under orders by the French government to prevent people from taking photos of their menus (…

France's McDonald's operates like an entirely different restaurant [1].

[1] http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/01/24/145698222/why-mc...

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

#187
The link in the submitted article, referring to an earlier incident in which a cell phone camera caused a physical confrontation with a McDonald's customer in France,

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505125_162-49140976/mcdonalds-me...

is probably important context here. It appears that there is some systematic misunderstanding among the company managers about how to train their employees to avoid overreacting to cameras in the store.

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

#188
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that fails Ockham's razor. I worked for Steve Mann about 15 years ago. Calling him the father of wearable computing is an understatement -- he was the father before it was even possible to create, and yet managed to make it happen essentially on his own a decade or more before it should have existed -- the JFK Apollo of wearables out of his own pocket. However, he is probably not the least suspicious person w…

The incident at Logan airport was big news in Boston in 2007. It involved an MIT undergraduate wearing a piece of art on the front of her shirt that consisted of a circuit board and LED attached to a battery. It freaked out some airport staff, and the Massachusetts State Police came very close to shooting her: http://tech.mit.edu/V127/N40/simpson.html

Different incident from the Steve Mann airport incident. I actually think the Star Simpson incident was caused by her bring really clueless about how paranoid airport security are, getting a dumb guy scared, and then being as rude to security as many civil libertarians can be. (Star is also a friend of mine, and I think she is a lot less likely to almost get killed by security now too :)

I don't understand the benefit to ever being anything but polite to suthority, even while resisting (legally or beyond legally, depending on how important the issue is to you). I "opt out" of rapescans all the time, and am polite, and the whole interaction goes fairly well. (I think it is security theater, but invasive pat downs aren't always inappropriate; just when there is not enough benefit. I'd draw that line as search incident to arrest based on RS and PC developed normally -- just being a passenger on a flight doesn't make you all that much more likely to be a terrorist). Protest in court, in congress, on the Internet, and during the incident, but don't be threatening or rude.

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

#190

Complete aside - Comment about posted pictures from Digital Eye Glass I noticed from his posted pictures (labelled as Possible Witness 2) http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RnoG7dHRDjY/UASnGzPFkSI/AAAAAAAAAD... There's some nasty spherical lensing effects there. I'm noticing that from the signboard on the right middle side. The menuboard should be flat across, with perhaps a deviation of where the signage isnt exactly flush t…

This could be intentional, as it may increase his peripheral vision through the Eye Glass.
Post reply on HN