What may be the world's first cybernetic hate crime unfolds in French McDonald's

reply to post by XeroOne


I have read it and seen nothing to suggest that. Can you point it out for me?

Originally posted by Gauss


Crazy #. To me it seems like it was totally unprovoked, and if that's the case, those employees should be fired and sued. We have enough hate crime in this world without people starting to go after those with prosthetics, so we better make some warning examples of those who would go after people like Mann.

Reddit has apparently set up a page or whatever for it as well, and John Biggs on TechCrunch calls for a boycott of McDonalds. I got to say I agree with him.

io9.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Sue the McDonalds employees...for what? You might get a sweet futon and some pizza box couches out of them! All kidding aside, these jokers need to be prosecuted and charged with assault. Good thing I stopepd eating McDonalds 3 years ago! As far as my health goes, this was one of the best choices I've ever made. That food is horrible and taste like garbage. if you think otherwise, you need to get out more and experience food made with REAL ingridients.

How is this a hate crime?

reply to post by PsykoOps


Gordon Bennet!!! It's been pointed out like 12 times on this thread. You cannot be that dense, surely?

On the previous page, Ericthenewbie gave an example of one of the relevant laws passed by the European Union, and cites a couple of extracts from Mann's own blog regarding the purpose of his camera device. The stated purpose of Mann's work ('sousveillance' and 'equiveillance') bring it into conflict with European computer and privacy laws, and therefore Mann might well have been acting illegally.

Several pages back, you'll find links to Mann's blog.

Originally posted by capone1
How is this a hate crime?

Because there are organizations in this world, some overt, and some secret, that construct themselves from a platform of fighting for a cause. If that cause falters, or ceases to exist, they have to create the problems out of thin air so their society still matters.

The oldest example (story) of this is how certain Angels, unimpressed by man, and convinced they could do no good in the eyes of the Perfect God, set about to undermining humanity regardless if humanity itself was pure on it's own. Even God did this in the bible with Job. Everything was fine, but God created a problem and set about the ruination of the pinnacle of his creation. Satan himself stood at his side coercing him, to prove that even God himself is not immune to this. The book of Job isn't about Job, it's about Satan showing that he could tempt God, and prove that even God will create problems when everything is perfect, just so he could continue to prove his point.

The Catholic church is famous for this, they need to keep people in the suffering they claim to save them from, in order to continue proving their point and hold their throne. Some say the Illuminati, an organization once known for challenging oppression in the name of human progress, now stoops so low as to keep people in abject misery and suppression, to "prove" that humanity sucks and needs to be ruled.

Civil Rights groups do this. Special interests groups do it.

I could go on, do we see a pattern here.

Aside from all the other points I've made in this thread that most seem to be ignoring when making their post in favor of Mr Mann and this situation, Let me try to make this as obvious as possible;

Problem-Reaction-Solution

Problem-Reaction-Solution is defined as the strategy of creating a crisis (the problem), waiting for a call for action to resolve the crisis (the reaction), then taking action (the solution), supposedly in response, which actually furthers a hidden agenda, usually gaining power.

Problem = supposed innocent person attacked by unruly individuals without cause, i.e Mann by McDonalds employees

Reaction = public opinion swayed for increased safety and new laws or technology to prevent the "problem" from happening again. i.e OMG how could this happen, lock'em up, Mann was only trying to help blind people.

Solution = diminish existing privacy laws and sell everyone Eye Tap glasses.

Chaching!

Go to youtube, search in "mcdonalds" and there will be like a ridiculous amount of in-store videos, mostly of kids fooling around or whatever. And then there's the frightening Japanese commercials...

Point is, this was never a problem and now it suddenly is. There will come a day when this is a default feature in our eyes like owning a cellphone. This will without a doubt not be illegal due to the fact that facebook is legal. It helps the CIA and other investigative organizations track down crimes even before it happens. Do you think this golden opportunity would be ignored? Heck no. Whether you like it or not, these devices are going to be popular one day and we'll be living in a multidimensional world, beyond 3D.

reply to post by XeroOne


Funny thing. I live in EU. We have no such laws here.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by XeroOne

 

Funny thing. I live in EU. We have no such laws here.

Yes we do.

Data Protection Directive

Under EU law, personal data can only be gathered legally under strict conditions, for a legitimate purpose. Furthermore, persons or organisations which collect and manage your personal information must protect it from misuse and must respect certain rights of the data owners which are guaranteed by EU law.
European Commission's statement

Public Video Surveillance in View of the European Privacy Protection Directive and German Privacy Protection Law

Think I'll drop Section 2 of European Directive 95/46/EC in here as well:
(2) Whereas data-processing systems are designed to serve man; whereas they must, whatever the nationality or residence of natural persons, respect their fundamental rights and freedoms, notably the right to privacy, and contribute to economic and social progress, trade expansion and the well-being of individuals;

Which is relevant to Section 14:
(14) Whereas, given the importance of the developments under way, in the framework of the information society, of the techniques used to capture, transmit, manipulate, record, store or communicate sound and image data relating to natural persons, this Directive should be applicable to processing involving such data;

and Section 30:
(30) Whereas, in order to be lawful, the processing of personal data must in addition be carried out with the consent of the data subject or be necessary for the conclusion or performance of a contract binding on the data subject, or as a legal requirement, or for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority, or in the legitimate interests of a natural or legal person, provided that the interests or the rights and freedoms of the data subject are not overriding;

Checkmate.

reply to post by XeroOne

Some examples of "personal data" are: address, credit card number, bank statements, criminal record, etc

Nothing there about video / photography. I know for a fact that when I go do street shooting I'm not required to keep any register or follow any data protection laws. I'm a photographer by profession btw.
You can paste garbage from the net all day long. I know what the law says.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by XeroOne

 

Some examples of "personal data" are: address, credit card number, bank statements, criminal record, etc

Nothing there about video / photography. I know for a fact that when I go do street shooting I'm not required to keep any register or follow any data protection laws. I'm a photographer by profession btw.
You can paste garbage from the net all day long. I know what the law says.

It says 'Some examples of'. And Mann wasn't engaging in conventional street photography, but by his own admission, a surveillance-related activity. I didn't link to any 'garbage from the net', but the European Commission's own site, and and academic source. I also referred to Mann's own site as well.

reply to post by Gauss


If the incident described happened exactly as Mann claims I would have to agree that the action taken by the employees are wrong.

However, I have my doubts that what he describes in his blog is the 100% God Honest Truth. There are stories all over the internet on this incident by many different outlets. From the mega-corporation to the lone blogger. For instance, in one of these versions of the truth, the employees asked Mann to leave when he entered the public restroom of the store. I can understand that. McDonalds(The corporate entity) would be inviting lawsuits if they let customers with recording equipment into a restroom. This restroom incident is one example of information that he left out of his blog...perhaps conveniently so.

I will reserve judgement until there are more facts available.