Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:I will never understand (Score 1) 73

by jklovanc (#49553981) Attached to: Vizio, Destroyer of Patent Trolls

McDonalds claims their customers like the coffee at a higher temp (175-180) since they often commute and don't drink it for a while.

I guess you don't commute either. Most people who get coffee at a drive through start drinking it immediately.
From the article;

Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.
Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee.

That is an admission of guilt and recklessness by McDonald's,
They finally changed their policy

Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the local Albuquerque McDonalds had dropped to 158 degrees fahrenheit.

Similarly, I also don't blame knives for being "too sharp" when I drop one on my foot ...

You miss the point that a sharp knife will not cause damage if used correctly. Coffee at 180 degrees would burn the mouth of consumed.

This might be one of the reasons that Tim Horton's actually puts in the cream and sugar so you don't have to on the car.

Comment: Re:I will never understand (Score 1) 73

by jklovanc (#49553909) Attached to: Vizio, Destroyer of Patent Trolls

You are saying even if they felt like they didn't do anything wrong,

There is the rub. They knew they were doing something wrong and did it anyway. They knew they were brewing coffee too hot as they had been warned several times before. They brew hotter so more flavour is extracted and less ground coffee needs to be used. One of the reasons the award was so bit gas that they put a few dollars profit above customer safety. Serving coffe at a temperature that would burn the inside of the mouth when it is designed to be consumed immediately is what got them into trouble.

But on the other hand I (and most people) brew coffee at > 180 degrees at home every day and manage not to soak cotton sweatpants with it to cook our skin for 30 seconds.

I bet that you cool the coffee with milk, as she was trying to do, or wait until you drink it. Coffee that hot would burn your mouth.

Which I have to say, I don't pity them much for. But I also don't think the lawsuit made much sense.

Read a few more facts and you will see that justice was served.

Comment: Re:Human Shield? (Score 1) 133

by jklovanc (#49551485) Attached to: Pirate Bay Blockade Censors CloudFlare Customers

Therefore disseminating information about where you can download something is speech.

I agree that disseminating information is protected speech. I do not agree that disseminating the copy written property of someone else is protected speech.

The moment you start deciding that one thing is speech and another isn't, regardless of your personal views on the merits of that speech, you begin running headlong towards despotism.

Actually you begin running headlong toward a civil society. Hate speech, incite to riot, libel, slander, etc are not protected speech. These types of speech have been found to be detrimental to civil society and have been made illegal in most places. Just because something is auditory in nature does not make it protected speech.

Comment: Re:Human Shield? (Score 1) 133

by jklovanc (#49551467) Attached to: Pirate Bay Blockade Censors CloudFlare Customers

Thus, as you can see, by allowing a caching-only service to be the arbiter for copyright law rather than requiring the aggrieved party to take legal action against the original site, you're just a hair's breadth away from throwing all free speech under the bus.

There are a few thing wrong wit this statement.
1. The court who handed down the injunction is the arbiter for copyright law.
2. The cache-only service is the means of enforcing the injunction.
3. If you go to the other end of the spectrum and follow the lowest level of law the copyright is dead on the internet.
4. The cache only service could segregate the different sources to different IPs so different countries could enforce their own laws by blocking selected content.

Comment: Re:Human Shield? (Score 1) 133

by jklovanc (#49550043) Attached to: Pirate Bay Blockade Censors CloudFlare Customers

Why is protecting that artists' works more important than the protection of free speech?

I never said that. All I said is that they are very different and setting up a scenario so that infringing and non-infringing content is served from the same IP may be contrived.

Cloudflare could serve from different IPs if they wanted to but don't. That's what I mean by "human shield". Shield infringing material with non-infringing material. That is much the same as shielding combatants with non-combatants.

Comment: Re:Don't follw the rules don't get paid. (Score 1) 143

Then there is the alternate scenario.
1. Find bug.
2. Report to Groupon.
3. Publish on group just long enough to get noticed and replicated.
4. Garner publicity for finding bug.
5. Groupon deny bounty
6. Garner more publicity from controversy.

It might not be as innocent as they make it out to be. For some the notoriety is more important than the money.

Comment: Re:Don't follw the rules don't get paid. (Score 1) 143

by jklovanc (#49542213) Attached to: Groupon Refuses To Pay Security Expert Who Found Serious XSS Site Bugs

Fair enough, but what about the other 30 or so bugs he reported?

By not following the rules he is disqualified from the program no matter how many bugs he submitted.

Next time someone finds a bug that effects Groupon what incentive do they have to report it to Groupon?

The same as before and they might actually follow the rules and get paid.

Comment: Re:Missing data point. (Score 2) 333

by jklovanc (#49542197) Attached to: Median Age At Google Is 29, Says Age Discrimination Lawsuit

I have a feeling that plenty of people on here will upmod defenders of google, and perhaps age discrimination in general.

I am not defending Google or age discrimination. I am just saying that an industry average is a poor indicator of discrimination in a single company. The telling number is the difference, if any, between the ages of people who applied and that of people who were hired.

BTW, I am over 50 and therefore not a youngun.

A rolling disk gathers no MOS.