Starbucks Ditches Square, Will Cease Accepting Wallet Mobile Payments In Coming Months


The two-year long partnership between Starbucks and mobile payment system Square is coming to an end, as the coffee company had decided to ditch the mobile payment company’s upcoming new system in favor of its own mobile ordering solution.

ReadWrite reports the end of the partnership was revealed when Square sent an email to users this week announcing plans to retire its current Wallet app, which is used at Starbucks.


Square says Wallet will be replaced by Square Order which will include a new feature called Tabs. That key feature will allow users to check into a store and pay by simply announcing their name to a cashier.


While the feature might sound perfect for a busy coffee shop, officials with Starbucks say it won’t be an option for customers.


“Starbucks is not adopting Square Order in our stores,” Maggie Jantzen, a spokesperson for Starbucks tells ReadWrite. “We opted to build our own mobile ordering solution, leveraging our own mobile app and world-class loyalty program.”


Starbucks’ mobile app with payment options has been in the works for several months and is currently being tested in the company’s Portland, OR stores, ReadWrite reports.


Back in 2012, Starbucks and Square announced a partnership that allowed customers to use Wallet at the shops. While the older version of Wallet was pulled from Google and Apple App stores earlier this year, users could still use the system at Starbucks.


Officials with Square hint in their email to users that a full retirement of Wallet could be coming soon, at which time use of the mobile payment provider at Starbucks will officially cease.


Starbucks To Square: It’s Over [ReadWrite]




by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Tesla Launching Battery Swap Pilot ProgramFor Some Model S Owners Next Week


While many electric car owners love being gas-free, the time-consuming process of recharging a vehicle can be a bit of a setback. So to cut down on that lengthy process, Tesla says it’ll be starting a pilot program next week that will allow some drivers to swap out their battery packs in just a few minutes.

Building off technology Tesla showed off in the past, the company says in a blog post today that starting next week it’ll start inviting certain drivers the chance to swap their Model S car’s battery at a facility built just for that purpose in Harris Ranch, CA, across the street from its Tesla Supercharger station.


Swaps are appointment-only at first, and though Tesla said previously that the technology could mean a fresh battery in just 90 seconds, the process actually takes about three minutes right now, with hopes for a one-minute process in the future. Tesla says. That’s what the pilot program is for, to “test technology and assess demand,” the company writes.


Unlike the Superchargers, the battery swap isn’t free — each one will cost “slightly less than a full tank of gasoline for a premium sedan.”


This is all part of Tesla’s even larger battery plans that goes beyond cars and into the home, plans that could end up being a huge threat to electric companies.




by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Flickr Stops Selling Prints Of Photos Licensed For Free Use


Creative Commons licenses let people without expansive legal teams license their creative work for use in other creative projects: a piece of Creative Commons-licensed music could appear in a podcast or a video, for example, or a photo could be used to illustrate a blog post. The idea is to let people share their work and build on others’ creative work. Users of photo-sharing site Flickr were upset about the company’s sale of prints of their CC-licensed photos without giving them a cut of the proceeds.

In the Internet spirit of sharing, doing this is actually legal, but is seriously uncool. Now, Consumerist isn’t a totally disinterested party here: this site would look very dull without Flickr users granting us permission to use their photos, either through Creative Commons or by submitting their images to the Consumerist Flickr Pool. However, what we’re doing is creating a new article illustrated with the image, not re-selling the image without adding any value, in an environment where it’s impossible to click on the photographer’s name to learn more about them and see more of their work. While users have to opt in to make their work usable for commercial purposes, Flickr selling prints of their photos without asking for permission or offering them even a nominal cut of the proceeds was unacceptable.


In a public apology to all Flickr users, the vice-president of the company wrote:



Over the past few weeks, we’ve received a lot of feedback from the community and beyond — while some expressed their excitement about the new photography marketplace and the value it would bring, many felt that including Creative Commons-licensed work in this service wasn’t within the spirit of the Commons and our sharing community.


We hear and understand your concerns, and we always want to ensure that we’re acting within the spirit with which the community has contributed. Given the varied reactions, as a first step, we’ve decided to remove the pool of Creative Commons-licensed images from Flickr Wall Art, effective immediately. We’ll also be refunding all sales of Creative Commons-licensed images made to date through this service.



That’s nice, but will it be enough? Flickr users have stayed loyal to the service through years of benign neglect from parent company Yahoo, and here they’re upset about a blatant cash grab. While that makes an auspicious change, it makes many Flickr users wonder whether the company understands what the spirit of its own site is about. It’s also interesting that Flickr simply ended the Creative Commons-licensed photo program rather than having users opt in or arranging some kind of revenue sharing arrangement.


An Update on Flickr Wall Art [Flickr]

Flickr ends sale of prints uploaded under Creative Commons [CNET]




by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

CDC: Listeria Contaminated Pre-Packaged Caramel Apples Linked to Four Deaths, 28 Illnesses


The holidays are full of sweet treats and fresh-baked goods. But if your snacking plans included finishing off those prepackaged caramel apples from fall, you better come up with different plans. That’s because federal officials say the desserts may be the source of a multi-state listeria outbreak that has been linked to at least five deaths.

ABC News reports that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are warning consumers to avoid the caramel apples after at least 28 people in 10 states have been infected with Listeriosis due to Listeria monocytogenes – a bacteria that can cause life-threatening illness.


According to a notice from the CDC, investigators are working quickly to determine specific brands or types of commercially produced, prepackaged caramel apples that may be linked to illnesses and to identify the source of contamination.


Officials with the CDC say that of the five deaths, Listeriosis definitely contributed to at least four deaths.


The investigation into the contamination is ongoing, but out of an abundance of caution, the CDC warned all consumers today to avoid eating prepackaged caramel apples, including plain caramel apples as well as those containing nuts, sprinkles, chocolate, or other toppings, until more specific guidance can be provided.


In all, the outbreak has affected consumers ages 5 to 92 in all corners of the U.S. including Arizona, California, Minnesota, Missouri, New Mexico, North Carolina, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin.


CDC officials report that of the 28 people who have been infected, three were children between the ages of 5 and 15 who developed severe meningitis symptoms. Another nine cases involved pregnant women or a newborn infant.


Of the 18 sickened people interviewed by the CDC, 15 reported they ate prepackaged caramel apples before becoming ill.


Infectious disease experts tell ABC News that the number of people infected by Listeriosis will likely grow because of an incubation period ranging from three to 70 days.


ABC News reports that the outbreak was first reported by the Minnesota Department of Health, which found four people between the ages of 59 and 90 had been infected.


The Department reports that the patients had eaten caramel apples during the months of October and November and were all subsequently hospitalized. Two died from the infection.


The Minnesota patients reported purchasing the caramel apples from Cub Foods, Kwik Trip and Mike’s Discount Foods, which carried the Carnival and Kitchen Cravings brands of caramel apples, according to the Minnesota Department of Health.


While the seasonal apples are no longer available for sale, Minnesota Dept. of Health officials say they fear consumers may still have tainted apples in their possession.


Director of food safety and quality assurance for Kwik Trip stores, says the pre-packaged treats have not been available at the stores for several weeks and that the company is working with state and federal officials “to make sure public health is protected,” ABC News reports.


A spokesperson for H. Brooks and Company, which releases the Carnival brand caramel apples, says the company is aware of the issue and working with officials during the investigation.


Officials with Cub Foods and Mike’s Discount Foods did not return requests for comment. Contact information for the second caramel apple brand producer, Kitchen Cravings, could not immediately be found, ABC News reports.


Caramel Apples Linked to 4 Deaths In Multi-State Listeria Outbreak [ABC News]




by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Obama: Sony “Made A Mistake” Pulling ‘The Interview’ From Theaters

sonypictureshacksue The FBI announced today, and President Obama confirmed during a press conference, that North Korea is indeed behind the attack on Sony Pictures Entertainment. The President expressed his sympathy for Sony employees, but gave voice to what many in the United States are thinking: that hacks are inevitable, and in pulling their movie, Sony did the wrong thing.


The very first questioner at the press conference asked the President what a “proportional response” to the Sony hack would look like, and if he thought Sony did the right thing by pulling The Interview from theaters. The response was surprisingly honest.


“Sony is a corporation,” Obama began. “It suffered significant damage, there were threats against its employes. I am sympathetic to the concerns that they faced.”


“Having said that,” he continued, “Yes. I think they made a mistake.”


“In this interconnected, digital world,” he went on, “there are going to be opportunities for hackers to engage in cyber assaults both in the private sector and the public sector.” He added that the first order of business for both public and private entities is to “harden” their sites and prevent those attacks from taking place in the first place.


But, it seems, the President is a realist. “Even as we get better,” he continued, “the hackers are going to get better too. Some are going to be state actors. Some are going to be non-state actors. … All will be sophisticated,” and can do some real damage. But even though threats are inevitable and will always exist, Obama said, that can’t be a factor in choosing not to act:



We cannot have a society in which some dictator someplace can start imposing censorship in the United States. … Imagine what they start doing when they see a documentary, or news reports, that they don’t like. Or even worse, imagine if producers and distributors and others start engaging in self-censorship because they don’t want to offend the sensibilities of someone whose sensibilities probably need to be offended.


That’s not who we are. That’s not what America’s about.



The President contrasted Sony’s pulling the movie from theaters to other decisions to advance in the face of attack, like Boston continuing to host and run its annual marathon in 2014 after attacks at the finish line killed three and wounded hundreds last year.


“Again,” he continued, “I’m sympathetic that Sony is a private company that’s worried about liabilities. But I wish they had spoken to me first. I would have told them: do not get into a pattern in which you are intimidated by these kinds of criminal attacks.”


Obama also poked fun at the idea that actors James Franco and Seth Rogen, even in a pointedly satirical movie, could possibly be credible threats to the North Korean state.


The President also returned to the theme that since hack attacks are inevitable, American institutions — both public and private — desperately need to be better-prepared to handle them.


“We’ve been coordinating with the private sector,” he told reporters, “but a lot more needs to be done. We’re not even close to where we need to be.”


Obama twice emphasized the need for Congress to pass a bill in 2015 that “allows for the kind of information-sharing we need” to bridge public and private best practices and prevent more attacks from happening in the first place.


“If we don’t put in place the kind of architecture that can prevent these attacks from taking place, this isn’t just going to be about one movie but about our entire economy,” the President noted.


Meanwhile, the actual details of the Sony hack are murkier by the day. Today, two conflicting reports emerged about messages Sony executives had purportedly received from the hackers late last night.


One, Ars Technica reports, was posted publicly and said that Sony has “suffered enough” and can move forward with The Interview as long as it is heavily edited to remove any harm to North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un. The other, as reported by CNN, was sent privately and says the exact opposite: that the movie should never be “released, distributed, or leaked in any form” and that all materials related to it should be removed from the internet.


The combination of the two messages basically leaves Sony leadership exactly between the rock and hard place where they have been since the hack first became known in November.




by Kate Cox via Consumerist

NLRB: McDonald’s Retaliation Against Workers Who Participated In Protests Violates Their Rights


McDonald’s and some of its franchisees retaliated against workers who participated in protests and other demonstrations over hours and working conditions, the National Labor Relations Board said today, in announcing several complaints it filed accusing the fast-food chain of violating workers’ rights with “discriminatory discipline.”

Regional offices of the NLRB filed 13 complaints today covering 78 specific charges, the organization said, though some of those complaints have been settled or to be found without merit since the investigation started in 2012.


And because the position of the NLRB is that McDonald’s HQ exerts such an influence over its franchisees that it should be treated as a joint employer alongside the franchisees, the chain is charged as a co-employer in addition to the franchise owners named in the complaints.


A spokeswoman for the company challenges that view, saying in a statement (via UPI) that McDonald’s is not, in fact, the employer of the workers involved, and that the charges “improperly and dramatically strike at the heart of the franchise system.”


“McDonald’s is disappointed with the board’s decision to overreach and move forward with these charges, and will contest the joint employer allegation as well as the unfair labor practice charges in the proper forums,” she said.


Among the charges: “discriminatory discipline, reductions in hours, discharges, and other coercive conduct directed at employees in response to union and protected concerted activity, including threats, surveillance, interrogations, promises of benefit, and overbroad restrictions on communicating with union representatives or with other employees about unions and the employees’ terms and conditions of employment.”


Three hearings have been scheduled in the eastern, midwestern and western regions of the United States for March, the NRLB says.


NLRB: McDonald’s and its franchisees violated employee rights [UPI.com]




by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Apple Condemns BBC Reports About Factory And Tin Supplier Conditions

panoramaEarlier this week, the BBC aired an hourlong documentary program on conditions for workers in factories assembling Apple products in China, and conditions in tin mines in Indonesia that supply Apple. Factory footage showed iPhone assemblers begging for time off and dozing off on the assembly line, and an illegal tin mine in Indonesia that is purportedly part of Apple’s supply chain.


In a letter sent to UK-based employee of Apple who might have seen the documentary, Jeff Williams, Apple’s senior vice president of operations, explained that both he and CEO Tim Cook were “deeply offended” by the accusation that Apple isn’t doing enough to improve conditions for everyone along its supply line. In the letter, Williams said that Apple shared its perspective on these issues with the BBC, but all of that information was “clearly missing from their program.”


In the hidden-camera footage, employees assembling the iPhone 6 were falling asleep at their stations after apparently working 12-hour shifts with no days off. Even the undercover reporter wearing the hidden camera asked for a day off and the request was turned down. Apple counters that its own audits show that suppliers are keeping their workers’ hours down to 60 or less per week 93% of the time, and the company closely monitors how the companies it contracts with to assemble products treat their employees.


The situation with the tin mine is more complex. Apple freely acknowledges that it does buy tin from Indonesia that may have originated in mines that are illegal and that employ children in poor conditions, as the BBC program showed. However, Apple counters, its choices are either to keep sourcing tin from Indonesia and work to improve conditions there along with other technology companies, or to source from other countries and ignore the issues with “artisanal mines” in Indonesia.


Apple goes to war with the BBC [Telegraph]

Read: Apple’s letter to UK staff over Chinese factory conditions [Telegraph]




by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Lawsuit Claims Couple Died After Getting Food Poisoning From Bob Evans’ Meatloaf

A new lawsuit claims that a "tainted meal" at Bob Evans lead to a couple's death.

A new lawsuit claims that a “tainted meal” at Bob Evans lead to a couple’s death.



Contracting food poisoning after consuming a meal is never a pleasant experience. While many consumers recover after a few days of being ill, some aren’t so lucky. Such is the case, a new lawsuit claims, for a West Virginia couple who died after allegedly becoming ill following a meal at a Bob Evans restaurant.

CNN reports that the family of the couple filed a lawsuit against Bob Evans claiming that a meal shared at a local restaurant in 2012 ultimately led to their deaths.


According to the complaint, about nine hours after eating the meal of meatloaf, mashed potatoes and gravy, broccoli and a roll, the mother “fell violently ill.”


Shortly thereafter, the husband also became ill but was able to call for an ambulance.


CNN reports that the couple was told by local emergency room staff that they had suffered from food poisoning “from consuming the tainted meal from Bob Evans.”


The couple’s children say that the day after consuming the meal, their father suffered a stroke. As a result, both of their parents were moved to a rehabilitation facility.


The lawsuit states that about two months after the shared meal, the mother died while in hospice care. Her husband’s condition then deteriorated rapidly, the children say. He passed away a few months later.


The children are suing Bob Evans for $250,000 for medical expenses from the chain and an unspecified amount for the “pain, suffering, emotional distress, mental anguish and the loss of ability to enjoy life” that were caused by their parents’ deaths.


A spokesperson for the restaurant chain tells CNN they are committed to “serving the safest, highest-quality foods for our guests — that is our responsibility and our priority.”


The spokesperson says that while the company feels sympathy for the family and their loss, they have done a “thorough review of the alleged claims in this matter, and quite simply, there is no basis to the allegations contained in the complaint and the suit is entirely without merit.”


CNN reports that the case will be heard in federal court next year.


Killer meatloaf? Lawsuit claims couple died after tainted Bob Evans meal [CNN]




by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

The Organization That Coordinates All The Internet Domain Names In The World Got Hacked

ICANNLOGO If the Internet was the Death Star, then the weak point hackers might be trying to aim at would be the International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN (though I’d like to think the non-profit organization that administers and coordinates all the world’s Internet domain names wouldn’t be on the dark side). As it turns out, ICANN says it was hacked — though there will be no space explosions because of it.


ICANN said in a web post this week that its internal systems were breached starting in November as the result of a “spear phishing” attack where hackers send emails that look like company emails, giving them access to those systems after users are tricked into handing over their credentials.


Ironically enough for the organization that doles out IP addresses and domain names for the entire planet, the emails reportedly came from ICANN’s own domain, reports The Verge.


The damage appears to include access internal emails, a Wiki page that only had public information, a tool that’s used to look up if a domain name is registered called WHOIS and ICANN’s Centralized Zone Data System. Within that, user information including real names, addresses, emails, telephones, usernames and encrypted passwords were accessed, ICANN says.


It’s since deactivated all CZDS passwords as a precaution, it said in the post:



We have deactivated all CZDS passwords as a precaution. Users may request a new password at czds.icann.org. We suggest that CZDS users take appropriate steps to protect any other online accounts for which they might have used the same username and/or password. ICANN is providing notices to the CZDS users whose personal information may have been compromised.



But the part of the organization that keeps the Internet running smoothly, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority or IANA, and other systems weren’t hit, ICANN says:


“Based on our investigation to date, we are not aware of any other systems that have been compromised, and we have confirmed that this attack does not impact any IANA-related systems.”


The United States is in charge of running ICANN, making this episode yet another hacking incident among a plethora of hacking incidents in just the last year to bedevil the government.


Global internet authority ICANN has been hacked [The Verge]




by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

10 años de estar juntos: ¿Qué estaba haciendo yo hace 10 años?... DESAPRENDIENDO, seguro





via EDUCACIÓN Y T.I.C. http://ift.tt/1xu5xSv