Vanity Fair Editor Sues Twitter Troll For Giving Him A Seizure

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
A Twitter user may be held liable for assault after sending a Vanity Fair and Newsweek writer an auto-playing animation that gave him a seizure. I thought you could opt out of videos and GIFs that play automatically…

…this is the second time someone tweeted him a seizure-inducing animation this year. Back in October, Eichenwald wrote in Newsweek that someone pinged him with a video of "flashing circles and images of Pepe flying toward the screen" after he wrote about how the President-Elect's businesses could undermine national security. He was able to drop his iPad before the animation triggered a seizure that time, though -- he wasn't so lucky this time. In a series of tweets he sent out after the event, the editor announced that he's taking a Twitter break to pursue a case against @jew_goldstein.
 
My president said it best.

giphy.gif



EDIT: Just noticed, he's gonna sue @jew_goldstein........good luck.
 
he's just trying to draw attention away from his soul crushingly embarrassing appearance on Tucker Carlson and his subsequent nonsensical twitter meltdown which he deleted. Fuck this embarrassment of a human being, just go back to writing articles that no one reads!
 
As messed up as this, I have zero sympathy for a vanity Faire editior. What actual harm was caused to him?
 
Exavior said:
exactly, this person had intent. No different than shoving peanut butter into somebody's mouth when you know they are allergic to peanuts.
Click to expand...

I think it would be a little closer to putting a container of peanut butter on a table with a big sign that says "You deserve an allergic reaction to peanut butter" in front of the peanut butter and then taking offense that upon eating the peanut butter you did indeed experience and allergic reaction.

Here's a safe version.

18a16982ad07586c50517f193460cd20.jpg


Here's a link to the illegal assaulting version
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meeho
like this
Lets say this lawsuit is successful. Or not. In either case, now the only difference will be that throwaway accounts tweet the same thing to him. The only solution is for him to turn off animation in his browser. Peanut butter analogy above is correct.
 
Wow...

You guys are jerks.

I don't care if this guy is a horrible whiny editor.

The fact that someone did something to purposefully cause bodily harm to another human being is sick.

This is no different than if I knew you have a deadly allergy to something, followed you and threw what you were allergic to all over you.

The fact that this was done across country and done electronically makes no difference.

Jesus, people...give a crap for your fellow man.
 
illram said:
What is it about this forum that makes it basically the tech section of Bretibart? This thread takes the cake today, it really does.
Click to expand...

Was the cake made in a factory that processes peanuts? Because you need to mention that just in case I'm allergic.

If it happened once, damn. Fix your shit. It happened a second time. That's on him. It's a shit thing to send that pic. But, you have to take care of yourself, too. Some people are assholes. Why leave yourself open to it happening again and again?

It won't be the last time it happens. Dude needs to fix his shit. Or just keep suing people, it is the 201x's...
 
NiViK said:
Wow...

You guys are jerks.
Click to expand...
I prefer the term asshole, but if you want to be mean then I suppose jerk works as well.

I don't see anyone defending the prick that did this, but if you're allergic to peanuts you take precautions. I would think the same applies if you're prone to seizures.
 
I read the story but didn't pull up the dudes twitter. Does he advertise on there that he is an epileptic? Is it a widely known thing? Why doesn't he have autoplay off?
I've seen that gif before, so it wasn't created just for him.
If he was smart though he'd sue twitter for allowing such a thing to be attached.
 
I completely disagree with all of you belitteling this.

This guy has a known seizure disorder, and people who disliked what he posted intentionally attacked him with seizure inducing patterns.

It's not like this was some random video he came across. It was a direct attack.

IMHO the person who did this belongs in jail.
 
Person with epilepsy here checking in...

First of all - different things can trigger different seizures for different people. That said, flashing lights is one of those things. Thankfully not for me though. That also said, there are plenty of places where there are flashing lights all the time. I've seen plenty of pop-up winners of "YOU ARE THE WINNER" type junk with flashing lights that I would think could trigger a seizure. I've also been driving late at night past midnight with very little lighting and seen places advertising that were non-stop flashing their lights to try to draw your attention - I could very well see that triggering one as well.

That said, I don't know if I believe this guy that says someone posting something on twitter made him have a seizure. Is it possible? I suppose.

Overall I'm a bit torn here. I'm all for free speech. Which means if someone insults you that you aren't entitled to try and shut their mouth. That also said, when someone receives a notification that someone posted something, I kind of feel that they should be able to safely see that message without having to risk a seizure. There is simply a different between sending someone your political opinion and someone that is literally trying to make you have a seizure that could (ultimately) be the cause of death.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quoll
like this
Cyraxx said:
That said, I don't know if I believe this guy that says someone posting something on twitter made him have a seizure. Is it possible? I suppose.
Click to expand...
Hello, just curious would it have to be mostly full screen or is a smallish image enough to trigger it? Something else I've been wondering about; cops with those flashing lightbars at night?

Do you take precautions against random animations/videos while browsing ye ol' interwebs?
 
thesmokingman said:
Yea, that is a fantastic idea!
Click to expand...

Intentionally causing a seizure amounts to a life threatening attack.

This is no different than if he had gone up to the guy and physically assaulted him with a dangerous weapon.

This is not just joking around type stuff. It is a very serious crime, and the guy deserves to spend a few years in jail for it. He could have killed the guy!

I'd argue the same for someone who intentionally gave a peanutbutter sandwich to a kid they knew had a life threatening allergy towards peanuts.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Intentionally causing a seizure amounts to a life threatening attack.

This is no different than if he had gone up to the guy and physically assaulted him with a dangerous weapon.

This is not just joking around type stuff. It is a very serious crime, and the guy deserves to spend a few years in jail for it. He could have killed the guy!

I'd argue the same for someone who intentionally gave a peanutbutter sandwich to a kid they knew had a life threatening allergy towards peanuts.
Click to expand...

Yea, totally, why stop at jail time its death penalty time!
 
ChoGGi said:
Hello, just curious would it have to be mostly full screen or is a smallish image enough to trigger it? Something else I've been wondering about; cops with those flashing lightbars at night?

Do you take precautions against random animations/videos while browsing ye ol' interwebs?
Click to expand...

Different people with the condition have differing degrees of sensitivity to light stimulation. My brother has had seizures triggered just by sitting in a car as it drives down the road from the flickering of the sunlight through branches at the side of the road.

The end result is simply, if someone does something with the intent to physically harm someone, something with potentially life threatening consequences it shouldn't matter that they are doing it over the internet. It should be legally pursued just as strongly as if he had walked up to him with a dangerous weapon and tried to kill him.
 
thesmokingman said:
Yea, totally, why stop at jail time its death penalty time!
Click to expand...

No. Death penalty is just silly.

An attempted murder charge is totally within the realm of possibility, but possibly downgraded to attempted voluntary manslaughter as the assailant may not have been aware of the potentially fatal consequences of seizures.

Either way, some real hard time is appropriate. Death penalty - however is just a stupid strawman argument on your part, and not even a particularly good one.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Different people with the condition have differing degrees of sensitivity to light stimulation. My brother has had seizures triggered just by sitting in a car as it drives down the road from the flickering of the sunlight through branches at the side of the road.
Click to expand...
Like a lot of other shitheads on the internet, this guy should be doing community service (don't see the point in wasting money on prison for this waste of flesh)

Like I said, just curious.
 
ChoGGi said:
Hello, just curious would it have to be mostly full screen or is a smallish image enough to trigger it? Something else I've been wondering about; cops with those flashing lightbars at night?

Do you take precautions against random animations/videos while browsing ye ol' interwebs?
Click to expand...

I'm glad to say I can't tell you that information. Sorry if I didn't highlight more in my post, but flashing lights does not trigger my epilepsy.

Furthermore, I had brain surgery and thankfully I have yet to have a grand mal seizure since having it.
 
Where is the proof this guy had a seizure and isn't just being a bitch about this? Wether had had a seizure or not, he is clearly looking for attention like a princess.
 
Ocellaris said:
Where is the proof this guy had a seizure and isn't just being a bitch about this? Wether had had a seizure or not, he is clearly looking for attention like a princess.
Click to expand...

Even as someone that does (and has had) seizures, even I have to agree with this.

I mean, at the same time... it was still a very dick move regardless though. Insult the man and argue with him if you want to, but sending him flashing light GIFs serves no purpose other than potential harm. Regardless of if we believe him or not.
 
illram said:
What is it about this forum that makes it basically the tech section of Bretibart? This thread takes the cake today, it really does.
Click to expand...

It's very common in the tech industry. I have a co-worker I really respect, but he obsessively reads Drudge report and Breibart 100% believing every single thing posted no matter how bizarre, but hey genius and insanity go hand in hand.
 
ChoGGi said:
Do you take precautions against random animations/videos while browsing ye ol' interwebs?
Click to expand...

If I were prone to seizures, I sure would.

I protect myself from viruses and other malware, too.

If you're prone to having a reaction from something, do what you need to in order to protect yourself from it. Check for nuts being used in processing, turn off auto-play with animations/videos/etc.. It was a dick move, yes. But, definitely avoidable on the receiving side.
 
Ur_Mom said:
If I were prone to seizures, I sure would.

I protect myself from viruses and other malware, too.

If you're prone to having a reaction from something, do what you need to in order to protect yourself from it. Check for nuts being used in processing, turn off auto-play with animations/videos/etc.. It was a dick move, yes. But, definitely avoidable on the receiving side.
Click to expand...

Classy. Victim blaming.

Sure, if I forgot my car unlocked and left a my phone in plain view on the passenger seat, I'd feel pretty dumb for not taking better precautjons, but 100% of the blame still lies with the person who stole it.

This was a deliberate attack, not just a random coming across of a video that happened to contain siezure triggering material, and the assailant needs to face the full force ofthe law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top