11–20 of 73 posts
Twitter has a prominent checkbox in the setting allowing you to turn off autoplaying of videos and GIFs. Given that most are not epileptic, and that Eichenwald is, he should have had the mindfulness to check whether the platform could be adapted to his needs.
You are implying that it is Eichenwald's fault and the attacker should be exonerated. Right?
Wow, this is equivalent to sending someone a mail "bomb" that doesn't explode but electrocutes them severely. I hope the offender ends up with a reasonable length prison sentence. There's a clear line, and the intentional infliction of physical harm is well beyond it.
Wow, this is equivalent to sending someone a mail "bomb" that doesn't explode but electrocutes them severely. I hope the offender ends up with a reasonable length prison sentence. There's a clear line, and the intentional infliction of physical harm is well beyond it.
So to be clear, you want someone to be imprisoned because they sent a tweet.
Wow, this is equivalent to sending someone a mail "bomb" that doesn't explode but electrocutes them severely. I hope the offender ends up with a reasonable length prison sentence. There's a clear line, and the intentional infliction of physical harm is well beyond it.
So to be clear, you want someone to be imprisoned because they sent a tweet.
Wow, this is equivalent to sending someone a mail "bomb" that doesn't explode but electrocutes them severely. I hope the offender ends up with a reasonable length prison sentence. There's a clear line, and the intentional infliction of physical harm is well beyond it.
So to be clear, you want someone to be imprisoned because they sent a tweet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So to be clear, you want someone to be imprisoned because they sent a tweet.
"Intent" is the operative word here.
Wow, this is equivalent to sending someone a mail "bomb" that doesn't explode but electrocutes them severely. I hope the offender ends up with a reasonable length prison sentence. There's a clear line, and the intentional infliction of physical harm is well beyond it.
So to be clear, you want someone to be imprisoned because they sent a tweet.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...
Wow, this is equivalent to sending someone a mail "bomb" that doesn't explode but electrocutes them severely. I hope the offender ends up with a reasonable length prison sentence. There's a clear line, and the intentional infliction of physical harm is well beyond it.
So to be clear, you want someone to be imprisoned because they sent a tweet.
No one forced him to watch the gif. If anything it's twitters fault for autoplaying the images.