Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

documentcloud.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 148 posts

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#61

Post by alphabettsy »

danso wrote: post #8

Dumb question, but what is the meaning of AT&T "toll records" used to link the user to an iPhone 6? > "AT&T responded and a review of the subscriber information showed the telephone number was associated with a Tracfone prepaid account with no subscriber information. However, a review of the AT&T toll records showed an associated Apple iPhone 6A Model 1586" That is, if you are a Tracfone user and Tracfone uses AT&T t…

I assume device IMEI and/or SIM ICCID of call carried on their network was recorded since Tracfone operates as an MVNO afaik.

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#62

Post by 69mlgsniperdad »

jacquesm wrote: post #59
69mlgsniperdad wrote: post #58

What happens if some 10 year old in say Russia, for example (lol), used Bitcoin he made from a few minutes of mining in the very early days of Bitcoin, to purchase a black hat SEO campaign, spamming social networks like Twitter, Tumblr, and Reddit with a click-baity title and purchased upvotes/likes/retweets, spreading a gif like this across US social networks. Would our law enforcement convince, or manually penetrat…

It does not appear that anything you wrote in that wall of text has any application to the case in the linked article.

Convicting a person who allegedly posted an image on the internet, with intent to trigger a sizeure in another, sets the precident for every means of distribution of a similar image that I listed off to be treated as attempted murder or whatever charges come of this. Name one thing in my wall of text that is not an implication of this story; Unless you are implying this article is on hackernews, only to foster discussion of the technical aspects of a subpoena of personal information?

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#63

Post by alphabettsy »

824ueirwfjd wrote: post #11
tyingq wrote: post #5

Desktop browsers allow you to disable auto-playing animated images. I'm surprised mobile browsers don't seem to have this. If I suffered from this, I'd want some sort of reasonable protection from asshats.

> reasonable protection from asshats Is there a strong argument that distinguishes this case of being "asshat on the internet" vs "homicidal with intent to kill"?

Yea, the fact that it was only done after the victim revealed publicly that he suffered from epilepsy and the suspect reportedly claimed he attemped to exploit that health issue.

Kinda like purposely giving someone something they're allergic to.

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#64

Post by 69mlgsniperdad »

alphabettsy wrote: post #60
69mlgsniperdad wrote: post #58

What happens if some 10 year old in say Russia, for example (lol), used Bitcoin he made from a few minutes of mining in the very early days of Bitcoin, to purchase a black hat SEO campaign, spamming social networks like Twitter, Tumblr, and Reddit with a click-baity title and purchased upvotes/likes/retweets, spreading a gif like this across US social networks. Would our law enforcement convince, or manually penetrat…

This is a long rant of "what if's" that aren't relevant since the details are known. The "what if the guy didn't do it" is what the justice system is for, attorneys and investigators sort it out.

I am implying that this is rediculous, and that spending any significant resources to pursue this should be criminal. I'm saying that unless they have a confession from the defendant that he was trying to kill this guy, or his diary dictating that, which they should include in the story were that the case, then this is just stupid. The presidence this case might set forth is terrifying. It provides a never before seen limitless weaponization of the justice system, which will be abused by those without morals, those who have a lot to lose, and those with more $ to attack anyone they like. Any halfway smart kid can use this image attack with zero risk of being caught, so clearly the safety mechanisms and protections need to be on the victims end.

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#65

Post by jacquesm »

69mlgsniperdad wrote: post #62
jacquesm wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does not appear that anything you wrote in that wall of text has any application to the case in the linked article.

Convicting a person who allegedly posted an image on the internet, with intent to trigger a sizeure in another, sets the precident for every means of distribution of a similar image that I listed off to be treated as attempted murder or whatever charges come of this. Name one thing in my wall of text that is not an implication of this story; Unless you are implying this article is on hackernews, only to foster discus…

> Convicting a person who allegedly posted an image on the internet, with intent to trigger a sizeure in another, sets the precident for every means of distribution of a similar image that I listed off to be treated as attempted murder or whatever charges come of this.

You are apparently unfamiliar with the concept of 'intent' in criminal law. This was a message targeted at an individual with specific intent to cause seizures. All your hypotheticals have no basis in fact.

> Name one thing in my wall of text that is not an implication of this story;

Every one of them?

> Unless you are implying this article is on hackernews, only to foster discussion of the technical aspects of a subpoena of personal information?

No, it is on HN because enough people found it interesting to warrant discussion of this actual case. Fantasy need not enter the discussion unless it bears some connection to reality, making stuff up out of whole cloth is not going to further the discussion in a meaningful way, no matter how long you make your walls of text.

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#66

Post by jacquesm »

69mlgsniperdad wrote: post #64
alphabettsy wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a long rant of "what if's" that aren't relevant since the details are known. The "what if the guy didn't do it" is what the justice system is for, attorneys and investigators sort it out.

I am implying that this is rediculous, and that spending any significant resources to pursue this should be criminal. I'm saying that unless they have a confession from the defendant that he was trying to kill this guy, or his diary dictating that, which they should include in the story were that the case, then this is just stupid. The presidence this case might set forth is terrifying. It provides a never before see…

> I'm saying that unless they have a confession from the defendant that he was trying to kill this guy, or his diary dictating that, which they should include in the story were that the case, then this is just stupid.

You must have missed the bit in the article where the defendant actually indicated he did just that, and in writing no less.

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#67

Post by 69mlgsniperdad »

jacquesm wrote: post #66
69mlgsniperdad wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am implying that this is rediculous, and that spending any significant resources to pursue this should be criminal. I'm saying that unless they have a confession from the defendant that he was trying to kill this guy, or his diary dictating that, which they should include in the story were that the case, then this is just stupid. The presidence this case might set forth is terrifying. It provides a never before see…

> I'm saying that unless they have a confession from the defendant that he was trying to kill this guy, or his diary dictating that, which they should include in the story were that the case, then this is just stupid. You must have missed the bit in the article where the defendant actually indicated he did just that, and in writing no less.

So the reason this article is on hackernews, is because some kid said he wanted to hurt someone else? That is the newsworthy bit? I can think of a dozen possible arguments justifying this articles relevancy to this community, and they are all laughable. Which one do you prefer? What makes this specific example of said argument more relevant than the thousands of comparable examples to said argument, to hn? I'm curious.

The only reasonable one I can come up with off-hand, is that there should be a browser plugin or video driver plugin that somehow limits refresh rate, detects risky patterns, or prevents media from autoplaying. Seems like the real travesty is that someone raised a child with this condition, in this world, with no fear, and no motivation to protect their life, while providing the child without any direction or insight into the many existing tools that could be installed for free in minutes, for their safety. Also, the child's doctors/health system in general.

Edit: No I didn't see that, only briefly skimmed the article, my comment (of facetious length), was triggered by the comments near the top when I posted. I would have posted the same thing, minus the bit you quoted, had I not overlooked that fact. Also I listed a plethora of reasons that the existence of this case is ridiculous. Had the perp been harder to find, used obfuscation, or hadn't immediately produced the confession, any random kid could effect potentially MASSIVE costs on the justice and police departments.

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#68

Post by jacquesm »

69mlgsniperdad wrote: post #67
jacquesm wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm saying that unless they have a confession from the defendant that he was trying to kill this guy, or his diary dictating that, which they should include in the story were that the case, then this is just stupid. You must have missed the bit in the article where the defendant actually indicated he did just that, and in writing no less.

So the reason this article is on hackernews, is because some kid said he wanted to hurt someone else? That is the newsworthy bit? I can think of a dozen possible arguments justifying this articles relevancy to this community, and they are all laughable. Which one do you prefer? What makes this specific example of said argument more relevant than the thousands of comparable examples to said argument, to hn? I'm curiou…

> So the reason this article is on hackernews, is because some kid said he wanted to hurt someone else?

No, it's because he actually did.

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#69

Post by [deleted] »

69mlgsniperdad wrote: post #67
jacquesm wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm saying that unless they have a confession from the defendant that he was trying to kill this guy, or his diary dictating that, which they should include in the story were that the case, then this is just stupid. You must have missed the bit in the article where the defendant actually indicated he did just that, and in writing no less.

So the reason this article is on hackernews, is because some kid said he wanted to hurt someone else? That is the newsworthy bit? I can think of a dozen possible arguments justifying this articles relevancy to this community, and they are all laughable. Which one do you prefer? What makes this specific example of said argument more relevant than the thousands of comparable examples to said argument, to hn? I'm curiou…

[deleted]

Re: How police found Twitter user accused of sending seizure-triggering GIF

#70

Post by r0m4n0 »

alphabettsy wrote: post #60
69mlgsniperdad wrote: post #58

What happens if some 10 year old in say Russia, for example (lol), used Bitcoin he made from a few minutes of mining in the very early days of Bitcoin, to purchase a black hat SEO campaign, spamming social networks like Twitter, Tumblr, and Reddit with a click-baity title and purchased upvotes/likes/retweets, spreading a gif like this across US social networks. Would our law enforcement convince, or manually penetrat…

This is a long rant of "what if's" that aren't relevant since the details are known. The "what if the guy didn't do it" is what the justice system is for, attorneys and investigators sort it out.

Sadly that's not how the justice system usually works. Investigators put together worst case scenario and find some facts that support their hypothesis (this document). Like everyone else he will settle and probably spend a few months in jail and pick up garbage on the freeway for 6 months, whether he did it or not. It's usually not worth the risk of losing in court
Post reply on HN