The saga on Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange, and how tech always serves the ruling class.

Right now, on Stack Overflow, Luigi Magione’s account has been renamed. Despite having fruitfully contributed to the network he is stripped of his name and his account is now known as “user4616250”.

This appears to violate the creative commons license under which Stack Overflow content is posted.

When the author asked about this:

As of yet, Stack Exchange has not replied to the above post, but they did promptly and within hours gave me a year-long ban for merely raising the question. Of course, they did draft a letter which credited the action to other events that occurred weeks before where I merely upvoted contributions from Luigi and bountied a few of his questions.

  • Zier@fedia.io
    3631·
    6 个月前

    user4616250 will now be a famous meme. “How do we fix healthcare? We call user4616250.”

  • FaceDeer@fedia.io
    1813·
    6 个月前

    Stack Overflow has been toxic for a long time already. It’s one of the things that a lot of people seem pleased to see AI devour.

  • Gork@lemm.eeEnglish
    140·
    6 个月前

    What can Stack Overflow’s motivation possibly be to strip Luigi’s account? Are their private equity owners in cahoots with health insurance executives?

    • dexa_scantron@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      994·
      6 个月前

      That’s not what the article is about. Stack Overflow has kept content that Luigi created up, but removed his username, in violation of Creative Commons. Edited the post to make that more clear.

      • TachyonTele@lemm.eeEnglish
        61·
        6 个月前

        If they weren’t afraid of what he represents they wouldn’t have removed his name.

        • Dasus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          20·
          6 个月前

          Yeah exactly. And they’re not allowed to under the Creative Commons licence

            • SolaceFiend@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              6 个月前

              This is the equivalent of a bank robber standing in a vault, filling his bag full of jewels. One of the hostages yelling “You can’t do this, it’s illegal.” Some other guy yells “…and yet…” minutes before police sirens can be heard outside.

              I look forward to Mangiine catching wind of this, which is basically theft, and adding it to the laundry list of things to be tried in court.

          • Hazor@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            6 个月前

            I doubt before. They’re still hoping they can erase or villainize him. I expect the news media will ignore his trial in favor of whatever antics Trump or Musk are up to, and we won’t hear much about him until there’s a guilty verdict they can parade before the masses in order to dissuade them from copying him. If he does get mentioned, they’ll be trying to frame him in as negative a light as possible and downplay his motives. I also expect the big social media will censor discussion under the guise of not promoting violence, or simply shadow ban any mention of him.

    • DUMBASS@leminal.spaceEnglish
      382·
      6 个月前

      No, they’re terrified of us now, they know we tasted blood and are hungry for more.

      • Ænima@lemm.eeEnglish
        111·
        6 个月前

        I know I am. I’m so sick of this system they’ve created and perpetuated for decades/centuries. I just want to live my fucking life without worrying about basic needs, or how someone with most can take even more from those who have little. Americans have more guns per capita than almost anywhere else. Those are guns in the hands of the people, not mercs or armies or private security. They should be afraid of us. They should be checking their car’s undercarriage daily before getting in. They should vary their routes daily to avoid patterns. They should see every person on the street as a potential assassin. Only THEN, will anything about these parasites’ attitudes change.

        Unfortunately, so many with the skills to engage in revolution are aligned with the interests of these corporate leeches, and thus are fighting the masses, instead of standing with them. They wanted a Civil War #2, it’s time to kick up, not down!

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          43·
          6 个月前

          Most gun owners are biggest bootlickers out there… They didn’t get weapons to fight corporate tyranny, they got them to shoot poor people they don’t like

          • SolaceFiend@lemmy.worldEnglish
            21·
            6 个月前

            Actually, they got them to shoot gun-wielding home invaders who threaten (if not attempt to murder) their family members.

    • Whateley@lemm.eeEnglish
      10·
      6 个月前

      Fucking terrified. I’ve never seen corpos circle their wagons like this before. It’s hilarious.

  • WhatYouNeed@lemmy.worldEnglish
    116·
    6 个月前

    By this logic, everyone charged (not convicted, just charged) should have their accounts and submissions changed in the same manner as Luigi’s.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.worldEnglish
      541·
      6 个月前

      Man I sure wish this’d mean all Trump-generated content and speeches got deleted. That’d be genuinely helpful to the world at least…

      • SolaceFiend@lemmy.worldEnglish
        23·
        6 个月前

        The presumption or admission of guilt does not and should not justify violating the Creative Commons License, nor perpetrating any illegal behavior agains any individual(s).

        If JK Rowling went out and robbed a bank, or murdered an ex-Husband, in no world or timeline would that give a member of her publishing company the right to scratch out her name from any of her books and replace it with their own or someone else’s.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          11·
          6 个月前

          should not justify violating the Creative Commons License

          Absolutely. Even a guilty verdict shouldn’t justify violating the Creative Commons License. It should either be completely taken down/hidden, or left in-tact.

          That’s not at all what I’m saying though though, I’m saying that it’s reasonable for the site to take action to hide the account. He’s a public figure with an apparent confession, which is going to attract a lot of attention to that account that otherwise wouldn’t be there. They shouldn’t have done it this way since it violates the Creative Commons License, but I am saying that action to hide/disable the account is warranted.

          • SolaceFiend@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            6 个月前

            Another comment way down claims it’s standard operating procedure for social media sites to disable/hide and account of a highly publicized murderer, particularly during investigations. However, the provided no examples nor sources or technical documents that detail this as something that is genuinely done as a standard procedure.

            I’m kinda gonna do my own research on that, but I feel the validity of Stack’s actions would to some degree depend on the results of researching that claim, and whether or not that is true.

            It’s kinda difficult to research something like that though when most highly publicized murders predated social media in its current form, so it would be hard to have a lot of examples despite there being a decent number of people who fit the bill, ironically.

          • SolaceFiend@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            6 个月前

            So far, all I’ve found is a 2018 publication by the Police Executive Research Forum, entitled “The Changing Nature of Crime And Criminal Investigations”. It’s a 67 page document, and I’m curious to see if it discusses how their investigation tactics may have changed, and if so, whether the aforementioned tactic is mentioned as being included.

            • SolaceFiend@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              6 个月前

              I didn’t find anything. But I also work 40 plus hours a week, so that doesn’t necessarily mean there’s not something out there. But it’s more likely the case that this might not be true, from what I know.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          13·
          6 个月前

          Pretty much everyone pleads not guilty, especially in a politically motivated murder charge (there’s always a chance of a hung jury or jury nullification). That said, his manifesto could be considered a form of confession and will certainly be used as evidence to that effect.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              31·
              6 个月前

              I never said he was guilty, I said he confessed. A plead of “not guilty” doesn’t necessarily mean you think you’re innocent (i.e. you perjure yourself; the 5th amendment protects against that), it just means you want to go through a trial. You can confess and still choose to go through trial proceedings.

              • spujb@lemmy.cafeEnglish
                6·
                6 个月前

                To add, plenty of innocent people give false confessions of guilt. It’s a known pattern in human behavior especially under stress and duress.

                I have no information to say whether this case is an example of that one way or the other, but just putting that out there.

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                  1·
                  6 个月前

                  I’m just saying that there’s probably enough evidence that it’s reasonable for a social media site to pull/hide his profile despite not being sentenced. He’s obviously innocent until proven guilty, but that doesn’t mean his profiles are immune from vandalism and whatnot.

              • nomous@lemmy.worldEnglish
                2·
                6 个月前

                I was not aware he confessed and can’t find anything saying he did. Do you have a source confirming he’s confessed?

    • CodexArcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      1·
      6 个月前

      “Censorship forced me to flee a pro-nazi site to another pro-nazi site,” is a contradiction worth noting. It highlights the general pro-nazi vibe going around big tech.

  • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    893·
    6 个月前

    As of yet, Stack Exchange has not replied to the above post, but they did promptly and within hours gave me a year-long ban for merely raising the question.

    Laws mean nothing anymore. Therefore licenses mean nothing. Therefore ownership means nothing, and “theft” no longer exists.

    • rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish
      27·
      6 个月前

      Therefore ownership means nothing, and “theft” no longer exists.

      WOAH WOAH WOAH… hold on there Circuitfarmer (checks clipboard) It says here you’re not nearly affluent enough to circumvent the law… we’ll be keeping a close eye on you… --BB

    • caboose2006@lemm.eeEnglish
      10·
      6 个月前

      I managed to convince my brother in law by using the wrongful death case of Kanokporn Tangsuan as an example. Framed it as his moral responsibility to never sign up for any digital media ever again since he has a family. I pointed him to a few resources to sail the high seas and he’s got his high seas pc hooked up to his TV and cancelled all his subscriptions. I’m so proud.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldEnglish
      440·
      6 个月前

      Jfc y’all sound like magats

      There is no law forcing a company to spread your message for you.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldEnglish
          435·
          6 个月前

          No there isn’t.

          Stack Overflow is privately owned by Prosus. You have certain limited rights to the content they host but they do not have the obligation to keep the content up and they even have user terms that every account agrees to: especially for moderation.

          • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.worldEnglish
            422·
            6 个月前

            If they’d just removed his content outright, I would agree with you. But if they’ve left his content up without attribution, that does violate the CC agreement, of which they are upheld by.

            I mean, it’s still a small copyright violation whom the proprietor of is a bit preoccupied to do anything about, so uh…this whole thing is quite dumb.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldEnglish
              212·
              6 个月前

              Idk if usernames count as “attribution”, even, but I assume the results would be the same if an account was named Jeremy Assface, Ted Bundy, or Adolf Hitler even if the user’s actual name was such. Not to compare Luigi to any of those people, no, but the point is usernames are moderated.

      • Zink@programming.devEnglish
        52·
        6 个月前

        In my experience it’s usually the magats who are the ones defending asshole and/or immoral behavior by pointing out that the offender is acting within the bounds of the law or within their legal rights.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldEnglish
          16·
          6 个月前

          Idk, I feel like Luigi Mangione being a phrase not allowed on Stack Overflow just makes sense. Good policy.

  • FolknForage@lemm.eeEnglish
    77·
    6 个月前

    “No wars but class wars” as true today as when Trotsky said it many decades ago. Not sure how anyone cannot see this very, very clear fact, made self evident by the treatment of Luigi and the composition of the upcoming administration and its supporters.

    But every other commoner that sees it needs to take according measures.

    Culture is not our friend.

    • intensely_human@lemm.eeEnglish
      541·
      6 个月前

      Can’t have a “terrorist” demonstrating his competence and productivity after all.

      The overlords know they’ve really fucked up when the competent, productive people start getting resentful and side-eyeing the system.

      • ansiz@lemmy.worldEnglish
        232·
        6 个月前

        Don’t worry everyone, the new President is going to rename the Gulf of Mexico and annex Greenland, so that will take care of it!

      • 0x0@programming.devEnglish
        2·
        6 个月前

        True, although it may also be “good things” done by person do not outweigh “bad thing” done by person. I’m sure there’s a name for that.
        Like human experimentation. Yes, bad, shouldn’t be done, outright illegal, immoral, inhumane, but has been done. Should we discard the scientific results?

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          11·
          6 个月前

          Obviously no… We hired these criminals so they can keep doing these experiments in the US!

    • SolaceFiend@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      6 个月前

      Righteous censorship is only “righteous” because everyone else is prevented from saying otherwise.

    • rekabis@lemmy.caEnglish
      442·
      6 个月前

      “Trickle down economics only occurs when the wealthy bleed.”

      Similar, and appropriate. The working class will only benefit once the wealthy are no longer wealthy.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
      23·
      6 个月前

      You can just ask an AI anyway since it’s training set will basically just be stackoverflow.

      • sus@programming.devEnglish
        21·
        6 个月前

        the entirety of stackoverflow is not enough data to make the AI work properly. They need terabytes of text, stackoverflow has about 50-100GB of useful data at most

    • Bazoogle@lemmy.worldEnglish
      36·
      6 个月前

      Plus AI is actually happy to answer your random questions, with an immediate response. Stack overflow will quickly become obsolete as AI gets better

      • JcbAzPx@lemmy.worldEnglish
        112·
        6 个月前

        AI is just regurgitating old stack overflow. It’s not going to get better.