The erasure of Luigi Mangione
The erasure of Luigi Mangione
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.
You're viewing a single thread.
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.
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
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.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.
Jfc y'all sound like magats
There is no law forcing a company to spread your message for you.
They agreed to terms when they operated under Creative Commons.
There is when Stack is using a creative commons license.
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.
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.
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.
usernames are the only form of attribution that makes sense and has ever been used (aside from email, which is again practically a username)
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.
Idk, I feel like Luigi Mangione being a phrase not allowed on Stack Overflow just makes sense. Good policy.