Nothing is forever, just ask HD-DVD, BetaMax, CD-ROM and literally everything else.
Beta is doing quite well in some niche cases, and CD-rom is as well. But yeah, your point stands.
I've got more bricked USB drives than I know what to do with and a stack of HDDs nearly as tall How is that even remotely different than it being available on a streaming service?
If the streaming service chooses to remove something, you can't have a back-up.
The only media I trust is my Plex server with it's RAID array and even then I'm just barely confident.
Ah, you answered your own question.
Looking at the Wiki for Bandcamp I find:
Fans are able to download their purchases or stream their music on the Bandcamp app/site only once or unlimited times by preserving the purchase voucher.
Then the wiki page is wrong.
You don't need an account to buy music, but if you don't have an account and want to re-download track then, yeah, you need to keep the download code.
You might disagree that IBM sold machines to Germany in the 1930ies,
Yes.
you might disagree that Dow Chemicals sold Agent Orange to the US Military in the 1970ies.
Yes.
But would you still disagree if your favourite Fast-Food joint refuses to serve you because you own a gun
Yes. I might even frequent a business like that more.
or drive a car?
Yes. It might depend on the type of car.
Would you still disagree if GitHub refuses your business because you don't pray 5 times a day on a colourful rug?
That would be discrimination based on religion, which is a special class of bad.
I don't know the year the incident may have taken place, so I am going to have to do some calculated guesses.
She was 17. He was 25 years older than Epstein and Epstein was supposedly much older than the girls at his parties. So a 40-50 years age difference would not be unreasonable to assume.
Now it is possible a girl 50 years your junior finds you enormously attractive. It is rather unlikely though, and at the very least warrants the question.
Next thing we know, you're going to demand trial by jury
Please no. In general, juries suck at giving decent verdicts.
and the right to confront one's accusers in open court.
With reasonable limits, yes.
So wait dead people get a free pass on arbitrarily bad behavior because they're dead?
No, but neither do the accusers of dead people.
While I age that RMSs words were badly misrepresented, his actual words were bad enough.
They weren't bad at all. His friend was accused of assaulting a girl, and the only point he tried to make that Minski may not have know that she was unwilling. If I am ever accused of having done things, I hope my friends will come forward as character witnesses.
Basically decided now was the perfect time to get into a semantic argument over whether it was technically assault.
Now was the time when his friend was accused. What other time would be an appropriate time to react to that?
Thing is if you're that day in the semantics you're not really defending someone anymore, because outside of a court of law where time been accused of assault, "not technically assault" doesn't equate worth "ok".
He's also completely wrong about the semantic definition too.
intent, noun:
1a : the act or fact of intending : purpose
especially : the design or purpose to commit a wrongful or criminal act
It seems to me that knowing an act is wrongful or criminal is essential for it being intentional. Minsky may have had sex with the girl -- RMS assumes so, but I've read reports that even that is not sure -- but he (probably) didn't know that she was unwilling.
He should have made sure, though. Not doing so would be a lack of character, not criminal intent.
"If a computer can't directly address all the RAM you can use, it's just a toy." -- anonymous comp.sys.amiga posting, non-sequitir