No, no, no. Their argument is "I didn't do anything wrong when I did X. That guy over THERE did something wrong when he did not-really-X." Clinton logic.
I wonder if it's that as readers got faster, they have less time to deal with errors from disks that were crap to start with, so errors that have been there all along are now causing visible issues.
I remember a study that found there were problems caused by writing CDs at slower speeds on hardware designed to write faster -- causing more write errors. I've always written disks at the fastest available speed, which might be why I never ran into that issue. (Tho I still have an old 4x unit should I ever run into it.)
Commercial disks are pretty durable, as you say (unless exposed to weather, then they fall apart fairly quick). The only commercial disk I've seen fail were bad out of the box. But burnables, not so much. Mine have done well (my oldest ones are still readable) but I lived in the desert. Dampness and CDRs do not play well together, as they're not completely sealed around the edges, so I'm not surprised by tales of woe.
I still use CDRs and DVDRs for sneakernet to the DOS machine that doesn't speak network or USB, and occasionally for a specific type of backup (movie or album) but no longer routinely use them for system backup. I can get a whole stack of DVDs on a single 128GB flash drive (not to mention backup is much faster and needs far less babysitting), and per the torture tests I've read about, flash drives beat everything else for durability (retaining data through all manner of abuse; one even partially survived being shot).
And until recently I was still using them for live CDs for testing OS distros, but along came that bootable-flash-drive app and now I have 40+ distros on a single flash stick, plus a place to save files convenient to whatever I'm testing.
I never did acquire a Blu-Ray, tho I suppose now that prices have gotten sane I'll pick one up just so I have it if I need one. Which might be never at the present rate (I don't buy BR movies, so what is it good for? burned BR are reputed very unreliable, failing in as little as six months.)
What indications are those? Please specify. Otherwise please quit making noise.
HRC and her team did everything they said they were going to do: they curated the emails, marked the ones that were personal for deletion, then used bleachbit to do the actual deletion. There is nothing new in that story.
But Trey Gowdy has demonstrated an appalling level of ignorance wrt to technology, and to the recent history of Federal level Republican politics. Oliver North, in Reagan's Iran - Contra fiasco, demonstrated full well that when it is expedient to delete something, you better damn well delete it. And not simply mark it as deleted. Gowdy is either an ignorant fool, or a disingenuous fool. But note that "fool" remains a constant with him, in this context.
To repeat: the Clinton team handled the deletions that she said she was doing in a professional manner. Gowdy just thinks that is somehow criminal that HRC is competent at handling sensitive information.
At this point I'm beginning to see a pattern shaping up where HRC is being found to be too competent at what she has been doing for fifty years, and therefore we hates her, we do, yes, we hates how this mere woman who is not a Republican is competent. Yes, we hates her.
The significance of this is Elon Musk, who is the self-driving Uber of dot.com billionaires and is the hero of our times.
Well, I knew Steve Jobs well enough, and have met a few civilian astronauts and a bunch of other rich people. None of the others seem to have done so much for the long-term future of the human race as Musk has in leading the path to more affordable spaceflight.
There is never time to do it right, but always time to do it over.