> The information is available for now....

OK, so you're speculating.

And quoting Howard (the guy violating the copyright) is irrelevant. It's not a trick to defend your copyright. If he set up a channel of nothing but old Simpsons clips to "preserve" them, YouTube would take those down, too.

▲

NewJazz 3 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, all archivers speculate that the original source of information will at some point become unavailable. On a long time horizon, they have often been correct.

▲

timr 3 days ago | parent [-]

OK, so you're speculating.

▲

ceejayoz 3 days ago | parent [-]

Sure, in the same sense you're speculating that they don't have a time machine to prove their point.

Not all speculation is of equal value.

▲

timr 3 days ago | parent [-]

> Sure, in the same sense you're speculating that they don't have a time machine to prove their point.

That's called: I'm stating a current fact, and you're imagining a future that doesn't exist.

	▲	ceejayoz 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		No, you're speculating that the parent poster can't prove it with their time machine. That is a reasonable form of speculation. As was the parent poster's speculation.