It depends on the type of CD. Normal CDs rely on the shape and reflectivity of the aluminum layer, and if this oxadizes they degrade, the oxidation process is drastically slowed by good storage, and they can last much longer if stored in an inert gas.

CD-Rs are dye based with the dye being burnt away for recording. Depending on the type of dye, the dye can break down fairly quickly irrelevant of storage conditions, the cheap dyes degrade inevitably with in 10 years.

CD-RWs (what I’m using) operate on an alloy that is melted to switch it between an amorphous and poly crystalline state to effect reflectivity, and that is fairly stable long term as it is not a chemical change and the alloy is resistant to oxidation, these can be expected to last 20 years under poor storage (exposed to UV and humidity which can damage the plastic) and up to 200 years if stored properly.

Frankly, I doubt my personal music collection needs to last more than 70 years.

Ain’t it weird how they keep taking out an important feature right before promoting a new service or product that makes it easier to live without it.

“Why would you need headphone jack when Bluetooth auto connecting earphones”

“Why would you need swappable/expandable storage when media streaming and cloud storage?”

Because my parents had a CD burner and a tower of blank CD-RWs they let me take from their place. Also, doesn’t need an internet connection for me to accesses them when I’m not at home.

A few months ago I started moving most of my audio media over to CDs. I don’t trust streaming services to maintain extensive libraries and/or continue to exist.

We’re already seeing video streaming services remove content from their platforms despite having the rights to it.

I doubt that Spotify or Apple Music won’t do the same in the near future.

Voice controls are worse and more frustrating still.

So, according to the motion filed on the 1st of may, which is what I assume the tweet is referencing, I think there are two things of note.

1st: When cornered at the McDonald’s, the police questioned him about his name and requested his id, then proceeded to ask him a bunch of different questions regarding his identity, the validity of his id, wether he had lied about his name, and any travel to New York. They, at no point at the McDonald’s, ever read him his Miranda rights, even after informing him that he was under investigation and detaining him, even after one officer told the others to read him his rights.

2nd: They moved his backpack to another table before informing him he was under investigation. They did not have a warrant to search his backpack, and given that it was far beyond his reach, and he was handcuffed when they began searching it, there was no reason to suspect anything in it would have been dangerous to the officers on sight. They found a computer chip in the bag while he was still inside, and did not “find” the loaded gun until he was outside and being driven to the precinct. After “finding” the gun, the officer searching the bag stated that they were searching it to make sure there “wasn’t a bomb or anything in here”. The motion I’m referencing suggests that this statement was a hasty attempt to justify the warrantless search post facto.