There's an interesting point hidden here. A lot of people claim that 2600 is obsolete because it is still in print as opposed to going full digital like a lot o

There's an interesting point hidden here. A lot of people claim that 2600 is obsolete because it is still in print as opposed to going full digital like a lot of places did. 30 years ago, a lot of us thought that the internet and digital would bring freedom. We would no longer have to rely on the good mercy of book stores or newsstands willing to stock the magazines, or convince reluctant editors to print articles. We could just put it online where it would live forever. It turns out that when something is online, it is much easier to ban or censor. Remember when the drama about Kevin Spacey came out, and all the streaming services removed his movies and TV shows? What about when a news story is posted and gets a bit of heat, so the editor goes in to edit it to remove the offending bits to appease the mob? Or deletes an article because they had bad blood with the writer? If you have a physical DVD of a movie, no streaming service can block it. And if you have the print version of the newspaper or the magazine, then the editor can't just break into your house and cut the article out of the issue. I mean I guess they could, but that is a LOT harder than just clicking a button in a CMS.