My interpretation of what happened is that Ms. Reid's lawyers requested that specific posts within a full archive be removed from the archive. In other words, they weren't asking for removal of the entire archive. They just wanted a "sanitized" version to be accessible to the public.
The Internet Archive has a mechanism for doing this, as I understand it. It involves asserting copyright over the material in question and essentially "making a case" for removal. IA decided the case they made didn't pass muster, and denied specific removal on those grounds, which is why they mention "journalistic nature of the archive" and so forth.
But that's entirely orthogonal to their policy of treating active maintenance of robots.txt as indicative of positive copyright assertion over the contents of an entire domain -- which Ms. Reid's team appears to have taken as a fallback position. They couldn't get the sanitized archive they wanted, so they just made the whole thing invisible.
"Marketing...kept changing the core functionality"
"CEO kept shoving his ludicrous ideas onto development"
Check and check. There's also my personal favorite: marketing informs the dev team they've just inked a big contract with a tight deadline for features that were never discussed with the dev team. "We kinda told them we already had those features but hadn't released them yet. Can you guys build that real quick like?"
As a relative newbie to Haskell, the linked document contains a lot of information that I had wondered about but hadn't found definitive answers for (eg. Should I be using String at all?) as well as a wealth of information I hadn't even thought to ask yet. I suspect it's going to live in a browser tab next to Hoogle until I get a lot more experience.
Favorite line: "Playing "type-tetris" to convert between Strings explicitly can be frustrating." Such understatement! Converting between string types and dealing with the lack of scoping in records have been two major pinch points for me with Haskell so far.
Most puzzling part: The description of Erlang as an imperative language.
I had some of the same frustration with Python, and eventually switched to julia-lang for this kind of stuff. You still don't get the static type analysis step of something like C++ or Haskell, but you can more easily control the types that flow through your computations (compared to python) by using julia's type system. You don't have to deal with numpy's magic, because julia has very nice linear algebra built-ins, and as long as you produce type-stable julia code it's usually plenty fast. There's also an opencv package for julia, although I've never used it.
"out to 60 semitones" -- does this mean you're interpreting the diagram as a pitch-map covering five octaves? I was interpreting it as a tone-map comprising 12 semitones grouped into five distinct tonal regions with the center web indicating specific movements from one tonal region to another.
EDIT: Just saw your other comment interpreting it as a spiral, which effectively answers my question.
I'm pretty sure both rings are normal whole-tone scales and all the places you have marked as Xn are simply Xb.
Curious though if you have a take on the boxed numbers over the C's. Perhaps calling out how the original tonic position changes in relation to everything else as you move around the circle?
The Internet Archive has a mechanism for doing this, as I understand it. It involves asserting copyright over the material in question and essentially "making a case" for removal. IA decided the case they made didn't pass muster, and denied specific removal on those grounds, which is why they mention "journalistic nature of the archive" and so forth.
But that's entirely orthogonal to their policy of treating active maintenance of robots.txt as indicative of positive copyright assertion over the contents of an entire domain -- which Ms. Reid's team appears to have taken as a fallback position. They couldn't get the sanitized archive they wanted, so they just made the whole thing invisible.