> But then all content should be static and never update?

And thus we arrive at the root of the conflict. Many users (that care about this kind of thing) want to publications that they’ve seen to stay where they’ve seen them; many publishers have become accustomed to being able to memory-hole things (sometimes for very real safety reasons; often for marketing ones). That on top of all the usual problems of maintaining a space of human-readable names.

No, not all content should never change. This is just the core of the dilemma: dynamic content (and identifiers) rots faster that static content (content addressed). We can have both, but not at the same time.