Yet in the US social progress needs to come IMMEDIATELY, as soon as someone stamps their precious little foot?
Except the law at the heart of the controversy is the opposite of social progress. A huge portion of the country has taken a step forward while Indiana is taking a step backward. It leaves a much larger moral divide than if Indiana was just trying to keep the status quo.
But for people who only can get to wikipedia through their basic cell phone plans
While I agree that there is genuine concern about wikipedia becoming a gatekeeper in general, I don't think it's valid to claim this was the sole source for people to be making college decisions on. Wikipedia Zero has only been around in India for about 2 years. What did they use prior to that to look up information on colleges? Did those other sources of information disappear in those two years? Just because a new, convenient source of information becomes available doesn't mean people should suddenly treat that as the only authority on the subject.
I would also question the article's claim that possibly 15,000 people were affected, since they don't seem to back up that calculation. I bet that is just the college's estimated yearly enrollment multiplied by the number of years the banned account was active.
Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?