And with that, the debate shuts down... this is the problem with any decentralized networking solution. If it's possible to get rid of the (insert objectionable content here), it's possible to use the exact same mechanism to get rid of the (insert government-disapproved content here). This is why a decentralized internet will never happen.
Hmm... that depends on finding one that's willing to route your requests, and I doubt that those are cheap. Of course, if I was an LEA, I'd set up a "low cost proxy server for requesting illegal content" and start logging requests right now.
Oh, for God's sake. Mention "censorship" and bring out the etymology nazis...
If what Amazon is doing - refusing to sell something because they object to it on a moral basis - what is it? What word defines that act? "Amazon Private-company-selling-whatever-legal-products-they-wish Expands" isn't a very snappy title, after all. Neither is "Amazon Doing-something-that-is-unworthy-of-discussion-because-amazon-is-not-the-government-and-their-actions-are-not-covered-by-the-first-amendment Expands". "Censorship" is the best word we've got to describe that act, so until we can agree on a better word, we'll continue using it. Now can you please stop jamming up the entire fscking comments section with 500 repeats of "They're a private company!" every time we talk try to bring corporate censorship to the attention of people who do care?