Public education failed you so thoroughly that you should probably retain legal counsel and sue. Meanwhile, stuff it while the folks who can read books with big words and no pictures are talking.

Public education failed you so thoroughly that you should probably retain legal counsel and sue.

It's got electrolytes and shit...

Don't forget the 3-2-1 Rule of Backups:

Have at least 3 separate copies of important files/data, preserved using 2 different storage formats (e.g. hard drive, optical media, cloud storage), and store at least 1 of those copies off-site or it's Schrodinger's Cat and you'll find out if it exists or not the next time you try to access it.

What? It has been the consistent argument of social media companies, et al. that they *do* moderate, do so intentionally, and it is within their company's First Amendment rights to do so. And if you don't think a corporation is a legal person, I refer you to the travesty which was the Citizen's United ruling of a clearly corrupt and bought off SCOTUS.

Given that one can type a url into the browser bar and, DNS gods permitting, navigate to the site/resource one intended... yeah. The fact that you can perform searches in the browser bar as well does not eliminate the first use-case.

To borrow from Mr. Adams: "A bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes."

Yes.

You've got mail!

*insert Captain America 'I understood that reference' meme here*

*Yandex has entered the chat*

You're not necessarily doing something wrong so long as you recognize that if you aren't paying for it, *you* are the product.

I've seen the occasionally calls for this kind of thing in the United States as well and my first question is to wonder if these various high-volume network traffic tech companies are somehow obtaining their Internet service for free? Because if not, then these tech companies have already negotiated a contract for service which takes network bandwidth utilization into account much in the same way that we as the consumers of these tech companies' services pay for our connections to the Internet and what speed of service we desire/can afford. So the network providers are billing both ends of the connection for the level of service each is consuming and yet somehow the tech companies need to pay more? You can bet an additional tax on the consumer end of the connection would soon follow so we can all "pay our fair share" as well. This is a money-grab based upon lies and the public's general lack of understanding of how the Internet itself works and is paid for.

Or when you can't find shady enough porn elsewhere and Tor scares you.

Yes, because when someone effectively has a market monopoly/duopoly, they aren't just another competitor who "outcompeted" their competition.