The title is implicitly responding to someone who thinks, "fashion is an important part of masculinity, and it's immutable," but has nothing to say to someone who thinks, "fashion is an important part of masculinity and can change."
As far as I can tell, you are arguing that it won't become impossible to use a VPN. But no-one has said that it will be, and what I and others are trying to point out, is that VPN usage will become more difficult and rare. The vast majority of people will be restricted from viewing the content that the government objects to, whatever that is.
If you have anything to say about that rather than repeating the point that, yes, for the knowledgeable, for the tech-literate, for the people with the will and the spare time and the energy, VPN usage will still be available, feel free to. Maybe you think that actually everyone will use a VPN - why? why won't a massive reduction in marketed options not reduce usage massively? Maybe you think that actually it doesn't matter - why? why does it not matter that the average person will be unable to get information censored by the government?
Mmm. Given that you didn't bother reading the article in order to have the context to respond to, I'm not inclined to take your word for it over the source.
The article even takes theft of a Picasso as an example. In that case you know it's not being stolen to melt down. That's not the case here.
“Stolen to order is something from the Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”
Why is carol bitching about what she can see on teams that she can't see looking around the office already?