>>6685372
you mean that Newsqueek didn't have that kind that the reeltoreel tape doesn't burst into flames if it gets diconnected from the system?
Is it really suppression of 'the press' if no one reads their magazine ever, and they don't even print it anymore?
Is anyone really keeping anyone from writing and saying what they want? I think not.
Does the confiscation include the people there being able to still get access to data that they might need?
how do they know, the confiscators, that those servers weren't part of some bigger thing and, if disconnected, never able to be useful for anything else (like so much tech is).?
If Newsqueek was used as a conduit for conspiracy, or trafficking, one would imagine that they'd have to deal with the consequences.
given that the magazine doesn't really exist anymore, what has been it's purpose these last few years other than as some neffarious back-chan for the flim-flam of the swamp-rat-people who don't play nice?