People won't be able to read anything contradicting government's point of view. It is important for stability in society that there is only correct and truthful information and no falseful foreign propaganda seeding distruct in government (e.g. by falsefully claiming that high-ranked officials own expensive villas in Europe that they cannot afford with their salary).
> only mobile networks are affected. I wonder why that is.
Because it is only testing stage now.
> Is this just the decisions of a handful of telcos
Why would telecoms spend money on censorship by themselves? It doesn't increase their profit.
> Wireguard for example is just UDP packets.
WireGuard packets are not obfuscated and can be easily detected. And even if it was obfuscated, everything that doesn't look like HTTPS can be blocked without causing much troubles.
People won't be able to read anything contradicting government's point of view. It is important for stability in society that there is only correct and truthful information and no falseful foreign propaganda seeding distruct in government (e.g. by falsefully claiming that high-ranked officials own expensive villas in Europe that they cannot afford with their salary).
> only mobile networks are affected. I wonder why that is.
Because it is only testing stage now.
> Is this just the decisions of a handful of telcos
Why would telecoms spend money on censorship by themselves? It doesn't increase their profit.
> Wireguard for example is just UDP packets.
WireGuard packets are not obfuscated and can be easily detected. And even if it was obfuscated, everything that doesn't look like HTTPS can be blocked without causing much troubles.