Is it paranoia?

It is possible that paranoia is with me. However, I am still socially safe ...
But what will the outcome of the initiative of the Chicago authorities , who propose to ban access to social networks from public libraries and school locales?

1. Drop in attendance of the library => some decrease in general education.

2. The increase in expenditures on the enforcement of this law => or an increase in the expenditure side of the budget, or the truncation of part of school expenses.
')
3. For communication in social networks, adolescents will visit places where it is much easier to “push” drugs and alcohol — cafes and bars.
3.1 Either sit out at home, which increases separation
3.2 Either use mobile access from laptops (yeah, the first ears stick out from behind the scenes: mobile providers increase traffic, which fully complies with the principle of “Qui prodest?”)

It is doubtful that this will be useful for saving libraries' traffic (where mega-pdf national laws are often downloaded or scans of ancient documents), since 75-80% of traffic on social networks is all the same blogs. Well, even 50%. Anyway, this is no more than 20% of additional traffic.

But the concept of confrontation between capitalism and netocracy fits perfectly: by creating additional difficulties (unreasoned, hastily), capital is trying to stop the expansion of social networks.

However, the fact that such initiatives instantly receive a wide resonance plays against capital.

Is the confrontation heating up?