At a certain philosophical / high level, I don't like the idea of the 'human-memorable names' .onion feature.<p>It's politicising software. Open-source software should never have an official, hard-coded opinion about any of the content findable through it.<p>I've seen the Firefox org increasing do similar things when reading their email newsletter. It even stopped me donating to Firefox.<p>A core idea of Tor is to not censor. When you give special access to some sites, it feels like the opposite of net neutrality. That is on the censorship spectrum.<p>I guess it's not too bad if they never block any content at the protocol or software level, but at some point, giving certain content privileged features at the software/protocol level is a two-edged sword. It means you're forced to <i>deny</i> supporting other content.<p>Indeed, once Tor starts having an official opinion about online content at the browser level, who's to stop people starting to pressure Tor to block certain content, since they're basically starting to be in that realm now? It can be a slippery slope.<p>I'd prefer at the very least it be toned down to a third party add-on. It's great to make onion sites easier to access, of course. But it should be in a way that doesn't involve political or legal barriers for content creators.<p>---<p>BTW, I highly encourage anyone with a linux box at home just sitting there 24/7 to start an obfs4 bridge relay. It's not that hard, and low on resources. #tor-relays IRC extremely helpful in getting you set up.<p>I've been running one for about a year and it's provided tens/hundreds of GBs of Tor Internet to people hopefully in Asia, South America, and the Middle East - protesters who really, really need some help in anonymization or gaining access to blocked content.