I'm not a fan of this recently-popular form of argument: "we're not banning X: we're just adding friction, so your arguments predicated on banning X are invalid

I'm not a fan of this recently-popular form of argument: "we're not banning X: we're just adding friction, so your arguments predicated on banning X are invalid". Support for a thing is continuous, not discrete. It ranges from full endorsement on one end of the spectrum to a total unrelenting ban on the other. The arguments against banning X also apply to adding friction to X, just to a lesser extent depending on how much friction we're talking about. If it didn't, you could defacto ban things by making them arbitratily difficult. I still think there's a data sovereignty argument against the move we're discussing on this thread. That it's just friction makes the move less bad, but I think it's still bad.