That breaks a few things like the sendmail command on a default *Nix setup. But you can often set it up to relay mail to the ISP server instead.
It's a bit sad that you can't run a mail server at home. But very few people really need to do that. If you have a legitimate need to run your own mail server get a cheap cloud instance or use one of the bulk mail delivery services instead.
Blocking port 25 is a sane measure to protect Internet users from the spam and phishing mail propagated by botnets. Just like how some ISPs block the Windows networking ports to protect users with mis-configured home networks.
If you've got a dynamic IP, please don't even attempt this. If somebody else gets assigned your IP before you have a chance to update the DNS, they could potentially pick up your email.
ISPs who implement blocks on port 25 and force everyone to use their mail server are able to take responsibility for the spam leaving their network.
Note, ISPs don't block ports 587 and 465, so they're not preventing you from using services like GMail etc.
Also, it is completely relevant as they have all done exactly what is being proposed in the article being discussed. ISPs in South Korea will also provide mail relays for their subscribers to use.
The port 25 block is designed to force compromised systems to route email via controlled boxes. The fact that you can route email via controlled boxes doesn't mean you've worked around the block, it means you've been forced to do exactly what the intention was.
I suppose that would be a form of non-net-neutral corporate censorship. But one could make a pretty good argument that it's a technical issue with a core protocol of the Internet. It's not really practical to send emails from your home anyway because so many servers will simply refuse to accept them from residential netblocks.