alt Hacker News>> It’s annoying, but not onerous.
> So government regulating stuff like that does go against much of the thing you said in the comment above?
It isn't law. But even if it was, that doesn't contradict what I am talking about. I'm talking about the export of puritanism. If you think having to turn the porn button from 'off' to 'on' in your phone contract's options is the same, then I don't know what to say.
> When governments try to introduce mass surveillance of personal communications to "protect the children" liek ChatControl maybe it should turn into one.
Yeah maybe, but that's not the topic of conversation here. The topic was about puritanical beliefs in the US and how its export affects the world (like the Visa issue).
> I'm talking about the export of puritanism
Sure, technically its government imposed domestic puritanism which isn't exported. I agree its a completely different thing.
> The topic was about puritanical beliefs in the US and how its export affects the world
Yes, US has its quirks but it's not that exceptional as you are implying. e.g. when it comes to banning/regulated video games Australia is inarguable much more restrictive.
Germany also has a history of banning violent video games and its again much worse than the US e.g. https://old.reddit.com/r/Steam/comments/ki12if/steam_now_reg...
Post "Online Safety Act" UK is not that much better either.
US is very tame and less "puritanical" by your definition than those countries. The core difference being that the government can't really regulate it directly so credit card companies might be acting as some sort of a proxy.
Or are you implying that US somehow turned Germany and Australia more "puritanical" than itself and there would be no domestic support for censorship there otherwise?