It's kind of a reverse streisand effect. The Gov't only actually wants to censor specific things. The constant rules are just a smoke screen to avoid drawing attention to the things they actually want to censor. The vagueness ensures the specific cases never have to worry about breaking their own rules, which would also draw attention.
Mostly because the voting system is set up to value money over public interest. Politicians don't fight for votes directly, they fight for money from lobbyists, then use the money to control the information the public gets to base their votes on.
Even if they did "allow" this, Google would have to pay apple first for the privilege of having it's browser in apple's market. Tell me that is not hindering competition more than just having something be installed by default.
They block competitors from making competing app stores to sell applications to run on the iphone. They block competitors from making competing hardware that runs IOS. They block competitors from making competing Operating systems that run on IPhone hardware. They block competitors from making applications that run on the iphone at all unless they pay Apple first. There are far more legitimate anti-trust issues with the way apple tries to keep it's entire market locked and under control than with google's open version.
Where is the absolute monopoly?.. You have a metric ton of sucky competition in all areas. There are many sucky search engines, there are many sucky phones there are many sucky web browsers. There is nothing preventing competition in this space, and you can't force companies make better products. Forcing the good ones to make worse products doesn't help anyone.
I don't get it.. So Google gets in trouble and Apple is somehow fine? Apple actively prevents other apps from running on the iphone and forces people to use it's app store giving it a cut of every application that runs on the iphone.
This is fine, but preinstalling chrome isn't? Isn't safari also preinstalled (not that anyone uses it)? I'm beyond confused.
I would highly suggest bribing the clerk at the retail store to give you your PD. The little gizmo they use to measure it is much more accurate, and it's quite important to get it right.
If you want to use the ruler method, definitely have someone else measure, since you can't read the ruler and hold your eyes straight at the same time. The ruler method didn't work for me though, I got a bunch of wonky symptoms and had to do the bribe the clerk method :)
I have no experience with online eye exams. However, I am familiar with buying glasses online. Currently buying glasses online in Canada is perfectly legal and like 1/10th the cost of buying them retail. The biggest obstacle to doing so is the glasses retailers attempt to prevent this through a deal with the optometrist that your pupillary distance is never included in your prescription from the optometrist. The pupillary distance is needed to make glasses for you, and because of this collusion, it's only ever measured by the glasses retailers, and they will never give it to you. You can *try* to measure it yourself, but it's not nearly as reliable and you can get headaches and such if you screw up and order glasses with a wrong PD.
Since as you mention the online version is not replacing checks for other medical conditions, those would still have to be performed on an as needed basis by your regular optometrists. Any opposition would have no cause to complain about any competition on that front.
Fortunately for you, if you or anyone else doesn't like/trust/whatever the online version they have the option of going to a brick and mortar one instead. Yay for competition!