R v Elliott is an interesting case. It contradicts what you are saying in general, but it also shows that the courts imposed strict conditions on a suspected harassment case which severely harmed the defendant's work life.
Courts commonly impose it. When such sentences first arose, the internet was marginal enough that it wasn't vital. And most judges now could probably live a tolerably normal life with an internet ban.
But if anyone on HN got banned from the internet, that would be tantamount to "banned from work", and much else.
I haven't seen much discussion about overuse of these order though.