[leppr]

It's hard to imagine how a government set to police the minutiae of everyday life of pretty much a whole continent's worth of humans, can not be antagonistic with the majority of it. Even in such a uniform cultural environment as the US, local differences will "always" be too important to make such relations with a state-wide governing entity consensual. High-level principles and policies, sure, but low level policing and surveillance applied uniformly at such a scale can't be consensual.

[carapace]

> It's hard to imagine how a government set to police the minutiae of everyday life of pretty much a whole continent's worth of humans, can not be antagonistic with the majority of it.

Indeed! But I think it's important to try.

FWIW, I don't postulate that the ubiquitous surveillance is consensual at all, just inevitable. For a lot of people the amount and degree of casual surveillance is already becoming an issue.

I'm saying, if we have to have it, how do we want to manage it?