[temporaryvector]

The complaint isn't about the capability for mass surveillance, but the normalization of it, in the public mind.

The capability has existed for a pretty long time, mostly out of the public eye, with occasional bursts of outrage when something caused it to become public, quickly forgotten afterwards.

The capability is there, that genie is out of the bottle and nobody is going to put it back in. This isn't really about the technology, it's about the legal frameworks and social attitudes surrounding this capability that are worth talking about. Putting your hands up in defeat is not useful, and at this point probably neither is trying to prevent the technology from spreading. I am unsure what the solution is but the conversation needs to happen, and in all likelihood the end result of that conversation will be that corporations can't be trusted, just like they couldn't be trusted with food safety, for example, thus the FDA was created. What actions will be taken after that, I cannot predict.

[LatteLazy]

Sorry, I can see where you're coming from, I just think you're seeing a difference that isn't there.

Specifically, these programs are totally normalised. We've had them for decades. They're supported by both parties in the the whole English speaking world. They've grown and expanded since they were revealed. At this point, total surveillance is normal.

If anything, making an app for coronavirus is a good thing. It's easier to ignore this if it's done server side than if your carrier suddenly compels you to install some shitty slow battery draining app. I don't know if that qualifies as normalising it, but if it does and get people up in arms (or encourages even 1% of them to move to tor or signal or something) it's a good thing...