If the system, when actually product tested and developed, offers people individual anonymity and discretion, as well as an off switch and an incentive not to push it, then it's good tech. If not then not, and it wouldn't sell. I for one wouldn't much mind if my system paid attention and popped out a note saying "Hey, you've said the word coffee 93 times this last month and never soda, how would you feel about me relaying that factoid up and you start getting coffee not soda commercials and a little less commercials overall?" "Why, yes, good idea." Says I or "No, I don't drink soda at all, and I always drink brand X of coffee" then says it, "Cool, I'll mark you as non-receipt for both then". That's useful tech, when used properly, same as an Xray machine can seriously invade your privacy but is also handy when used properly. Determining best usage has to wait till the tech is developed because Röntgen didn't know we'd be using Xrays to detect broken bones when he first studied them, and patents are part of that process. I don't see the big deal, it's a huge leap to assume mandatory usage.



It is stunning to me how fast people rewrite both recent and distant history to fit their narratives.

We have a cultural very interested in privacy and we descend principally from cultures who had little expectation of privacy, typically living in one or two room huts in villages or tribes where everyone knew everyone and every rumor and past infraction they'd ever committed. Most of our lack of privacy these days comes from idiots voluntarily airing their dirty laundry on Facebook or Twitter anyway.