Describing the implementation details does nothing to change the reality that the device is acting as an informant against its owner. The number of hoops literally changes nothing. Adding an AI model versus using SHA sums changes nothing. Adding some convoluted cryptography system to implement some additional policy changes nothing. In trivial cases like anti-piracy measures or anti-cheat in games, we tolerate that the device will sometimes act against our best interest, but at least in this case, the stakes are low and the intentions are transparent.

We have every fact we need to know to know this shouldn’t be done, and I’m glad that privacy orgs like EFF have already spoken much to this effect.