So what's the magic age at which it becomes morally acceptable to surveil people? Is this a way to ease into the argument that freedom from surveillance is a human right?

I'd say 200!

I mean to be fair any college exam is physically proctored by TA's and teachers to avoid the same thing before. Though the solutions aren't great there is something to be said for attempting to keep the validity of an exam.

> The popular tool Lock Down Browser is more or less spyware that takes over your device, monitors every click,

... during the administration of an exam.

> and watches every movement.

This is an option most exams don't opt for.

> And yet most colleges and universities can’t reliably detect cheating even with this tool.

It does remove the massive temptation of using the computer you're sitting at to look "just one thing" up.

My big complaint about it is that it's garbage.

Well designed tests aren't something you can get through with a textbook or a web browser.

I would say the majority of tests are not well designed, and rely on rote memorization and recall. It's disheartening to see schools implement surveillance to compensate.

I would expect a lot of this software locks down your computer in the name of "preventing cheating" but the company's unstated goal is "harvesting more information."

In a similar vein, after 9-11 the airlines loved the idea that they had to start checking the ID of every passenger to ensure it matched the name on the ticket. They said they supported this for "increased security" but the real reason the airlines liked the idea was that it eliminated ticket resale, which had been a major annoyance to the airlines' bottom line for decades.