I was struck most by Coll's last point: "the United States has only issued non-binding guidelines" on "the sale and use of surveillance technology." This seems odd, as it's clearly a form of a weapon, or at least can be used as such, yet is not regulated at all.

But that also kind of fits more largely in the US's view of software. It's never really regulated, whether for monopolies ornuser privacy or what have it. It's almost as if by using devices and the internet, we are giving our full consent to the makers of those devices and content that they have no responsibility for us on the back end. I guess that's common with relatively new technologies, but it feels like regulation is moving too slow here.