I don't think that's quite true. It's like the difference between surveilling someone by tailing them and surveilling them with an automated network of cameras

I don't think that's quite true. It's like the difference between surveilling someone by tailing them and surveilling them with an automated network of cameras equipped with facial recognition. Scale matters. Much work (especially work we call unskilled) is rendered tolerable by the small human moments you have with your coworkers, a conversation out back when taking out the trash or whatever. Management sees any such thing as "time theft" or a similarly dystopian term and would like to eradicate it, but they cannot be everywhere at once. An algorithm can be everywhere at once. So the conversation "maybe people should not actually have to be doing productive things the entire time they are being paid" never really had to be had before, because people would just do things to make their job tolerable. But now that such simple pleasures can actually be eradicated the conversation does have to be had. There are other domains where analogous conversations should be had. Many people agree with their laws in the general and even specific senses, but almost nobody would want to live in a society where all the laws are enforced perfectly 100% of the time. Occasional lawbreaking is necessary for society to function. Anybody who objects to this should really think through what they're wishing for.