Couldn't the same argument have been had with mobile phones a couple of decades ago, or even still now? They can be tracked, so not owning a mobile will brand you as suspicious?
One could make the argument that we're moving down that path. Ever heard a conversation with someone who doesn't have a mobile phone? People can't believe why someone wouldn't have a cell phone. Pay phones are gone, emergency call boxes on the highways are gone. If you don't have a cell phone, you can't reach emergency services in many areas of travel. If you're not able to be in constant contact, people get suspicious.
It's a far cry from being officially branded as a person of interest, but if you don't have a mobile phone, you're out of mainstream society.
A point I called out. What I was trying to do was make an argument that we may have begun our journey to "if you don't have a cell phone, you're suspicious". How long until someone could use their GPS tracking data and witnesses on the other end of the phone as an alibi to prove their innocence when the prosecution has a case that says otherwise, except they don't have a mobile phone?
Slipper slopes aren't always that slippery, but sometimes they are. It's just a possibility, and possibilities are fun to think about.
