I think you're extrapolating way too far, and hence your arguments aren't hitting the mark. The total amount of invigilation in the entirety of each course I'm involved in is 3-5 hours. This has been the case for many decades. This year, for some students, it is aided by software, due to the fact that they're unavoidably thousands of kilometres away. It is not a slippery slope, and none of your dystopian ideas seem like they could result from it.
This kind of software does not monitor computer use outside of the test. It monitors the student during the test, like a human invigilator (yes, it's recorded, so not identical). During the test, the student is only working on the test, which is not private or secret. When the test is finished, the software exits.
I don't see how you could have the resources for an infrequently used testing centre, but not enough to pay one person for an hour or two. That is not what this kind of software is useful for.
This kind of software does not monitor computer use outside of the test. It monitors the student during the test, like a human invigilator (yes, it's recorded, so not identical). During the test, the student is only working on the test, which is not private or secret. When the test is finished, the software exits.
I don't see how you could have the resources for an infrequently used testing centre, but not enough to pay one person for an hour or two. That is not what this kind of software is useful for.