Nothing about crime and punishment mechanisms being used, in-character, by in-game entities, behaving in an in-setting context automatically implies a automatically implies 'Big Brother'esque approach. Not that such an approach would be out of character for many of the societies in the Elite setting.
I'd love it if the low-sec systems (NOT anarchy) had a distinctly less big-brother approach, where being attacked would summon an authority response as your distress call goes out, but they can't issue a bounty unless they actually see you being naughty - so if you assault someone, the cops are summoned but you don't actually become wanted unless the authority ships catch you in the act of commiting a crime or at the very least they catch you at the scene (I imagine they're smart enough to hear "help cmdr screemonster is attacking me" over comms, arrive and see cmdr screemonster hanging around next to a debris field or damaged ship, and put two and two together)
If this were the case, I'd assume high-security systems had a more advanced system link and surveillance satellites that could verify a crime-in-progress based on just a report. Likewise, things like a nav beacon, settlement or station would count as "authorities" for the sake of verifying a crime report.
Highsec, I'd also beef up to the point where
interdictions are considered a bounty and summon an authority response.
That's something that, imo, would make a notable difference between low, medium and high security.
Solo would be much improved if system chat from otherplayers was filtered out too...
It depends on the system. Borann got pretty bad at times, whatever the current CG is can be awful, but minor-hotspots can be generally okay. The biggest pain about system chat in systems that don't have an active conversation going when you arrive is that you have no way of knowing if anyone is listening, so nobody bothers piping up for a chat in the systems where people are just chilling and going about their business.