Fishface, I linked you to a particular part of the article. Did you miss it by mistake?

Here is the part you failed to read:

The Panopticon [...] must be understood as a generalizable model of functioning ; a way of defining power relations in terms of the everyday life of men. No doubt Bentham presents it as a particular institution, closed in upon itself. [...] But the Panopticon must not be understood as a dream building

If you are able to scroll down even further and continue reading, you'll also discover workplace surveillance is considered a Panopticon... Even though it apparently fits into your definition of something that is "circumventable", wherever you pulled that from.