The simple approach is to default to single party consent but allow explicit nonconsent. In other words nobody can be recorded without their knowledge, but if they’re informed a recording is being made then remaining in the conversation is consent.
Obviously there are lines to be drawn when we are talking about the government recording citizens. Warrants are an important check on power for this. But any individual should be able to record (mostly) anything. At the very least, it can save you money when a customer service rep claims they never said something. At most, it can keep you out of prison.
Fine. I'm recording it!
This therefore to me seems like a thinly-veiled variant on “if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear”. A world of constant recording is not a better one.