I worry that for 3rd parties to put forth any effort, there needs to be incentives... which would be in the form of demand... which isn't there yet because they don't put any effort into it.
MS is playing a dangerous game (for them). If they turn the screws on users hard enough then Linux might gain enough market share for there to be real demand. I'm trying to get people to switch but the lack of third party support makes it a minefield sometimes.
The war of drugs, and most other similar initiatives, mainly exist as tools for "law enforcement". In reality , "law enforcement" is primarily aimed at the lower classes when they step out of line.
It's extremely important to recognize that "laws" are enforced selectively. Those with power, money, and influence rarely suffer anything more than performative punishment, and only when not doing so might cause a substantial public backlash.
At the start of the war on drugs with Nixon, it was recognized (openly in conversations made public thanks to Watergate) as an extremely convenient way for cops to target and control blacks and anti-war protesters.
This continues today. Cop pulls you over and gets suspicious because you aren't white... "Is that marijuana I smell? I'm going to have to search your vehicle to find or, maybe even plant, something I can use to charge you with a crime." ... "You don't consent? That's sounds really suspicious. What are you hiding? Nothing? Well then it'd be easier if you just consent. It's really in your best interest." ... "Still no? Well, I hope you don't have somewhere to be, I'm going to have to call a K-9 in while I take 30 minutes to write up your ticket..."
Don't forget that when it crashes, they'll get to try to rebuild the system so that it's more stable for the capitalist class and workers have fewer rights and options.
It'll also help to underfund the system so that Republicans can pretend they need to cut more shit, like "entitlements" (Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid).
My elderly mother was advised to purchase a personal EKG/ECG monitor to help investigate occasional atypical heart behavior. She purchased a KardiaMobile 6L. I helped her set it up this weekend - requires a phone app to connect to the device via BT... and, of course, an account with a possibility paid subscription... good lord.
At every turn there are popups for a US $11.99/Month or $99/Year service, required for any use cases that aren't look at recent records and export a PDF. App closes in the background and opens again... full screen popup next time it opens. Finish an EKG? Popup offering service to have a specialist look at the EKG. Main screen? List of every service not included with the free tier in its own little box with a button to subscribe for each.
So now my mother is supposed to find her instructions on how to navigate around this bullshit, with large text and fingers so dry she struggles to activate the touch screen without a stylus, during an abnormal cardiac event... then navigate around more bullshit to find the record in her history and send her doctor the PDF.
I really wish there was a mandatory interface for consumer medical devices (or just... devices in general) or something so I could just make a solution to bypass the bullshit and get the thing do what it was designed to do. Open the app, big button to record an EKG, prompt to save it or send it after.
Don't forget my favorite part: Greedflation.
Your iPad now costs $900 because they can blame the price increase on tariffs and inflation. Every other company does it so now more "inflation" and you iPad will be $1,000 next year.
You try to buy a 100% US made tablet (what tariffs are supposed to be used for) but the US company that actually manufacturer goods in the US jacks up their prices too because they can blame inflation and their completion is even more expensive now.
American consumers are about to get fleeced hard and inflation is going to explode while the wealthiest folks slurp up even more of the wealth.
It uh... actually doesn't.
the problem is the human element
I absolutely agree. The difference is that the incentives of capitalism virtually guarantee exploitation and inequality. It's a system that encourages the concentration of wealth and power. Antisocial and anticompetitive tactics maximize returns and ensure that bad actors willing to put profit above anything else benefit the most and rise to the top as leaders and bosses. It relies on competition and, assumes "market forces" will self correct an imbalanced system... eventually.
Unless you want a brutal, unstable system where power and wealth accumulate and get concentrated until a violent shift (hopefully) collapses that power and eventually market forces pick a new "winner" you need regulation to keep the profit motive in check and competition fair. Still, the rules of the system encourage regulatory capture as competitive actors try to gain advantage however they can, regardless of the impact on the general population.
Socialism, honestly, has become a weird catch-all term for critiques of capitalism looking to align the goals of society toward democracy and equality. There is a ton of theory and different methods of achieving or implementing such a society but that's kind of where I see things.
Within that eventual ideal society there is still the ability for people to exploit each other for power. The human element doesn't disappear. The idea is that it is harder when the goal of the system is to ensure everyone has what they need and everyone gets a say in how things are done. The system needs to be built and tweaked with checks and balances to ensure that power doesn't get concentrated without the ability for the greater population to redistribute that power.
Basically, unless you are a proponent of laissez-faire capitalism (no government involvement) then you recognize the danger posed by unfettered capitalism. Socialism attempts to change the incentives so that society can be designed, fundamentally, to minimize the danger posed by that human element. It recognizes that a democratic and fair capitalist society is an oxymoron.
I have a challenge for you. Again, assuming you are not a proponent of laissez-faire capitalism, think about the ways that our capitalist society could be improved by new regulation or the removal or adjusting of existing bad regulation (Edit: regulation is meant to include laws, taxes, etc). How many of those regulations don't exist - were proposed and shot down - because those empowered by capitalism (Edit: **who have achieved disproportionate wealth and power via capitalism and wish to maintain their status) have fought tooth and tail to prevent them? How many of those bad, restrictive, existing regulations were implemented, or twisted, by those empowered by capitalism?
Edit: Look around the world at the questionable actions performed by the United States and ask why did the US do that? What was their incentive? More often than not, it involves preserving and furthering the power of those who already hold a disproportionate amount of power in that capitalist society.
It isn't mixed messages. It isn't even hypocrisy. It is so very far beyond that. There is no inconsistent morality or ideals to depart from. Words, categories, definitions... these things mean what they need them to mean in the moment. Whatever serves their interests becomes the reality they pretend exists.
Do I suffer when I offend people with my speech? Respect the first amendment! Free speech! Government oppression! Tyranny! Anti-American!
Do I suffer when someone else says it? Well, that's hate speech. Damages our children. It's basically a call to violence - terrorism really, when you get right down to it. Anti-American!
Name a value and I promise you they'll flip on a dime given the right situation.
2nd amendment? Not if minorities start carrying! Freedom of religion? Only as long as it's their religion... Every life is sacred? Nah, only the lives they care about, like cute little white babies.
Nothing means anything anymore and that's just how they like it.
While I like the idea of credit unions, I opened a bank account with one for my first credit card - I was traveling overseas and it was recommended to have a card for that. I put $500 in a new savings account but the card arrived too late for my trip so I kind of let it sit and never really used the card or account. Checked back a year or two later and the account lost money due to an inactivity fee. Closed my accounts instantly. Shit like that really sticks with you and I'm still hesitant to try them again.
While I'm not against body cams, I feel like they address issues so niche and so far removed from the core problems that they only really provide a false sense of a solution.
The problem is that a cop's purpose in our capitalist system is not to protect and serve the general population. It's not to universally enforce laws that improve society for the good of everyone. The system they exist in is corrupted to its core by capitalism. Most of the law itself doesn't exist for everyone's benefit - it exists to serve existing power structures.
Sure, cops will give legitimate tickets to people breaking traffic laws, and sometimes the powerful can't just pay for a good lawyer and have to face... a fine. Of course, a fine is just the cost of doing business if you have money. Also, note that the only portion of my example that was actually illegal for a cop was planting evidence, which cops have already learned to bypass by shifting their torso to distract from or obscure the action. Sure, they sometimes get caught if the victim has the resources for a good lawyer... and the cops misjudge how well they obscured the action... but the cop doesn't usually target people with those kinds of resources. Things like traffic fines exist to harvest money from the population to fund the department and serve well as an excuse to pull someone over and escalate the situation if needed.
Cops exist to selectively enforce laws mostly designed or corrupted to be selectively enforced. Sometimes the masses will get a decent law passed or a cop will try to do the right thing but the rest of the system has been corrupted enough that those with power rarely face consequences.
These laws and "enforcers" exist to teach the masses that they need to behave and keep their filthy, unworthy hands off of whatever the powerful don't think they deserve. The culture is that of the thin blue line, which serves to isolate them and otherize "civilians". The culture is that of noble warriors fighting for their lives and ready to defend themselves from a barbaric, uncivilized world... like brown kids and distressed minorities. They think that they "protect and serve". They put a lot of lipstick on that pig when you look at the big picture they only protect and serve those with power... and sometimes themselves.
When shit gets real and the masses protest, cops will be there to find (or infiltrate and create) a reason to escalate, arrest people, and disperse the protest. They'll enforce curfews to "keep the peace". They'll absolutely protect businesses. Sometimes they'll even break up strikes or attempts to organize.