“Stopping a small number of incredibly over-resourced people from externalising consequences for their sole gain and causing significant and long lasting woe and damage on the rest of us” != “stopping innovation”
Nobody is saying “uh uh, no more problem solving”,drawing that conclusion would be uncharitable at best, and “wrong” at worst. The argument is “gosh, maybe we could have some innovation that’s actually useful, and not some polished-turd/enshittification”.
I’m not sure you’re making the same argument as the others in the comments above. I agree with your comment aside from your characterization of the others comments.
We’re still a democratic republic that can stop the enshittification of utilities (or whatever the problem de jour is). There are bad actors, but by and large, things are working and continue to be improving. Some things need to be bolstered, some things need to be replaced. Stagnation is not the answer.
What would you propose as the solution? All new ideas go through a centralized approval process? That experiment is already being run in other countries. If they start winning, the US will adapt or die.
Nobody is saying “uh uh, no more problem solving”,drawing that conclusion would be uncharitable at best, and “wrong” at worst. The argument is “gosh, maybe we could have some innovation that’s actually useful, and not some polished-turd/enshittification”.