"You want to change society, yet you live in society. How hypocritical of you! I am very smart!"

He's the one saying it is killing his "humanity". Its on him to take steps in that regard. Who exactly is holding his hands and stopping him from living in the woods without power and technology?

And if he wants to avoid technology he will have to back some 100-200k years ago and kill whatever ape or hominid first learned to use tools.

Capitalism and wealth hoarding

The seven seas have always been there, just a matter of building a ship again

Snow Leopard was the pinnacle of operating systems, it was just the best

C# may be easier but it is not simpler than Go

If margins are already at the least possible bottom (according to market logic this should always happen with commodities and competition) then you need to start to look for ways to reduce your operating costs in order to increase them again

Why? If you are already at an optimum (which "least possible bottom" indicates), then any kind of you trying to move into a different state, is going to leave the optimum.

Well, least possible bottom when taken to an infinite usually means monopoly as at one point one company usually outprices all the others and remains the only one with profitable margins (always talking about commodities, mind). Once a monopoly they can hike prices and milk customers until new comptetitors show up which they either buy or get superseded by. Thus the circle continues.

Exactly this, I wonder why this setup (with ability for external techies to be granted temporary access) was not chosen in the first place. Considering the threat model, "my freezers all defrost at the same time all over my stores because of ~cyber~" should be a critical item to be discussed

Because the incentives are not aligned. In a capitalist society societal consciousness is necessarily imprinted with capitalist (value extracting) logic.

If most of the people around you believe that making money is the logical way to survive then making money will become the goal of many to most human interactions. People will choose big publishers because big publishers guarantee them some amount of money (and services around publishing) in exchange for the ownership and monetisation rights (and then the right to sue somebody into oblivion when they break copyright law).

So the rich and vibrant ecosystem can be reality, just not within current society.

The comparison doesn't really make sense. Stockholm Syndrome is a pop-culture term that has no medical recognition and is psychologically contested

It makes sense in that someone has rightfully pointed out there’s a prison and the door might be opening soon, allowing us to leave and the response was essentially “well, it’s safe here, who else could we reasonably trust?”

How is that unlike developing an attachment to/sympathy for your captors?

Corporate having interests that are not aligned with the interests of the majority and using their funds and power to influence the outcome to their liking is not a new concept