If you're a product, then there is simply a bigger paying customer. Companies are ever tending towards surveillance capitalism because the profit the marketpla

If you're a product, then there is simply a bigger paying customer. Companies are ever tending towards surveillance capitalism because the profit the marketplace for personal information provides them potentially far outweighs the profits of mere direct sales. Withdrawing your business from such a company will achieve very little so long as they still have some user data in the bank. Participating in surveillance capitalism provides a great competitive edge at first, but the race to the bottom makes it a necessary component of conducting business. If Wacom simply needs to sell customers' session data to stay afloat, a not-wacom that expressly refuses to do the same probably won't stay in business for long on just sales. They would need some other revenue source, in crowdfunding, venture capital, SaaS, advertisements, a corporate buyout, government or military contract, renting and franchising, anything. Save for crowdfunding, these kinds of alternate revenue sources serve to tap into the lion's share of currency consumers don't hold. Incredibly inequal wealth distribution prevents money from functioning like a distributed democratic force.