The people that "build the systems" are paid for by those corporations who make money by tracking you. Who exactly do you think is going to: A. Fund this new decentralized non-tracking utopia. B. Convince users already embedded in existing systems to switch to something less functional in order to not be tracked?
EVERY project that's tried what you're describing has failed miserably because end-users just don't care. Can you cite even ONE example of a competing system that has focused on privacy that has garnered what can be considered even a modicum of success against an already entrenched player?
We return to my issue: does it being difficult and yet to be achieved mean that the people that are aware of potential drawbacks of the status quo should lay down and give up? That seems to be your implication.
So... the 2 hours a day I'm not with a family member or coworker or friend I can't be tracked? And to do so I literally have to disable everything on my phone manually (no more bluetooth streaming in the car, manually turn off the wifi on my phone every time I leave the house, somehow magically prevent the cell towers from tracking me).
If you cannot get the general populous to agree and actively vote for privacy, you're fighting a battle that's already been lost.
Furthermore, I am not sure that any of those are necessarily a given. I'm not advocating for breaking apps or an abrupt shift to no location services, I'm not dismissing your average end-user's needs/desires or insulting their intelligence. I'm hypothesizing that there might be ways to get non-GPS location services out of the hands of a few big players. It theoretically wouldn't make your phone cost more money, but it might take the time-money-effort of people who build the systems (maybe open-source?). I'm trying to appeal to the people who build the systems and brainstorm ways to do that, not really rally the end-users to this particular cause.