IMO cloudflare represents the death of the small player on the public internet, before it most small players ran their own internet-facing services, with it many choose to just run behind cloudflare.
They may not have the bandwidth as you point out, but they have a pretty big chunk of websites. (Obv not 100%)
(That said, AWS has a lot more than “just” the TLS connection on a large fraction of the web, including all of my web properties, so yeah, who are you going to trust and for how long?)
We specifically aren’t interested in pure bit delivery. It’s a commodity business that will have its margins squeezed to zero over time. We provide CDN services because caching is a useful tool in computer science when you want to deliver performance for other applications. If you measured our revenue per bit delivered, it would be far more attractive than any of the traditional CDN providers because we aren’t primarily selling bit delivery where they primarily are.
And you don't really have the option of switching CDNs (at least, not easily) if you've bought into all their proprietary stuff like their workers implementation, various optimization techniques that your site couldn't survive without, etc.
If you go along with the above premise, I don't see what the problem is. You will always have the option of switching CDNs if Cloudflare starts snooping in on user data.
Of course, if you disagree and think CF will take 100% of the market, then what you said makes sense. Personally, I don't see that happening.