And misplaced identification of this system as capitalism.

What would you call it?

There is nothing stopping a company from both selling you a subscription and selling your data under a socialist organization of society. It only means the profits of said product would be more evenly distributed.

Capitalism and Socialism aren't the only ways to organize society. The state could force every company that operates within it be beneficial to its citizens.

> would be more evenly distributed.

riiiiiiiight.

Not sure the need for the sarcasm. If you have a criticism of what I'm saying, you can use words to address it. If you are insufficiently equipped to counter what I've said, it's far better etiquette to not post at all. Sweden is far more socialized than the rest of the world - and even employees rank and file Swedish employees of H&M enjoy a far greater share of the profits of H&M. That doesn't stop H&M from committing and profiting off of human rights abuses in Indonesia.

Under a socialist structure if all workers decided to poison the ocean in order to increase profits, that's completely possible. The main distinction is that more "shareholders" would be the people who actually do labor for the company, but I personally believe that they wouldn't act completely differently from shareholders of today if the negative externalities of their decisions were sufficiently outsourced.

Crony capitalism. Capitalism is in the name, but that's not what it is at all.