would you care about data privacy when you're dead?

Your living relatives might, considering the hereditary nature of so many things in medicine.

I feel like you were trying to make a point here, but I have no idea what it was.

We are made of electrons. Every electron is the same. Electrons have no sense of privacy.

Electrons don't get murdered when their SO's find out they are pregnant. Although I guess that's more of an issue in the USA than Canada.

Electrons don’t eat food either.

Eating food is unnecessary.

Care about anything when you are dead?

I honestly don't love taxpayer funding being used - unless the underlying technology is open sourced and available for commercial use, so then the free market can make improvements on it, etc.

Or funding situations like e.g. "we'll pay for you if the doctor/practitioner chooses your software" - but otherwise the free market is efficient, and unelected people administering taxpayer money have no real incentive to not mismanage the money; especially when current governments are money printing devaluing everyone's money, causing a ton of externalized effects literally causing harm to people's health and reducing people's quality of life.

> but otherwise the free market is efficient

Efficient in routing public goods to a locked box maybe

If you look at a small enough timeframe and a completely free market without setting up rules to the game to keep it an even playing field, then that's an issue, yes.

What are your thoughts on patents?

if there's rules to ensure fairness then it isn't a free market. and if a market with rules could be called a free market, but only for arbitrary slices of time, i'd submit that also isn't a free market.

"allow lucky or unscrupulous owners to swallow less lucky or more ethical owners' businesses until there's only 1-3 players left that are too big to start to compete with and too big for the others to buy out."

I find perfectionism gets in the way in such conversations: the goal is aiming for the freest market possible, but no - you can't legally sell services to assassinate people; unless you're the state who has a monopoly on violence.

Because on the other side we have people blaming the free market and capitalism in general for the problems, when capitalism is the solution - it's crony capitalism or what I prefer to call it - corruption and things like regulatory capture that's the problem.

The problem is heavily industrial complexes' funding and lobbying of politicians, placing politicians who will favour policy for them - is the problem; and it appears that foreign bad actors have also helped certain politicians get elected elsewhere.

I like the Democracy Dollars and Journalism Dollars solutions proposed by Andrew Yang during his presidential run to help act as a counterweight to the power of industrial complexes.