I don’t think you fully understand the gravity and significance of what is happening. After Snowden exposed the companies that are cooperating with the State to open their applications for espionage, Apple and Google aggressively locking them out of hundreds of millions of devices is not only brave and quite astonishing, but unprecedented. This marks a sea change in how the world works, and belittling it, and the risks these companies are taking is ungrateful at the least.
All you have to do is look at what happened to the CEO of Qualcomm who refused to let the NSA into their devices. Trumped up charges were brought against him and he went to prison in direct retaliation for his defiance of the State. Everyone in the tech sector knows this story, and knew the risk they were taking. In the light of this (which I am guessing you do not know about) the actions of Tim Cook and Google are very brave indeed.
People who make software are not your “ally” they provide a service to you for profit. Its up to you to accept or reject their services, which are entirely voluntary. Apple is doing something good with iOS and so people will decide to use them because they are providing utility, and now, privacy. This is the way the market works. It is ethical, efficient and everyone benefits on both sides of the equation.
You say “tech giants live from selling our personal data profiles” this sounds like cookie cutter EFF drivel. Google, Facebook and Apple can only sell what you give them. If you insist on putting all your data into their systems, you do so voluntarily. You can live very well without these services, and most people who ever lived on the earth did exactly that. Also, if you are computer literate, you can use these services without them knowing anything about you. Its up to you how you choose to use these services, which are not compulsory. Google, Apple and Facebook do not “invade your privacy” you voluntarily give your data to them. This sort of language is the socialist EFF supporters line; they cannot distinguish between the NSA and Google, thinking that because both of them collect data, they must be intrinsically the same. They are not. One is voluntary, operating openly in the market, the other is compulsory, financed by theft. Google and all private companies that interact on a voluntary basis absolutely have the high moral ground, and its only brainwashed millennial types who can’t tell the difference between the State and a private corporation. This is why you cannot make a proper distinction between a service and a government spy agency.
You may believe that Google and Apple are “covering their asses” whatever that means (nothing) and once again, they are not violating “our” privacy. People who have concerns about Google can and do use another search engine, like Duck Duck Go. Right here is where you claim that no one knows about Duck Duck Go and that they might be collecting private data also, or some other fallacious response, entirely missing what I just did; make a suggestion. Instead of complaining about Google, use something else or build your own service. Google started out with a few beige boxes and 100,000 in seed capital. There is nothing stopping you from creating your own services and running them in any way you see fit.
You say “our” privacy and keeping “us” as customers what this shows is that you are probably a socialist or some other form of collectivist. The fact of the matter is there is no “us” or “our” privacy; privacy is not collective, its personal. The question here is what do you do with your data, what services do you use and recommend? Doing that is something that’s actually useful. Wile we are at it, do you use GPG do encrypt your email? Are you running Microsoft Windows? I wonder!
Apple and Google are acting ethically; it just so happens that this decision also aligns with a good business policy, and there is nothing wrong with that. It is only the socialist that is against profit, which is an entirely unethical position to hold. Once again, you say the “internet model that has come to harm us all” there is no “us all” in any of this. The people who harm men and women are those in the NSA and the State, not Google and Apple, who provide voluntary services to the public, and now, a means of defence against privacy violation that few people even know they are using. Even those who should know better scorn them out of sheer ignorance.
You say the NSA would not exist without the business model of tech companies. You clearly now nothing about the NSA. Even if what you are saying is true, the fact that Apple and Google are now openly turning against them should be seen as highly significant to you. But it isn't… why?
You once again, show your collectivist colours by saying that “we” need to “support our own interests” in this, and get rid of abusive companies. One. There is no “we”. Two “getting rid” of companies that offer services voluntarily without force means you want to use force to stop non violent men from offering products to other men. You do not have the right to break up other people’s property and prevent them from trading freely on the market. Period. Your opinion is only binding upon you. If you don’t like Google, start your own business and offer services that you think others will want. Anyone who suggests violence to solve problems is themselves the problem.
You say “we” need free software. Go and write it. Contribute to GNU. The software is already out there; contribute to it to make it better. As for free hardware, there is no such thing. If you mean hardware based on open standards, that is another matter. Its important to use English clearly if you want to convey something complex. As for “end to end encryption”, once again, you say this in a public forum without linking to GNUPG or any tool that can do this, so that the people reading this can protect themselves. You don’t even have the sense to do that, and want to violently break up Google. Astonishing.
The same goes for supporting companies that don’t violate (user) privacy. Name them. Link to them. Do not talk about fantasy products that “have built in anonymity” they simply don’t exist. You say “we” need companies that offer privacy. Start one. If you know of one, list it. As for paying for these services, this is a fantasy. No one will pay for privacy, and decades of evidence is out there to prove it. What Apple and Google are doing, by encrypting Android and iOS is providing something for users that are very dumb, and who do not even know they need their devices to be locked down and made private. They get no reward for doing so, and are scorned by people who have never encrypted their email, and who run Windows. This puts their heroic acts into perspective; at great risk to themselves, without any hope of acknowledgement from their customers, Apple and Google have stood up to the NSA. This is really quite incredible.
You claim that both business models and companies need to change their criminal practices. I do not think you know what a crime is; everything Apple and Google do is open to inspection in their TOS, and you voluntarily accept them. They are not breaking any laws, and are acting in an ethical manner. You may not personally like what they do, but that does not make what they do criminal.
As for them being political allies, they have just locked the NSA out of hundreds of millions of devices. If that is not an ally, I don’t know what is.
You say that they need to “protect democracy” the fact of the matter is that democracy is what spawned the NSA. Democracy is not legitimate or ethical, and in fact it is the root problem to all of this, not businessmen providing a service voluntarily.
Finally, I don’t think you know what rights are, or where they come from. If you did, you wouldn't rail against Google and corporations as you do, and you would be able to spot the true enemy, which clearly you cannot. I suggest you read, “For a New Liberty” by Murray Rothbard before you venture into any of this again. Then you will have a proper understanding of your rights, what Google and Apple really are, and who the real enemy is.