Sadly not really a solution yet for SNI being unencrypted. So while they may not see your DNS query they can just use DPI to capture the sites.
VPN is a solution but not always deployable.
VPN is a solution but not always deployable.
A lot of people really do distrust their ISP enough that even with knowledge that you're shifting the responsibility to the VPN provider they still trust a random VPN more than their ISP.
Would I trust some random unknown VPN provider more than Comcast? Maybe.
I follow the same logic by setting up my own VPS in a rented $big_provider VPN. VPS companies are succulent targets that surely attract many eyes, whereas I doubt any non-state actor has the capacity of capturing and filtering the traffic of the millions of random VPNs that $big_provider has.
Therefore, going from three to eight ISPs is arguably worse as your exposed to nearly 3x the risk of exposure.
Yeah, my VPN provider could be lying to me and logging a whole bunch of extra data under the table. But I know my ISP is logging that data. I have every reason to trust a paid VPN provider more than my ISP because my VPN provider is basing their business model on me trusting them, not on being a monopoly.
Not to mention that VPNs also help at least a bit with anonymizing IP addresses. The trust model I have with directly exposing my IP to a website is "I hope nobody I visit on the Internet is logging this."
If I'm wrong and my VPN is logging everything, I'll still be in a better position than I was with my ISP, because at least I won't be broadcasting my current physical location to every single website I visit.
If in the Netherlands: probably Turkey. If anywhere else: probably the Netherlands.
Although it is hard to think about a scenario in which the only available choice is between the Netherlands and Turkey.
The idea is hedging against the closest guy with a stick.