Maybe the future is in fully sandboxed/containerized apps, where each action outside of sandbox/container is confirmed by the user.
It is horrible for any reasonable professional workflow. Even if you get permissions lined up correctly once, when you change your workflow, shit breaks. and more subtly, the way permissions accrete through reactive interactive dialogs, folks become less secure over time - past permission "paths" enable capabilities that the user no longer even remembers making.
More formal ways of defining security policy of course work better (I deal with that sort of thing for a living), but expecting normal people to be able to understand how to, e.g., use `restorecon` or the moral equivalent is a nonstarter.
Personally, I'm headed back to Linux when I need to replace the Macbook I'm typing on. I'm no longer the target MacOS user, and I'm not going to rely on a machine I don't control.
We would need to change some things, but I'd love to know if some random lib I'm using is trying to do things my application shouldn't. Or if something I installed, say Docker, is trying to access my photos or ssh keys.
It was also my first thought after I recently upgraded MacOS, and was bombarded with multiple permission dialogs whenever I did anything.
I still think something like it could evolve to fill that role.
But I do have to say, the more Canonical and Redhat attempt to "innovate", the more I appreciate FreeBSD.