> It is unnecessary that such mitigations be employed by "most people", they only need to pass a cost-benefit analysis for those who use them.

This can be said for pretty much any technology/software/hardware/mitigation that some people dismiss out of hand…

> It could be argued that if more people used "surveillance escape valves", there could be pressure to close them.

I would even go one step further and argue that our devices should actively send spoofed data (not necessarily random) and poison the data wells these companies like to drink from to amass their power they wield asymmetrically at scale against individuals.