Socialism has nothing to do with 'government capture'; it only concerns itself with worker ownership over the means of production.
We are kind of already at a point where working class individuals can own the means of production without ever needing to 'smesh capitalism'. I expect as a result we'll see a divergence between people who want to own the means of production and people who want to impoverish the current owners.
It's kinda like "owning a home" doesn't imply just owning the walls, but implicitly also a place with privacy.
So in today's SW world, means of production is not a computer, but rather the datacenters of the cloud, proprietary APIs and control over browser standards. And control over habits of the users, who also participate in production, by generating "content". These things cannot be simply replicated by the workers.
I wonder how many Marxists study logistics.
If you want to improve things by doing things on your own, you will own the fruits of your labor. If you need additional employees to improve things, then you will probably have to share with them.
Capitalists do not get money because of their labour. They get money because they own capital. An heir who inherits a large company can continue to receive his share of profits and dividends simply by being the "owner", even if he passes on the administrative work to others. If he has not worked, but consumes, he enjoys the fruits of the labor of others. The capitalist concentration of wealth in the hands of a few means that these few enjoy a quantity of fruits of labor that a person could never generate even if they worked for more than 100 years. So, obviously, capitalism has nothing to do with giving each person the fruits of their labor.
In socialism, if you want other people to help you build the company, you have to do so on equal terms, by giving them equal stake in ownership. That doesn't mean you don't own fruits of your labor.