I think what yesterday's SSD discussion revealed is that an open database of "leaked" SMART data would be of immense value to users and should have happened years ago. It sucks that privacy derangement vetoes the development of things of real value.
Are you using this to refer to the attitude of companies that want to collect as much data as possible whether or not they have a clear and good use for it, or the attitude of users who are no longer willing to trust large-scale data collection efforts?
Big Tech does not want your stupid private data. It is in all objective respects toxic waste. But they do want to know if your CPU is overheating, or your SSD is failing early, or if your programs run slowly. Telemetry is good and valuable.
This is so obviously contradicted by the actual behavior of Google and most other tech companies, big and small. From the inside, you may see a clear distinction between telemetry and the truly creepy amount of personal data collection happening in other parts of the company. But you should have no trouble understanding how end users are less able to draw that distinction, especially when they are not offered the choice to only opt-in to some of the data collection and "personalization".
So, do you really think that a user being suspicious of large-scale data collection means they're deranged?
I can imagine your future assault robbery trial. "But your honor, stealing his wallet was good for him! Couldn't get into the bar that night and gave his liver a well-needed break." :-D