This is one of those stories that reminds me of the 'privacy & security movement' where in tech all the advocates for privacy and security are willing to put up with something they don't like (extra steps, carrying around tokens, what not) for better overall security. But people who market to them realize how much they are willing to pay for better security is not much more than what it costs to get better security.
Using the fictional example, Browser X $10, Browser Y with more security $15, they both function identically. The market buys the $10 browser and promises themselves to be careful.
If you try to sell plant based ground beef for a lot more money than cow based ground beef, most of the market seems to just buy the cheaper "regular" beef and promise to eat more vegetables or something.
Bottom line is that it is really really hard for many, if not most, people to justify paying extra for something because it is "better for the world" or "better for society."
Using the fictional example, Browser X $10, Browser Y with more security $15, they both function identically. The market buys the $10 browser and promises themselves to be careful.
If you try to sell plant based ground beef for a lot more money than cow based ground beef, most of the market seems to just buy the cheaper "regular" beef and promise to eat more vegetables or something.
Bottom line is that it is really really hard for many, if not most, people to justify paying extra for something because it is "better for the world" or "better for society."