When it comes to buying food, "everything is privatized, everything is monetized". And yet with robust competition, the market for food essentially works. It's worst problem seems to be price discrimination "sales", but those are around a factor of two, which may seem high but is actually pretty reasonable compared to non-competative markets.
And while morally, we can perhaps say that we've progressed as a species to a point that nobody should go hungry, any attempts to do so are necessarily going to rely on that food market to create food, with publicly funded purchases. In general, markets can be really good at solving certain problems.
Now, my comment is not a defense of trying to creating scarcity or monopolies where they don't exist - eg NFTs, Nestle buying up aquifers, copyright, etc. Nor is it a defense of creating "market efficiency" out of things that would be personal capital goods, where market inefficiency allowed for wealth to remain distributed (eg Uber, AirBNB).
Personally, I would say that wireless Internet access is (regrettably) a scarce good and thus attempts to make the market more democratized and efficient are a good thing. This is not the all-too-common converse of someone trying to take something that is already democratized and trying to make a market out of it.