I actually think the "solution" is in this article right here.

I think people have been slowly waking up to internet advertising

1. Not being as good as it used to be in bringing in new/repeat customers
2. That generally the benefits and utility are failing because of the swamps of scam ads.

Ads are basically the only profitable part of Google, and it's ripe for a new search-model to undermine its now old-and-busted algorithms that are only surfacing AI-produced garbage and for a new ad-competitor that produces an ad-experience that people won't turn on adblockers for.

That was the original promise of AdBlock Plus, that they would make deals with advertisers who agreed to standards that made the ads non-intrusive and clear they were an ad.

I'm not against ads, I'm against an ad industry that thinks we owe them viewing their advertising. No, viewing advertising is a choice it's not a legal requirement for us to use the service, to click on ads and buy things.

If the ad industry could shape up, I wouldn't need uBlock Origin or a Pi-Hole.

There's an opportunity, someone just have to have the capital and take the chance.

Sort of a non-solution for the wider problem isn’t it?

Honestly, I was wondering what people here are talking about. uBO is so effective that you don't notice either its presence or the ads it blocks. uBO might be a real effective solution for the problems you mention - until enough people use and start hurting Google's revenue. Even if it does, uBO is a necessary defense since Google ads are obnoxious and potentially harmful.