Would you elaborate your argument? IP protections such as copyright exist for the express purpose of promoting the sharing of information. If patent law disappeared, everyone would keep their inventions private and work to obfuscate them as much as possible.
Killing copyright would essentially do the same - and if you think clickbait is bad now, removal of copyright would destroy the economic incentive to investing any effort into content.
This seems like a solution looking for a problem. https://tiller.com/ works great and lets you do whatever calculations you want in a spreadsheet - and, bonus, it's never going to hallucinate.
I don't quite understand the desire to have these verbose summaries that you have to read from LLMs. You'll notice anomalies if you just categorize each of your expenses every so often (easy with Tiller).
Sounds cool and I hope you can make it work; what I don't understand, though, is how to solve for the hidden preferences which are the major barrier when scheduling.
E.g. I'm friends with so-and-so and I don't want to be a jerk and schedule a 4:30PM Friday meeting (regardless of whether this is sensible, it's the reality). Or, I see continuous blocks of meetings on someone's calendar with only one open slot, presumably where they'll eat lunch; I shouldn't take that slot. Except for that one guy who I know doesn't eat lunch. Alternatively, I'm getting on a flight at 3PM and working the last 2 hours from a plane; I haven't actually blocked by calendar (people are lazy), so I can't actually do meetings then. Or, I know there's a conflict but someone told me to book over it.
You can go on with the "hidden context". Perhaps this works in some industries where calendars can be trusted, but I've always found the "hidden preferences" to make scheduling optimization essentially impossible. How do you know, for example, when it's okay to reschedule a meeting? How do you say, well, if X person can't be there but Y can, it's okay, but ideally they'd both be there, but not if we have to move it further than a week out from today, then it's fine; but I'll check with X and Y anyway on that?
How do we differentiate "addictive" behaviors from "non-addictive"? Is it illegal if people like your product too much? There isn't a clear definition here of where free will comes into play.
This is the intention of capitalism - profits go to the companies who can build products that people are most enticed to buy. A company that doesn't work to make their product loved/addictive will not continue to exist.
Another way of phrasing what you've said is that we should prevent companies from building products that people really like and want to use. No one is forcing anyone to use Facebook.
Killing copyright would essentially do the same - and if you think clickbait is bad now, removal of copyright would destroy the economic incentive to investing any effort into content.