It often feels like a lot of software fails to follow the first principle: > Software engineers shall act consistently with the public interest. But what can

It often feels like a lot of software fails to follow the first principle: > Software engineers shall act consistently with the public interest. But what can or should be done about it? It seems like it's just economic reality that software as a whole continues trending in a certain direction. For a lot of telemetry and tracking, if users were made aware of exactly what sort of data is being collected, do you think that they would still consent? It would be interesting to hear how other engineering professions have handled similar issues. Well, at least looking at the hardware world, it doesn't look like they've managed to do a great job. Repairability seems like it would clearly be in the public interest, but that feature is often ignored by many of the large hardware manufacturers. And at least with hardware manufacturers, there's always greater demands of purity and perfection. Even when a company shows up providing hardware that's more open than the alternatives, people will often just complaint that it's not open enough and refuse to buy in. But this is a battle that must be won in slow steps towards making open hardware more viable. The idealist within me feels frustrated when it comes into contact with reality. Imagine what a perfect or ideal world would look like and then ask yourself: what features would be worth fighting to bring into this reality?