I'm an industrial designer and manufacturing engineer who founded a reverse engineering firm. We use some nice techniques to virtually eliminate defects in our

I'm an industrial designer and manufacturing engineer who founded a reverse engineering firm. We use some nice techniques to virtually eliminate defects in our client production streams, even though we have basically no tacit knowledge of their production back ends. What we do understand is our design geometry and its quality metrics. In our case, simply controlling the quality of our geometry is enough to stamp out defects and rework, which is why our clients use us as a turnkey solution for eliminating design risks. Those kinds of quality controls and universal productions sims don't get developed for simple open source designs. So yes I understand that productionizing a design traditionally depends mainly on accruing tacit knowledge. At the same time I understand also how important quality controls in the design phase are for eliminating rework in the production phase. And we are increasingly able to plan designs that will enter into production flawlessly. The scenario I'm asking you to envision, therefore, is not this project, but some hypothetical other scenario where the creator really supports larger scale efforts with novel quality controls that have traditionally been too expensive for open source. I'm also interested in a political scenario where we're designing a purely software weapon, a new drone munition, or other dangerous tech. Let's even suppose we're doing this because we hope it will disrupt for corporations and governments. The question then remains: when due this kind of work cross into dangerous territory, and incur outside risks. Where are the limits? How much can we expect to "get away with"? Obviously the answer is "it depends' and "talk to a lawyer". But I'm curious about insights and stories folks might have here.