So, the world of software spans from proofs-of-concept to libraries to full-fledged services consumed by others to games to dedicated business applications. As

So, the world of software spans from proofs-of-concept to libraries to full-fledged services consumed by others to games to dedicated business applications. As such, any complaints about "ethics" really require additional context before we can make useful headway. All of the aforementioned fields have different requirements, and honestly many of them don't need ethics. In computer games, for example, I don't think that "ethics" beyond a mere "okay, well, it sorta passes QA" is sufficient. In fact, in many cases, the rate of release of software and low barriers to entry have basically obviated the need for a sort of professional ethics to protect the consumer: any software that is grossly unreliable tends to be replaced in short order in any space (say, the social web) by a competitor. It's in the aloof silos of, say, aerospace or healthcare IT where the true garbage is fermented, because they have nobody breathing down their necks as long as the paperwork looks right. Also, I think that we don't get and don't take enough credit in our profession for how deeply we influence businesses. Done correctly, a team of programmers should be able to automate away everyone at the company who isn't directly interfacing with customers--themselves included. What does ethics have to say about such a situation, especially when the people making requests don't understand how the business itself is implemented?