> Look, we aren't going to go back to a setting where we don't patch software.

And I never said we should. I was just describing the situation.

> Look at the Y2K bug [...] We also had similar success in big problems like fixing the ozone layer

That's an optimistic point of view :-). I would argue that both of those were infinitely easier to solve than, say, the current mass extinction, energy problem and climate change. We've past what, 7 of the 9 planetary boundaries? We've pretty much lost the Amazon, we've pretty much lost coral reefs, we've definitely failed at the 1.5C goal and are now moving forward to failing the 2C goal. With the inertia in that system, once you fail there is no coming back in the next thousand years (unlike the ozone, BTW).

Those are real problems that we are not only not solving: we're making them worse. All of them.

> All I ask is that you speak up and question when the teams you work for are trying to push unfinished products.

Most software is part of the problem. The problem is that we do too much in general. Doing requires energy. The more we do, the more energy we use. The more energy we use, the more we screw up the planet. You want to help? Do less. But at the end of the day, you still need to get paid, right? And for that you need your company to be profitable, right?