As you point out, the legal software as a huge technical debt, and must deal with compatibility issues as well. The consequence is that loopholes will <i>always</i> exist. Perhaps &quot;rule by moral indignation&quot; doesn&#x27;t scale, but fixing the law doesn&#x27;t work, either.<p>&gt;  My primary issue with assertions of immorality is that it&#x27;s unquantified and completely subjective.<p>Who talks like a software developer now? ;-) It is more or less as you say, though.
But I believe it&#x27;s better to let people judge for themselves. The same way people do make their own judgement about whether or not it&#x27;s ethical for company X to outsource its production in country Y where working conditions are known to be terrible.<p>&gt;  But by making assertions of immorality or &quot;evil&quot;ness on the part of perceived bad actors, you&#x27;re not offering any solutions, and instead starting the conversation from a place where no progress can be made.<p>On the contrary, it is one step further than &quot;let&#x27;s fix the taxation law&quot; hand-waving. It also goes deeper than just law and economy technicalities.<p>It lead some countries to enforce more transparency with regards to the income of their MPs, for instance. It makes legal tax avoidance tricks and various forms of &quot;soft corruption&quot; a little more difficult.