There’s no equivalent to a licensed civil engineer in programming.

It’s literally called a software engineer in most jurisdictions that aren’t America where anyone is allowed to call themselves that. And software engineers also have to take engineering ethics, both courses in university as well as in their final professional exams if they want to call themselves engineers.

Why do you keep adding new parameters to these analogies? It’s such a simple concept but you are determined to prove your opinion, that the devs should acquiesce to your point of view, no matter what.

You’re the one who added the “posted online” parameter. I responded and pointed out that it doesn’t matter to the analogy.

If you put something dangerous into the world, mark it “ready to use”, and encourage people to use it, and that results in them getting hurt or hurting others, then that is a bad thing and you have an obligation to fix it or warn people.  

It’s such a simple concept but you are determined to prove your opinion, that the devs should acquiesce to your point of view, no matter what.

You’re right about it being a simple concept, I don’ understand where you think I’m demanding anyone do anything. The devs have already acquiesced after the community overwhelmingly dumped on their response. My only point has been that it’s not entitled to expect a developer to put a warning on software once they’ve been alerted that it’s dangerous.