I've figured out what bothers me about this article. I have nothing against refusing to work for a company that is in a business you don't approve of, but imagine for a moment what happens if this movement actually succeeded in depriving government policies they don't like of technical support. What do you think anybody who is not a programmer would think?<p>In case you're wondering, think about how non-Trump supporters felt when they learned that Twitter and Facebook had more power to communicate with the public than the President of the United States. Even left-of-center figures like the current President of Mexico (no Trump fan) found that disquieting.<p>If you don't like a government policy, sure, you have the right to not work for a company that's enforcing it. But, on the off chance that something like a general strike of programmers was able to veto government policies, don't expect those who were previously in favor of those policies to meekly decide that the programmers are in charge now. More likely, it will add to an already growing sense among all the non-programmers, that a fairly arrogant and not especially socially adept tech elite is trying to decide government policy instead of allowing elected officials to do it.<p>Fortunately, this particular movement probably has little chance of achieving its aims. Good. If you want to change government policy, in a democracy, you should start with the assumption that the way to do that is to convince a majority of the voters that it needs to be changed.