"Software [ought to be] about people, not code"

Related but not quite the same as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is%E2%80%93ought_problem

Raising the is–ought fallacy here i s a category mistake that weakens the author’s argument.

“Software is about people” argues:

> I used to think software was fundamentally about code. Experience taught me that I was mistaken. Software is fundamentally an artifact made by people, for people’s purposes, and its success depends on them.

“Software ought to be about people” says:

> Software isn’t necessarily about people, but I believe it should be.

You may argue the latter, but I think the OP believes software is already shaped by humans .