I kind-of-sort-of also feel this way about other patents, but in the spirit of specificity my particular sticking point is software.

Yeah, other patents are problematic, but at least patents of yore were more like "here's my design for a door hinge. Here's a diagram showing my specific implementation. There are many ways to mount a door and this is one I've invented and physically produced. Anyone else is free to create a different hinge mechanism."

A modern software patent version of that is "I thought of the idea of a hinge in my basement. They've existed for centuries but I'll be the first to file. No, I've never physically produced a single one. Yes, any implementation of opening a door infringes on my system-for-opening-a-door patent."

there are 1000s of hinge patents. Here is the abstract of one issued in 2015

"A hinge device for a door is provided. The hinge device has two hinge members which engage with each other and a hinge cap. A bearing with one or more tapered ends engages with the hinge members to allow easy opening and closing of a door attached to the hinge device."

https://patents.google.com/patent/US9290974?oq=hinge+2018

I opened up an old piano recently and saw a patent number inside. Looked it up expecting some cool piano technology and found out it was a 100 year old patent about putting the owners name on a bit of metal and then screwing that to the stringboard rather than the traditional method of casting in on the stringboard. The whole patent essentially comes down to using bolts to attach 2 bits of metal rather than using one.

Who is Galaxy Brain?