Yes, everyone who has a different utility function from you is a closet eugenicst.

Respect, as you say, is important. Leaf by example.

You took liberty to generalize what I said.

I was referring into technical implementations and what risks are included. It requires deep undertanding how these things work. Average user does not have it. Many aspects are invisible to the end-users, like the war against malware in App Store.

The end-user knows what they want in terms of end-result. How to to get the job done with a tool (app). They can compare end-results.

Sometimes, however not all results all there to be compared. Because, they don’t understand what kind of tools can be actually created. They are happy with the current one because they think it is the best what can be.

Or, what else the tool can do besides their advertised functionality. Which can be malicious or harmful to user in another way.

Or tools could work in a better way, but are currently hindered for monetary gain.

All this requires specialised knowledge.

What? You can both believe that “people don’t know what’s good for them” and that “liberty and freedom is necessary for a functioning society”. For example, insects is a pretty good source of nutrient and protein but is there anyone within a 100 miles from you that will willingly eat them daily? Even easier, we all know, deep down, that we could be doing something better, but how often do we rise up to that ideal?