I also appreciate the callout but don’t believe it’s in bad taste. There are enough analogs, and it makes you question the type of people who run the companies and make the decisions. In MSFTs case, Bill Gates was an associate with a known pedophile and likely an abuser himself.

I completely understand it being triggering but shying away from it because of that protects perpetrators. A lot of executive circles are filled with abusive freaks and their decision making reflects that.

>the impact or meaning of referring to violence in a flip[pant] way

I don't think you actually mean "violence" in general, unless you think that word means something radically and fundamentally different from what I think it means (and my understanding is based on what dictionaries say; but I will happily acknowledge that I have encountered very, very many people whose apparent understanding of the term is utterly incomprehensible to me). I say this because I never, ever see people object to the use of idioms such as https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/you+killed+it . The objection is only ever raised with respect to very specific kinds of violence.

Or will you also object when I kill a process, or when POSIX-standard systems (I'm pretty sure this is part of the standard but I'm not that kind of nerd) continue to use `kill` as the command name? How about when a new startup releases a "killer app"?

The guy was a Darknet Vendor and has been to Jail/Prison in the US.