Out of the inner desire for engineering excellence?
That's not true, you totally can: "gud enough."
Work in general is.
Heck, life in general is
Not throwing endless resources and energies at a problem "because Twitter told me what the best practices are".
E.g. Maybe Claude Code could use half the memory, maybe, but maybe the correct estimation is that solving the memory problem would negatively effect development speed, or would cost many millions of engineering effort and no real world user would really care whether it's using 50 or 500 MBs of ram.
So no, you're not an engineer but a "developer", if you think that "quality" code is engineering, code has a development and maintenance cost, specific directions come with important trade offs.
But since it isn't (we know real users care and complain, we know it's not your made up "endless resources" and "millions of engineering effort" because "millions" of other software products exist that have been made without those) you're short of an actual argument.
> code has a development and maintenance cost, specific directions come with important trade offs.
Yet again you forgot to make a case how any of those trade off towards the current state.
In general, how would you ever determine whether the current situation is justified or not if nothing in your strawman questions anything, but just comes up with not very plausible justifications of whatever already exists???
That has no bearing on the product i maintain, where users very much have a choice, and we keep them with us by solving their problems and listening to their concerns.
But real users do that about pretty much every piece of software, correct? Free SW, expensive SW, open source, closed, SW by a single person, SW from a massive company, etc.
There is an assumption here that everyone thinks of excellence the way you do.