Free open source software (FOSS) is running the world. The information society is build upon the work of volunteer coders that have permitted the usage of their code freely.
The philosophy behind the FOSS movement is that the usage shouldn't be restricted in any way based on the use case of the code. It's all good as long the openness, attribution and redistribution clauses are respected. It's nice and also part of why it has become so popular. Being able to build on top of others code can be a huge saving.
But maybe it's time to make a difference. We don't have to allow any usage of our code. We can have a say on how it can be used and hence help making world a better place.
There has been attempts doing this. For example the license for using JSON data format denies it to be used for evil. There is also the climate strike license that is trying to restrict the usage for any software that could be harmful for the environment. The idea behind both of these is good, but they both have their own issues. "Evil" isn't really well defined condition and the clause could make the whole license void. The climate strike one on the other hand might be too restrictive and radical.
What I think would work best is a license somewhere between those two. It should define the usage for evil more concretely. Restricting the usage for non-environmentally friendly software could also be allowed under the condition that the environmental impact is being offset by other means like carbon compensation.