Re: Lovely idea - no chance of it ever happening
Like you, I think the articles sentiment around memory should just be extended to software efficiency in general.
You only have to look at Notepad.exe as a good example of something that's now considerably larger and slower, and delivers little benefit for the bloating (perhaps we didn't need to rewrite it to require a .NET dependency to get tabs? etc)
I grew up trying to get a program to fit in the boot sector on an Amiga floppy disk - an era when people tried to wring ever last ounce of performance out of a system.
Some of that still goes on in certain circles - like where there's a cost saving to be made (many years ago Google did a decent bunch of work around optimising webpage efficiency, reducing bloat, best practice for images etc - I guess the result is that the "cost" was shunted to the client, but serving the content at scale became significantly cheaper). More often than not the general idea is to do something good enough more quickly so that revenue can be recognised. Compromises are made so that things can be delivered at scale more quickly - e.g. microservices can be seen as a way to manage people.
Ignoring what we might think about AI - a lot of the code it produces is inefficient and usually benefits from significant refactoring (which you can get use AI to do, but I digress) - AI slop does fall into the "good enough" boat in order to get that precious revenue.
All of that is to say that software inefficiency is not a technical problem, but a management issue.