It sounds like you're advocating an alternative explanation to the one I gave, but without understanding that it's different. This probably means that my explanation wasn't very clear.

The workers owning the means of production doesn't seem ironic at all to me in this case; it's textbook Marxist economic theory. The means of production for software are, from Marx's point of view, your laptop and maybe a colo box. When you own (or rent!) them, you aren't alienated from them (in the purely objective sense of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_alienation#... rather than any emotional sense) and consequently you own the product. By contrast, when you depend on your employer for access to the means of production, they own the product of your labor.

Open-source tooling, based on the idea that "software should not have owners" (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html), enables every worker to own not only their own computer but their own compiler, linker, etc., rather than depending on angel investors to invest the capital necessary to license them from Computer Associates. You are precisely correct there.

Where my analysis departs from orthodox Marxism (perhaps because I am in fact a liberal) is that I see this as a question of bargaining power rather than a Hegelian mystical thing.

Civil engineers have very little bargaining power because the state power necessary to build a highway is very scarce indeed, while the expertise required to design it is relatively abundant.

Electrical engineers have more bargaining power because they can choose between many potential employers, who have to compete with one another for their relatively scarce skills, but bringing a new electronic product to market still requires a significant investment and several months, if not a year or more. For more advanced electronics like submillimeter ASICs, we're probably talking about several years and tens of millions of dollars.

Programmers have enormous bargaining power because they can bring a salable product to market over the weekend with an investment of a few hundred dollars. Or a few thousand if they're targeting the iPhone.

So I don't think collective awareness and action are what's going on here. I think individual programmers are in a better bargaining position than individual electrical engineers, and consequently they get better bargains individually, without functioning in a fashion akin to a guild. (And collectively owning the means of production, as orthodox Marxism prescribes, would not provide the same benefits. Observably it did not, neither in the Soviet Union and Mao's China nor when US retirees owned the majority of the stock market through their pension funds.)

Incidentally, there have been a lot of innovations over the past 25 years or so that have greatly dropped the investment required to bring a new web service online. Sourceforge and later GitHub and then GitLab eliminated the need to spend a week configuring a server to support a software team. Rackspace and then Amazon Web Services eliminated the need to buy the server, haul it over to the colo, and maybe commit to a service contract. MySQL (now MariaDB), Postgres, and SQLite eliminated the need to license Oracle. (Linux had already eliminated the need to buy a Solaris license 25 years ago, but a lot of people hadn't noticed yet.)

Companies like JLCPCB, PCBWay, and OSHPark seem like they're sort of trying to do the same thing with PCB products, FPGAs and especially Yosys are doing the same thing with digital designs, and companies like Skywater, (the nonprofit) IHP, and Matt Venn (Tiny Tapeout) seem to be trying to do the same thing with ASICs, including mixed-signal ASICs. (I'd list Efabless here, but they seem to have gone out of business last week.)

But being able to pay US$10 for one-week turnaround on a stack of prototype PCBs isn't going to replace a 1GHz LeCroy oscilloscope or a Kuka industrial robot, so I'm not confident that they'll have the same effect.