In a philosophical sense yes, but there’s degrees to both of them, and once you consider practical issues your options will often be a mix of good and evil.
As for myself, I work for non-profits largely because I want to do good for others. I cannot see taking advantage of another's data, for instance, without their consent (real or imagined) to make a profit and then share it with them. Perhaps I'm a goody-two-shoes, but I'll accept it. I cannot fathom working a job where my existence is to bleed out as much profit from others without them knowing, or if they do know, them not having a voice or a way out short of not using the devices of modernity.
I could do this all day. A clear and unambigious view of what's wrong and right is a risky thing - you will be compelled to fix it, without limits to your interference.
That was provocative and I think you're a good person but I don't think it's so easy, or safe, to draw a dividing line. But that risks not drawing a dividing line, so more dangers lurk.
As far as meat goes, I don't eat red meat. Fish, yes. Chicken, don't really care for it. I could easily get by on fish, rice, beans, salads, etc. I see your point. My eating fish would be evil to someone else since a life is lost in doing so. Beef is nasty to me because I hate even seeing fat on food. As an aside, to me, nothing is better than fried fish or a salad made from chilled chickpeas, lime juice, cilantro, diced Roma tomatoes, and red onion. Add Serrano or Jalapeno peppers if you like spicy.
Do your taxes contribute to murdering foreigners in a desert far away?
Are you evil?
This isn't a personal attack, I just really struggle when I see moral absolutism and binary thinking. The world isn't binary even though our work with computers and human systems often lead us to pretend that it is.