VovixLDR

The first thing we must remember, technology as the whole is not a matter of preference or as Russians say, choosing a tomtit in your hand or a crane in the sky (safety vs. risk). It is a matter of survival. There can be no safety for humans without "industrial society", because carrying capacity of Unabomber's way of life for the planet would be perhaps 7 millions, not billions. In case of his dream coming true, most of humans would certainly die in a few days. There is simply no choice "to live with robots" or "to live as in Herbert's Dune", it's not a matter of tomorrow, it is a matter of today. The whole idea turns obviously absurd when we realize it is about not "destroying machines today to avoid death tomorrow", but actually "killing billions of people today to avoid... what and for whom?"

So the whole Luddite discourse is not just useless in terms of sustainability and avoiding global risks - it is harmful, i. e. the more Luddites we have, the more dangerous our risks become - not only direct risks from Luddite actions, but those not solved in time and in a right way because of some people's active or passive Luddism. In a word, Luddism itself is a risk.