I mostly will disagree with you on what you commented but it's good to have your reassurance that this is not going to offend you. So I really appreciate it.

Why would a blacksmith or a horse breeder of his time have been enthusiastic about the fact that carriages would once be motorised and many times faster than the four-legged ones? His enthusiasm for it would have been of little use to him, except theoretically in his idea of a future world. He could have dreamed of it in front of his fellow men, but those fellow men who would have heard him talk about the fact that there would one day be machines as fast as an arrow that would make all present carriages and carts superfluous would have asked him whether he would not be satisfied with his present life if they had had his welfare at heart. Because, knowing him well, they would have seen that his dreams were beyond his own abilities. They would challenge him until he either proved them wrong or found out that what was in his head, did not match with what abilities he had. (Now, as we know, the more advanced and projected into the future technology becomes, the more difficult is it to see it coming to life in present times.)

They could have said that if he was convinced of a wonderful future, he should learn to construct a motorised vehicle and demonstrate it to them, to get the funds needed for experimenting. Just like Da Vinci, he would never have experienced for himself that his idea of driving fast or flying the skies would become reality. Others would take his notes, trials and errors that such a man would have left behind and continue to experiment with them.

Such a man who, when he gave himself to an idea of the future, always needed people to support him in his lifetime. A family, a wife and children to feed him, relatives and friends, patrons or nobles who would have provided for him while he brooded over plans, books and sketches, making his experiments in a workshop. Who allowed him to not only neglect his present lifestyle but also somewhat insult and question the lifestyles of his present and close to him fellows. Rightly, they also could have questioned him if they are not good enough any more? And why they would make sacrifices in order to give him the needed space?

But unless you yourself are such a man, having not only an idea of the future but also the skills and materials and and having to argue it against an environment that does not share your dreams of the future because there is no claim to it, and so you yourself were never born rich and have no means of your own to research, you will have to offer yourself to someone to realise your intentions and elaborated plans (to check if they are really so well elaborated).

So it will have been that people without money but with ideas sought out those who had money (and resources) and no ideas and since you never know whether someone is good or evil because that difference is basically not discernible when you have an intention that you are eager to see through because you then want to see the good because if you saw the bad you would feel thwarted in your ideas or even refrain from putting them into action.

Therefore, ultimately, you have to transcend good or evil in order to bring about technological progress. If you are honest with yourself, you realise that every human being has both good and evil potentials that are neither predictable nor always recognisable in a given situation.

So you may know or distribute code and software from "good sources", but you never know when someone will turn into one that you no longer like, for example. And since you never have control over what will happen, the same thing always happens. For some this has materially or psychologically gratifying consequences, for others not. It's actually not very legit to predict paradise, in my view.

Cars today are seen by more and more people as an evil reality because they clog up roads, need more and more motorways, cause stress and accidents and pollute the environment, etc. The joyful acceptance of cars, I would think, lasted only a very short period of time in the history of the automobile. Already people are suffering from this invention that they once praised; or so they think. That is always the case, I would say. People never stay satisfied if what is present becomes ordinary and makes them miserable, despite the greatness of the invention and then start to look for something "better".

You will always have people who fall for propaganda and those who just wake up from having cheered it. From Saul to Paul and back again.

So, that is why I do not believe in a paradise but expect an ongoing process of progress and invention, only to be questioned, after those progressings have come to fruition and then been either condemned or defended. Or destroyed, dismantled. Then newly built on the ruins in different forms and shapes and purposes.

There are no good people "in general". It can happen any moment that a nice person turns into a nasty one right in front of your eyes. You see someone acting mostly reasonable but all of a sudden he or she turns out to be a ghastly human being. Either accusing you or others, of being offensive and whatnot. Also, you yourself can become that hostile human any given moment when the matching trigger comes your way.

This world offers mostly insecurity. To live with the wisdom that this is so, may eliminate most of the desires and wishes for a "better world", while all the while staying blind in front of the good world in which a human being exists, too.

To find a balance between the doomsday sayers and the paradise bringers is what I find a challenging task. Sometimes I don't even want to listen to any of those future scenarios. For it distracts me from my own being and entangles me in so much contradictions that it starts confusing me. The state of confusion then is such a burden and creates so much pain that you have to be a very spontane and happy person to find out of it by letting those things go. I have realized that I better live up to my possibilities in real reach. I can now belittle them and regret never have being an over intelligent and excellent person or I strive for being content with it. Which, I admit, is difficult enough. I am far from being entangled, I guess.

About fifteen years ago, I stopped driving a car. For I had formed the conviction that cars are bad. I became ignorant towards the fact that all my life before, the car has transported me to places I wouldn't have gotten so easily without it.

But in quarantine times, we bought a car to be able to move around freely because I refused to wear a mask and to avoid the nonsense of the measures. I didn't give a damn about harming the environment because I put my wellbeing above that of the environment. It is certainly true that the car did not only change the world to its advantage, but it is equally true that it served the individual well and, as a consequence, also the human community.

When it comes to my own self-preservation, I do not sacrifice myself for the self-preservation of others or oppose it, although this might be a necessity, but it is not necessarily noble. Moreover, there is no question for me that the division of minds on the basis of an alleged epidemic always causes harm. If I protect others, then this is never an absolute protection for these others, because these others always represent very different needs and views.
Thus, "protecting" the elderly in nursing homes only protected those who were more afraid of illness than isolation. Those who were more afraid of isolation were harmed. To believe that everyone benefits equally from this or that measure, from this or that invention, is therefore a mistake, I think.

This error cannot be eradicated even if it is forcibly sold as true. In fact, violence makes the fallacy reveal itself more quickly. Propaganda is therefore a means of achieving something without violence, so that people voluntarily do something they would not do if they thought for themselves and did not look for security, or alternatively perfection, as the highest goal. Which, of course, you already know.
I don't want to do without our car any more, and they really have to take it away from me by force or make driving so expensive that I can no longer afford it. Of course, I refuse to do either, because I live in fear.

This fear is my teaching ground. I have yet not found a way to deal with it in a calm manner. I am calm when I am not threatened but I become anxious once the threat feels very close to me. Now, isn't that an irony? For calmness shall be exactly then present if times are tough, isn't it?