Is technology good for us?

[Shadowferal]

The polio vaccine proved that such things can be done.
But it will never happen as long as greed is controlling progress. And pharms have a vested interest. It's only logical.
It's the same reason why pharms in the US flatly refuse to outsource prescriptions. Not because they're unsafe. But because they're cheap, and affects profits.

[PC2]

The polio vaccine proved that such things can be done.

You can't generalize from particular instances of success(or failure) to any other because each organism is different and requires new and novel molecules to address each parasite. With that said there is no such thing as an organism that can't be countered with enough knowledge and technology, you simply can't expect that solutions to arrive in any kind of predictable fashion. A solution could be discovered tomorrow, or in a decade, or a century.

But it will never happen as long as greed is controlling progress. And pharms have a vested interest. It's only logical.
It's the same reason why pharms in the US flatly refuse to outsource prescriptions. Not because they're unsafe. But because they're cheap, and affects profits.

It's not, if you and all the people you know aren't greedy then start studying chemistry, biology, and medicine and work on this issue without the "greed" you claim to hate. If other people spent their time and energy on gaining pharmaceutical and medical skills you don't have an inherent right to the fruits of their labor, ie their medical products and services. Unless you pay for them then access to them is entirely a privilege(charity) and not a right.

[shadowmouse]

I'm sure it has already been mentioned but: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/gold...ess-model.html

Goldman Sachs analysts attempted to address a touchy subject for biotech companies, especially those involved in the pioneering "gene therapy" treatment: cures could be bad for business in the long run.

"Is curing patients a sustainable business model?" analysts ask in an April 10 report entitled "The Genome Revolution."

"The potential to deliver 'one shot cures' is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies," analyst Salveen Richter wrote in the note to clients Tuesday. "While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow."

[Shadowferal]

I'm sure it has already been mentioned but: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/gold...ess-model.html

I'm near certain that such a conversation has been had more often than we want to know.

On another front; Big Pharma and Clinical Trials

[Strakalo]

definitely yes, technologies ease our life

[StayTuned]

Technology is neither.
It's the users who are good or bad.

[Zuben]

It'll probably be what destroys us in the end, directly or indirectly, but I still say it's good.

[smityx]

Good to a point. One good exception is social media.

[XangXu]

since the spread of the internet and social media, I have noticed quality in all sectors of life drop.

It's like people are sidetracked or can't focus on a job for long enough to get it done properly.

The result is aircrafts that aren't properly built or checked, inferior products with a new shine to them...

[Neenaw]

Good in what way?

Health?
Ethically?
Psychologically?
Spiritually?
For society?

Good or bad is such a vague question.

[Twoddle]

The predicted cyborgs thing after the networking era is over is kinda depressing, who wants this!?

[lagiacrux]

maybe YOU would but there are plenty of people that live off the grid and are doing just fine. technology can be both a boon and a hindrance when you rely TOO much on it. one good CME would knock that technology out just like that.

i wouldnt call that "fine", but that just a personal opinion.

[Pony Soldier]

I would say it's good in more ways than not but it can be bad if we start to rely on it too much. Technology makes things easier for us, does things we used to have to do but now no longer. Speeds up work, makes some things safer, and the overall quality of life goes up. However, I feel if we rely on it too much we'll forget how to do things ourselves.

Also it could lead to a more anti-social world which we kinda live in today. People don't want to interact with other people anymore. They'd rather order something online than go to a store and walk around and browse simply because of the convenience of not having to drive out there (I admit I'm guilty of this but it's more to do with my social anxiety). That's why we have all these retail stores closing because everybody just goes on Amazon or something to buy their stuff. Some people don't even want to go out for food anymore they'd rather have it delivered to their house.

I'm not saying all of this is bad but moderation. Too much of something is never a good thing.

[Vash The Stampede]

Remember this when eventually we use technology to cure all diseases and eliminate aging. We used technology to remove the need for wars as resources are more freely available. With the adoption of electric vehicles, the need for oil from questionable countries will also be eliminated. Lab crown meat will solve a lot of problems we have with meant production. Technology isn't inherently evil, just that some humans are.

[PC2]

Good question but answering the question is easy. In a mature society technological advance is the only known way to improve the standard of living. There have been no tech advances whose beneficial effect in the long run did not vastly exceed the disruptive effects in the short run.

Yes technology may be the biggest source of progress but we should avoid the idea that there can be such a thing as a "mature society". In my view a society can't be mature when it comes to things like political knowledge, morality, and art/aesthetics because that implies that we're near some kind of end-point beyond which there cannot be an endless amount of further improvement to every aspect of society. Advanced technology is meaningless without the wisdom that is needed to prevent it from being misused.

[Sunseeker]

"Technology" is hardly a specific enough category to give an answer on.

I will argue that on the whole technology is better for us than not.

[Stelio Kontos]

Much like giving a machine gun to a chimp, sooner or later, we're going to wreck our civilization and the most advanced tech will be the bow and arrow and the plow again.

WW4 will be fought with spears and shields, I'd bet.

[ErrandRunner]

It depends how you define technology. Any tool that is created to make life easier, safer or more convenient could be classified as technology.

There are aspects of technology that are good for humanity and make life safer and more pleasant. There are also aspects that make human beings worse off and lazy.