[Jedd]

  > Technology should enhance quality of
  > life of people. when it replaces people,
  > chaos ensue !

This doesn't make much sense.

There's no 'should' with technology - it's merely a (set of) thing(s).

Replacing people, in the sense of doing away with Bullshit Jobs <tm> is entirely the goal of new technology - so that those people can do something else. Ideally that something else is something they want to do (and that may (but not necessarily does) improve the world).

I think your prediction that people will be replaced by technology is a little naive.

The idea that the pointless activities of some people will be replaced by the vague category of 'technology' is entirely palatable to most people.

[applecore]

> There's no 'should' with technology.

This is a common belief but it isn't true.

Actually, government plays a huge role in deciding how technology is developed and broadly adopted by society. There is a should with technology: in the sense of achieving a desirable or expected state.

[Jedd]

I liked your original edit the most :)

  > Actually, government plays a huge
  > role in deciding how technology is
  > developed and broadly adopted by
  >society.

I'm in Australia. Where do you live?

Outside of Singapore, I don't know of (m)any governments where administrators are even passably proficient in matters of technology.

Generally governments are hostile towards any new technology until they can work out how to turn them into a benefit to the state (water catchment tanks, internet, bitcoin, solar generators, uber, et cetera)..

  > There is a should with technology:
  > in the sense of achieving a desirable
  > or expected state.

Intent is a lovely thing, but technology doesn't come shipped with intent, and that was my point.

The other (bigger) part of my point was that we need to start having civilised discussions about how we integrate technology into our society now, rather than half-way through revolutions / civil wars.