A part of what it is, yes. But that's the beauty of it: cities are constantly changing and building upon what came before. It's what makes them cities and not forgotten backwaters.
I have no opinion against change, per se. I think that is an unfair and incorrect reframing of someone's opinion. It is only the nature of certain changes I have an opinion about. It is like if someone has opinion about X, a single example of how to implement Y, and then someone else accuses them of being "against Y". Ridiculous.
"Change is good" is not what I'm trying to say. The point is that change is a fundamental attribute of cities. Trying to claim that a city should retain the characteristics it had when you moved there flies in the face of all the change that took place to make it that way that way. The only thing you can do is lean into the change and try to steer it in positive directions.
I guess what I'm trying to say is there's a fair chance GP was somebody else's version of a "techie" when they moved to Seattle. Most likely that someone else was equally salty about the changing demographics.