[analbumcover]

This is distinctly at odds with the techno-optimist view that is so prevalent on this site, and in the tech world in general, that expects technology to address societies ills in a way that allows us to forgo systemic changes.

[clairity]

that's not bad as one-line critiques go, but few people are narrowly techno-optimist. few would say that only technology will fix our ills, with no other structural changes.

but certainly technology as solution can be misguided. UBI for instance (applying the term 'technology' broadly), as a path to labor and leisure utopia that actually further entrenches power/wealth in the hands of the few, thereby making no meaningful structural change addressing unproductivity or unfairness.

[yarrel]

If people wish to push for structural change, having time to do so is a good affordance of UBI.

[clairity]

a better affordance might be a wealth tax that supports grants to individuals and organizations pushing for structural change, perhaps encouraging civic participation and jumpstarting economic opportunity in disadvantaged regions. a fixed and constant cycle of money that distorts economic, political, and social incentives is not the only way, nor even a good way, i'd contend.