[Zambyte]

The plow is very obviously life sustaining technology. Plows help make food, food is required to live. I find it extremely unlikely that there was any noteworthy amount of "complaining" about it at any point in history. Every technology exists on a spectrum of obviously good to obviously bad. Lots of things are not in the middle of that spectrum.

> I’ll take scrolling myself to death at 80 over smallpox and dying of a trivially curable infection at 40 every time

Luckily we don't have to choose either.

[AngryData]

The plow probably isn't the best technology for the example because it is such a substantial improvement in farming capabilities, but something like weaving loom technology or grain milling technology might work better. Because while they reduce labor, it is perfectly feasible to live your entire life using simpler techniques. Hand mills and hand weaving take a lot of labor but aren't hard enough to make living in any particular enviroment too difficult to sustain well into old age. And I can imagine many people scoffing at that tech as unneccessary and dieing without ever feeling a need or desire to adopt it.

[scoofy]

The nostalgic hunter gather hippies probably thought the plow was unnatural.

[hnfong]

> I find it extremely unlikely that there was any noteworthy amount of "complaining" about it at any point in history.

"If plows had not been invented nobody would have to plow the fields!!!"

OK, if that logic sounds ridiculous to you, just realize that this is the whole basis of the argument about things getting complicated.