The OP should read-up on what "computers" were in the the early 20th century, and the error-prone toil that "automatic computers" sought to replace. There's so much that couldn't ever exist today if not for automatic computation.
With other animals we look at them stuck in zoos as being a worse existence than in their natural environment, and zoos are at least intentionally designed for the animals wellbeing. For ourselves the technological progressivist sees moving away from our natural habitat as inherently good.
Electricity, the steam engine, antibiotics, and agriculture all exist. We’ve been through multiple levels of life changing technological advancement yet people in general don’t seem particularly happy nor fulfilled. Better planes, cars, and other devices seems a moot point if those things didn’t get the job done. Hell, those things exist and people still kill themselves, or need a cocktail of antidepressants to make it through the day.
You would think if technological progress improved lives at all then such marvels would have managed to move the needle enough that rich western worlders who never have to directly expend effort on any of their basic needs ever again wouldn't intentionally kill themselves.
I think this article should really be: web developer wonders if there's more to computers than websites. Because I guarantee the scientist that used a computer to model disease and create a vaccine is not wondering if computers make the world better.