I find it interesting that you added "despite tech advancements". I don't see how the level of technological advancement enters into this equation at all.

Maybe the connection dandanua is alluding to is that mythology from the beginning of the "Information Age" (circa 1980) that technology would "bring us all together in a giant conversation of humankind". As if. Now, here we are having this conversation on a platform owned and run by those same "bunker men" who probably bought the laws that destroyed the peered Internet that was our hope. We're still stuck in 1980, holding out that "technology will save us".

tech advancements = improvements of life for the whole humanity, and thus overall happiness. But it seems this naive thinking doesn't work in this world.

> tech advancements = improvements of life for the whole humanity

Yes, that equation is inaccurate. Tech advancements mean more powerful tools. Tools that can be used to improve things or can just as easily be used to make things worse.

The entire history of mankind indicates that it will always end up being a mix of both.

So you do agree that tech advancement could in fact slow or stop the apocalypse? That's all they were getting at.

Unless you want to argue that the lion's share of tech advancements instead doomed humanity.