I'm confused by their idea that insider criticism and self-reflection is a sign of collapse rather than maturity in this case. If professional architects find v

I'm confused by their idea that insider criticism and self-reflection is a sign of collapse rather than maturity in this case. If professional architects find value in working together to develop and adhere to standards before building a city (which I'd consider "technology") it is not a warning sign that architecture will cease to exist. Gene drives, nuclear weapons, space organisms getting to earth, self-reflection on potential risks is not a sign of failure unless your only goal is to move. We only get to make some of these choices, as an entire global civilization, once. AI is not exactly in that category but it's sure not a sign of failure that the people making it are actually considering the results before just making decisions with world-scale impacts. It slows things down but that is important when decisions only get to be made once and cannot be reversed. That was less the case with earlier tech, so I don't understand the surprise at the difference in scrutiny over time.