I recently read The Techno-Optimist Manifesto by Marc Andreessen, and it was quite thought-provoking. Andreessen, one of the pioneers of Netscape¹, the browser I used on my first personal computer, believes that technology and capitalism are essential for progress. He sees stagnation as humanity’s biggest enemy and argues that continuous progress should be almost a given.

Throughout the article, Andreessen repeats the same fundamental message: “Technological progress is necessary, and standing in its way is a crime against humanity.” He defines those he accuses of this “crime” under the heading "Enemy”: listing many different elements ranging from corruption to cartels, from bureaucracy to anti-greatness. He concludes his writing by referencing Nietzsche’s concept of the Last Man.²

Andreessen says:

Lies

"We are being lied to.
We are told to be pessimistic.
We are told to be angry, bitter, and resentful about technology.
We are told to be miserable about the future."

Truth

"Our civilization is built on technology.
It is time to be Techno-Optimists."

Yes, there are many people who view technology negatively and express their critical opinions. However, we cannot ignore that these criticisms have deep roots and solid foundations. In his work Discourse on the Sciences and Arts published in 1750, Jean-Jacques Rousseau opposed the optimistic, progress-focused outlook of the Age of Enlightenment. Rousseau argued that scientific and artistic developments could distance people from their fundamental virtues, suggesting that such progress could trigger moral corruption. Idealizing a lifestyle in harmony with nature and simple human virtues, Rousseau believed that technological advancements offered only superficial successes.

Similarly, in his book The Disappearance of Childhood, which I’ve enjoyed reading, author Neil Postman emphasizes that the flow of information offered by technology is rapid and superficial. Postman argues that children’s ability to access adult-oriented content through media weakens their capacity for deep thinking and removes the special nature of childhood as a distinct period. It is true that technology has made access to information easier, but as Postman points out, this access can sometimes lead to distraction, lack of depth, and even the weakening of social bonds.

I do not think that Enlightenment thinkers like Kant, Montesquieu, Rousseau, or postmodern writers representing the movement such as Postman and McLuhan have "lied" to us. These thinkers have deeply explored the potential negative effects of technological progress and have highlighted the risks it may pose to human nature, morality, and social structures. Viewing technology with a critical eye, discussing its possible harms, and developing more sustainable, human-centered approaches is not a crime against humanity; on the contrary, it is a necessity.

The first rule of the communication we establish with the outside world is that it should provide continuity and build trust. Just like the friendships we form, technological devices that have our time and attention also require this. We are in an organic relationship with technology as well, but unlike our friends and family, technological devices are more of a closed box; we don’t really know or understand them. We think we control them, but that’s not entirely true. Accepting this is a bit difficult.

Andreessen presents technology almost as a power that can be turned on and off with a key, easily controllable. Regarding artificial intelligence (AI), he makes the following statement:

“We believe any deceleration of AI will cost lives. Deaths that were preventable by the AI that was prevented from existing is a form of murder.”

Advanced technologies like artificial intelligence don’t just change our daily lives, they also reshape cultures and deeply impact power structures. So, they’re not as simple as Andreessen presents. Yes, AI can bring huge benefits to humanity, with revolutionary progress possible in fields like medicine and industry. However, organizations like the Center for AI Safety (CAIS), which study AI’s societal impacts, are also researching potential social risks and advising governments. So, while we praise technology’s benefits, we must also consider the potential harms it may bring and the research being done on this.

The Chinese proverb, “Heaven is high and the emperor is far away”,³ suggests that corruption and lack of control grow as one moves further from authority. This highlights the limits of central power and the risks of weak oversight. As Andreessen suggests, leaving artificial intelligence unchecked could lead to a similar outcome. AI can increase control by widening authority’s reach, potentially creating "surveillance societies".⁴ Even in dictatorships, power has its limits, but the control AI enables could remove these limits entirely, allowing continuous surveillance that greatly enhances the state’s power over its citizens.

So, we need to discuss the limits of artificial intelligence and technology, as well as ethics and social responsibility. Technology has the power not only to make life easier but also to change the structure of society. To protect social well-being, it’s essential to question, regulate, and keep this power within ethical limits.

---

1. Netscape played a central role in the “browser wars” of the 1990s.

2. Nietzsche’s Last Man is a symbol of complacency and mediocrity in society.

3. In Russian, there exists a directly similar proverb: "God is high, and the czar is far away (while I am near, so bow deeply to me)".

4. I first encountered this term in a essay by Michel Foucault where he interprets Immanuel Kant’s essay of the same name, What Is Enlightenment?