To result within a reasonable denouement, one must first analyze and interpet the differing views from either side. While technological development has lead to a much more comfortable standard of living , it has come at the cost of increased mental activity which many were not used to giving, and thus leading to the argument claiming that this improvement has, to a greater extent turned in to a hassle rather than a positive change inside the lives of milions. This quarrel stems from individuals who were exempt from modern day achievements all of a sudden appearing to be in the middle of 21st century standards. Elders with a livelihood far from technology and the online world have struggled adapting to changes happening in stores, banking and other areas that can count as necessities turning towards electronics, away from traditional ways of operating.
Although this view has validity, it is countered with the statements saying that the positives distantly outweight the negatives in these scenarios, and that humans are alive beings that can adapt to differences that have occured in familiar environments,like older persons being able to learning to working their paths around these occurances.
Both sides may have their own logical arguments and explanations to counter the opposing side in their feud my personal conclusion leans towards this high-tech world helping us out more than hurting US. Modern day developments have automated lengthy processes as in manufacturing and services to the point where manual intervention is not necessary. Older generations will have to learn some things, but they will prevail and be fast to adapt.