To expand on things previously said, I am of the opinion that "there can't be technological solutions to social problems" and "technology can *cause* social problems" are beliefs that can coexist in a coherent worldview.
My fictive peeps are even more skeptical on that point, and would generally claim technology to be value-neutral even though its _telos_ is to be an integral part of a philosophy of sophont aspiration.
Universal surveillance would be a good example. I mean, we'd use it to persecute the shit out of people, no question, have you met the US government recently?
*There*, they think of it as the thing that ensures no sparrow shall fall even in the remote wilderness without paramedical assistance being deployed before it hits the ground, or why there've been no street robberies on the homeworld since 2784.
(It's 7298 as of last writing.)
It makes discussions kind of difficult. I mean, they're coming from a totally different place, so...
"Let me get this straight. Your planet has to let people die alone and terrified in the wilderness because a basic lifesaving technology would be routinely and pervasively abused to persecute people by your government. That is popularly elected."
"What. With all due respect. The shit."
But as such, their response to people suffering from we might think of as technological dystopias is not going to be about the technology. It's going to be about whatever bloody awful things they chose to do with it.
Or, for short, "Gods below, _you are living in barbarian hell!_"