As nuclear weapons may yet be the death of us all, they would be a sound candidate. But I think it’s utter fantasy to think that a possible technology can be anything more than delayed. Besides, once GAI (general artificial intelligence) starts freeballing it’ll inevitably stumble onto a mode of death that makes the H-bomb look like a caveman’s campfire by comparison.
What technology would you be better off without, why?
That’s a tough question. While not a Luddite, I do think there are a number of technologies that are out of control, figuratively (or may – literally – become so.) But that doesn’t mean I think they should be gone altogether (it just makes me wishful that people can find a way to moderate their use.)
I’ll go with nuclear weapons, the one technology whose only use lies in not being used. I choose them because they result in low-level existential dread and inflated tax bills. [There is the argument that they may have staved off a colossal Third World War, but one can also argue that two really shitty wars in rapid succession led to institutions (e.g. UN agencies & permanent alliances) and approaches (e.g. low-intensity proxy wars) to avert such a war as well (Those things also being extremely expensive, but not so much with the existential dread.)]
Tiger Riding for Beginners 