Technology is a tool, it can be used to increase your social interactions (e.g. finding like-minded groups online to meet up with in-person) or to decrease your social interactions.
You say technology is "destroying communities", but don't acknowledge all of the communities technology has helped build.
Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, like people living in middle of nowhere, or who have otherwise trouble finding like-minded friends offline.
The number one myth about technology is that it is just a tool. It is a society-shaping force. For example, WhatsApp in Brazil: even if you HATE whatsapp and Meta and don't want to use it, you might be forced to use it if you want to get a job, book a hotel, etc, because it's so entrenched.
Sorry to say, but technology works through first being optional, then being adopted because it gives a person marginal advantages in the short-term, and then being mandatory because the majority adopts it.
Many people are forced to use technology even if they would rather not because if this process. That technology is a tool is the greatest misprepresentation of any concept in the history of humanity.
Edit: let me ask you one question, how did you get the idea that technology is just a tool? How many times to people repeat this mantra? Try thinking about it more deeply and over many decades of time and understand the root cause of this thinking.
My point was that you can (and many people do) use technology to increase their social interaction. You seem to suggest it can only possibly decrease it.
>The number one myth about technology is that it is just a tool.
I didn't say it was _just_ a tool.
It is _a_ tool, which can be used to help increase social interaction.
>Edit: let me ask you one question, how did you get the idea that technology is just a tool?
I didn't.
Well, I think it can increase it, but that the increases in time form a sequence of local maxima that themselves are strictly decreasing. (Edit: I meant in terms of overall societal health, like adding up the social happiness of everyone).
But my comment was about how the future of having to be drip-fed social interactions to meet our basic needs, otherwise no one will ever interact with anyone ever, is a silly exaggeration.
In any case, I'd love to see what data you're referring to. I'm familiar with studies that look at specific technologies (e.g. social media). But I'm unfamiliar with data/studies that looks at all technologies across all levels of society and measures the net benefit/harm. I'm not even sure how you would go about quantifying, say, the benefit of being able to contact a long-distance relative with significantly more ease and less expense vs. the harm of having to use Facebook to organize the video call.