"I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
1. Anything that is in the world when you're born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way** the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you're fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things."
Now my corollary:
Of those under 35, half will embrace new technology to the extent they find it useful to their daily lives or a very cool thing to play with in their leisure time (or sneakily at work). The other half will ignore new technology until they're forced to use it because everyone else in the world already is. Both are normal responses and to be expected.
Of those over 35, the majority will ignore new technology, even when they've supposedly been forced to use it because everyone else in the world already is. This is also a normal response and to be expected.
BUT a small group of those over 35 and an even smaller (fringe) group of those under 35 will wildly latch onto new technology, stake their careers on it, go around telling everyone how wonderful it is, ground-breaking, the wave of the future, and will one day cure cancer. They will point to the very very small percentage of their ideological forebears whose wild ramblings proved unexpectedly correct, ignoring the very very many who were rightfully proved laughingstocks, who lost money in dot-com bubbles, and who knocked all that off and joined normal society once their bandwagon proved to be going nowhere with nobody on it. This, too, is unfortunately a normal response and to be expected. But that doesn't mean I have to listen to them.