This line of thought is interesting but I think it's kind of defeatist. OK, you are skeptical of or reject myth of progress's reliance upon continued development. Maybe you're right that a voluntary regress will make things better, but what are you going to do when the asteroid shows up or the super-volcano goes off or a nearby star goes supernova? We have a finite amount of time -- maybe 10 years, maybe 100 years, 10,000 years, but a just a snap of the fingers, really -- to get smart enough to spread and survive in the universe. Progress might be the end of use, but regress is sure to be.