I'll admit the only writings of yours I've read are Permanence and the blog post to which I replied; I think at least some of the rest, particularly Lady of Mazes, needs to go on my reading list. (Nietzsche is already on it, hindered only by the usual lack of time.)

Your questions are good ones. "If it actually were a decision to halt technological progress, what would you do?" is the easiest - if it actually came about that I was the only person alive who wanted technological progress, my presence would no longer be of positive utility and I would take steps to remedy the situation, with a last smile to all that had been possible (literary allusion intended).

In the much more likely situation where it's say 90% of humanity who don't want progress and 10% who do, my preference would be to take myself off with as many as were willing of the 10% and go our path without interfering with the 90%. Good fences make good neighbors. If you like anchovies on pizza and I don't, shall whichever of us is the quickest on the draw with a .45 determine both our diets? I think it's much better if you eat anchovies and I eat an alternative topping, and we both get what we want and neither of us needs to draw a gun (or, as it is in practice, delegate the use of guns to the police).

Which leads on to your other questions. Here's my best idea of what the future should look like: Domain Protection.

There is another point on which I disagree with you, but I'll reply to it under 'Instead of Transhumanism', which I think is more directly related to the topic.

(Meta-note: I did check the notify box, but haven't received any email notifications; should I have? Not complaining, just that I'm obviously not familiar with the software this page uses so in case I'm missing something.)