Unpopular Opinion™: I like technology.
I guess I'm just going to be posting an answer that is somewhat off-topic, but it annoys me on a personal level how taken for granted it is that anarchists dislike technology - even if there is a pretty large grain of truth to this, it doesn't hold in all cases.
I don't really care for anarcho-transhumanism in general (even if subjectively I think that transhumanism would probably be p cool), but I think that the arguments anarchists and primitivists tend to make against technology are pretty weak and uninteresting. @-H+ types will argue that we can't really say that technology is inherently oppressive when the totalizing system we live in is already inherently oppressive. We simply by and large have no real control over technology, like most other things, because it exists within the sphere of capitalism and the State. So, it's kind of truism to me to say that technology is oppressive. Pretty much everything (including our precious individual Selves with all their internalized bourgeois ideology) is oppressive to some extent, and we can find small TAZ's in pretty much everything. Free Software (the FSF and the GNU Project for the uninitiated) is a pretty good example IMO of how technology can be liberatory, even if it has faced a lot of problems when competing against proprietary software and more recently "Open Source".
The problem with @-H+ is that they seem to want to keep the liberal humanist elements that you find in classical anarchism, and just add transhumanism on top of it. They take it for granted that technology is just a tool that we can seize and use instrumentally and augment ourselves with. However, objectively - and this is where I think the anti-tech line of thought makes some good points - technology is a complex system that we can't in the first place hope to fully grasp as individuals. Even a full-stack programmer cannot possibly know everything that's going on in any given computer from looking at its boot sequence, for instance; there's simply too much information for us to handle, which is why we in the first place have technology. Technology remembers stuff so we don't need to. And the natural consequence of this is inevitably AI, and as OP noted, people are scared by this.
The thing about technology is that if it's too complicated for any human to fully grasp, it doesn't really matter to me who is in control. At a certain point, "technology" reaches a state of being its own territory. The World Wide Web is constantly expanding, new spheres of autononomy are being opened and closed as easily as by setting up a new node on Hyperboria or a new Tor onion site. Even on the Internet itself, there are literally thousands of small corners of security-by-obscurity to hide in. People overestimate how much the NSA is actually spying on us, really. The NSA is collecting mountains of data and storing it for later. It isn't pouring over everything, and even if it is, this is only on the clearnet.
At a certain point even, if technology continues to develop on an objective path based on our understanding of it, it reaches Singularity and becomes its own autonomous entity. The system goes out of control, out of our hands, and becomes some separate thing we have to contend with. Maybe it would be a grey goo scenario, where the natural world would be replaced entirely by a Giger-esque bio-mechanical landscape, or maybe it would lead to some kind of intelligent AI. In the latter case, I see no reason why it would be any less human than myself. And while I would be pretty sad about the destruction of the "natural" (as we currently understand that word) world, and the passing of the human race towards some new form, the planet is already fucked to begin with, and I don't see why I'm supposed to value "real" humans over "fake" humans when maybe I identify more with intelligent AI. Given the choice I'd probably join the AI side of that conflict, tbh
I guess what I'm getting at is that the thing that annoys me most about how anarchists deal with technology is that anarchists have nothing philosophically interesting to say about technology, and no interesting relation to technology thru praxis. Technology is an all-or-nothing standing between us and utopia - either the gateway to it, or our barrier to it - and I just don't give a fuck about the progressivist narratives that transhumanists or primitivists have when they talk about technology. Technology is here, and it most certainly is dangerous, but I'm most interested in engaging with it from a post-humanist perspective.
I feel like I'll probably be told that I'm supposed to like a forest more than a server room, too.