The technology I accept best is that which serves basic functions. I need to have clothes, a pack, a sleeping bag, a light source, food and water, whether or not these are enhanced by a higher level of technology. So, for example, I love the advent of LED lights, sturdy lightweight synthetic fabrics, improved ultra-light tents and so on.

Where I least desire or accept technology is when it serves mostly to distract me from my surroundings. A digital camera doesn't detract from my engagement with whatever I am photographing, but an MP3 player just fills my head with sounds that mask the sounds of wind, water, birds, or other wildlife. A GPS is marginally more useful than a paper map, but can easily become a distraction, too, by continuously updating my hiking statistics. It takes discipline not to become fixated on those stats.

A drone is little more than a noisy toy and an annoyance to everyone but their owner. I hate them.

As for the theoretical anti-gravity pack, it would make wilderness access so easy that the either the wilderness we have set aside would be too small and need to be greatly expanded, or else it would cause overcrowding or invite draconian restrictions and quotas, so nice as it sounds, I think the Law of Unintended Consequences would make them the worst technology, yet.