I came across the following article which others may find to be an interesting read, particularly in assessing the extent to which technology is transforming (or not) the fundamental practice of Archaeology.
This article highlighted for me that technology is not the only force of change that is acting on Archeology at this time. Other capitalist and economic forces are also at play that could significantly change how Archaeology might be done in the future.
If one considers the TED talks forum to be a social lightening rod for innovation and change, then the markets will likely respond with new archaeological products and services to fulfill emergent opportunities (and make potentially sizable profits while doing so) - this could in turn result in a chain reaction of fundamental changes to the practice of Archaeology in terms of who, how, where, and perhaps even why it is done.
The idea of Technology replacing, rather than assisting Archaeologists in doing their work would obviously represent a fundamental shift in our discipline. Having previously worked in IT and business for several years, I generally embrace the potential value of technological advances - but not as a silver bullet or without making a conscious effort to understand the implications. Is there an unintended consequence (risk of loss of experience, meaning, skills, etc) of technology inhibiting us from getting "off the veranda" as Malinowski encouraged us to do - to take the white gloves off and to actually get our own hands dirty while digging something up?