@selfsame I'm increasingly convinced that technology IS debt.
currently i agree, only because it's designed that way from the manufacturer.
A solid state machine with a reasonable interface feels like an extension of self, but i suspect that everyone's ideal interface is different, meaning the more mass-marketable something is, the worse it fits, resulting in everyone ending up with bottom tier experience on hardware capable of providing so much more than the user will ever know.
All code is technical debt in the same way that municipal infrastructure is technical debt. (I can point you at a rabbit-hole of articles-I-found-fascinating on this subject.)
That doesn't *automatically* mean it's not worth the investment, but it certainly can end up costing more than it's worth... and that cost can be weaponized.
As an example of technology-as-debt going beyond code, take China's concrete debt. The country has poured more concrete in a decade than the US did in a century. But concrete doesn't last forever -- well-maintained half-life is about 100 years, poorly maintained is half that or less. That clock is ticking, and has both interest (maintenance) and principle (replacement) components.
Generalistic and moderated instance.