I don't really think the main thrust is correct, though, if that's what it really is. Because humans don't have to be bad for tech to bring about a dystopia even under your first premise. They just have to have enough instincts that are even potentially adaptive in times of scarcity that become maladaptive in a high-tech environment for tech to bring about a dystopia. And I don't think that dystopia will be a self-fulfilling prophecy, even if your second premise is correct, because if humans have a sufficient number of instincts to interact with technology to bring about a dystopia, it's very likely to happen whether we believe it or not.

Finally, even the majority can be optimistic about humanity or even everyone, and it could still lead to a tech dystopia because of the additive effects of good intentions sometimes adding to bad (see fossil fuel use for example).

I don't think we have many opportunities to redefine the world. We're already in a state where people just trying to get by is contributing to the destruction.