No worries, faith. It's all too easy to assume someone with a differing opinion is insulting ones own, and I know I make that mistake sometimes too.
The issue with the technological solution is that it isn't a solution. And not because the timings are too short to find and install such technology - though that's true too. But telling a person that cameras will be watching as they drive across the border to see their aunt in the next village, or that they have to fill in a form to move stock from one part of their business to another, or any of the hundreds of other barriers that this tech would throw up, is untenable to an Irish-identifying person who for twenty years has been afforded the respect of being allowed to not recognise that border. On a practical level the cameras would be shot down and the forms will be ignored, (and the people going to fix the cameras or check the lorries would be given shortshrift - and unfortunately met with violence - so there would be no way to enforce it) which Ireland/EU are pointing out, as well as their stated position that imposing those constraints on an Irish person who lived in the north would be contrary to their rights as enshrined in the GFA.
I agree though that having to show their passport to get into the "rest of the Uk" (as my NI Protestant neighbours would see it, and which I want to respect) would potentially be just as discriminatory to their rights under the GFA. Anyone saying lightly that either an Irish Sea border or technological border is an obvious solution probabaly hasn't read the Belfast treaty and certainly hasn't lived under it; I know no-one saying that either is tenable who does, except those goading the 'other side'.
Which leaves the whole thing an incredible mess.