Zhen Li, you misunderstand me.
On people rushing to save time you commented:
Other than extra time to meditate and practice the path to nirvana?
More time to enjoy poetry and nature, more time to spend with family. More time to spend creating and enjoying artwork and literature. I can think of plenty of things.
Which would be lovely if true but in reality does not seem to apply to a very large majority of people, in my admittedly limited 50 years of experience. You are ascribing some 'noble intent' when none exists. And if you read that Bryson quote carefully you will see that he noted that people were not using the time saved for the things you posit (i.e. leisure), but instead elected to work even more. As he says, a vicious little circle.
I think the main problem, Qing Tian, is just that you're being a grouch about things, and so terribly pessimistic. You have to lighten up a little to have a nice experience in the world, and spend some time enjoying the small things while being mindful of their impermanence - which is part of their beauty.
And this is just so far off the mark... I am one of those people who actually takes the time to experience things. I love life and all its myriad wonders. I am one of those odd people for whom a smile is never far from my lips and have often been accused of not taking things seriously enough! Go figure.
On problem and solutions you commented:
So if you're starving, you don't consider it a problem?
When I am starving I do not perceive it as a 'problem to be solved' - in the sense of it being an abstract concept. I perceive it as hunger to be assuaged. When I have eaten and the hunger has receded I do not congratulate myself on a 'problem solved' but merely pat my stomach in contentment. In evolution there is no procedure whereby some agency is looking at the environment and saying 'Hey, we need to change to survive. How are we going to solve this problem'. The changes occur randomly (mutation) irrespective of any change in environment (although some factors increase the risk of mutation), but some changes will have a better chance of survival under certain conditions than others, and so they survive until the environment changes to become less favourable for that form. Any other way of looking at it smacks of anthropomorphism.
We can agree to disagree if you like. I would suggest reading some authoritative books on evolution though as it is an awfully slippery and counter-intuitive subject.
PS. The discrepancy between how I present my written arguments and how I am in person has been noted on many occasions. Perhaps I am simply a poor communicator in print.