How would you approach getting it under control?

That would depend on the political context and circumstances I would be dealing with, and the level of control I would have over the issue.

For example, how deeply embedded it is in our lives was realized by me when I was forced to live without my phone for several days, many things can't be done without it, e.g. you can't order a taxi without your phone, you can't do remote banking without your phone, you can't easily (or in many cases, anyhow) communicate with your friends, etc.

The last part that has to do with social relations is a different topic, but the more administrative stuff is not really an issue, in my opinion. I think it is natural and logical that various complex technologies will be simplified and centralised in order to increase the ease of their management by people. It is good to be able to do online banking on your phone. If there is a trusted authority, this is not a problem. The issue is when liberals control who can and cannot use what are today vital technologies.

And that's just on individual level, I have even more of a hard time imagining governments actively getting rid of technology, thus making themselves weaker.

I think responsible management of technology will necessarily involve the government. Admittedly, a lot depends on the international situation as well - for example, if the market for mobile phones makes up a considerable chunk of your economy and you need the taxes in order to compete with hostile states, it might be a bad idea to restrict the sale or the features of mobile phones too extensively.

Speaking more generally, the way I see it, I think any solution to the technology problem would necessarily require the involvement of both the government and the common man. On the government side of things, my preferred solution would be to select a group of high IQ people of good moral character and to essentially establish a caste of experts whose ability to work and own property will be legally regulated. The job of these people and their descendants would be to evaluate the usefulness and effects of technology both in its technical and social aspects - they would be neither required nor allowed to do anything else, or to receive any additional property apart from what they are legally entitled to, in order to avoid bribes. Similarly, outsiders would be prohibited from joining this group in order to prevent vested interests from taking it over, and the members of this group would be expected to almost exclusively communicate with each other and people that they approach for research purposes on their own initiative. In order for such a group to function correctly, it would also be necessary for the state to develop a well-articulated position on technology, and on what kind of technology is and is not desirable. There should be proper doctrines for these people to study and derive their worldview from, and these doctrines should emphasise the importance of linking technology with teleology. I realise that this might sound very strange, but I think it could work - of course, it all depends on the political possibilities. I think it could be useful to introduce other institutional safeguards in other parts of the government too, but there is no need to get overly specific at this point in time.

That would be for the role of government in managing technology. The other important element would be the promotion of a psychological revolution on the mass level. The vast majority of people are naturally passive thinkers, and we live in an age where mental passivity is further encouraged and conditioned. Ideally, people should instead be encouraged and supported in maintaining active, constant awareness of their own minds. If you are familiar with Buddhism, that is essentially the Buddhist ideal. If people are constantly aware, or barring that, if they approach the ideal of constant awareness as closely as possible, it will be much easier for society to handle technology and the enormous flood of information that is constantly conditioning people and competing for their shortened attention span. If people learn how to act actively, intentionally and with constant awareness of what they do and why, I think the technology problem would be completely resolved without the need for any additional safeguards or governmental intervention. Since this ideal would be extremely difficult to achieve at a mass level, however, it would be best if governmental restrictions of technology were also introduced.