helpful and good.  The dictionary defines it as follows:

the use of science in industry, engineering, etc., to invent useful things or to solve problems

That side of technology is presented in the story.  The house is a "smart home."  It automatically cooks breakfast and cleans it up.  Vacuum cleaners are little robots that automatically detect a mess, and the house can be voice controlled.  That's not that different than my own home currently.  I have a robot vacuum cleaner called a "Roomba."  The Amazon Echo lets me choose music with voice control and even order stuff from Amazon.  I can even set my thermostat with it.  To a certain extent, I think it is a bit of a gimmick at this point, but I do see my Roomba and Echo pointing toward the home in Bradbury's story.  I think people will really enjoy a house like that because it does useful things.  

On the other hand, Bradbury's story shows readers that despite all of that technology, the fancy tech was incapable of saving the people's lives.  In fact, it was advanced technology in the form of nuclear weaponry that caused the destruction in the first place.  I'd also like to point out that the house in the story is so advanced that it could operate without any kind of human input.  Living humans are simply not needed in order for the advanced technology to continue "living."  That's a scary thought. I believe that Bradbury's view of technology is that technology can be both good and dangerous at the same time. 

In addition to all humans being destroyed, the only other living thing we see in the story dies because it cannot reach the food it smells. So, not only did technology destroy humanity in the form of a nuclear bomb, but it also almost cruelly keeps the dog shut out of the kitchen, unable to access the food that the kitchen was still constantly cooking. The house itself does a better job of protecting what's inside than humans ever could; since the house is still standing, one may assume that the people would have lived had they been indoors instead of out.

That is where the true frailty of human life lies. All that's left of those who once seemed so vibrant are shadows on the wall. The force of the blast literally captured their silhouettes at the moment of immolation. It's almost as though the people are a part of the house now, or as though the house has somehow absorbed their life force. Of course, one can argue that since humans invented the technology, they are still alive and well while it remains working.

At least in this story, the power of technology is written as a much more significant and lasting force in the world than the fragile human life that created it.  The story's characters are entirely robotic or technological--we have the robot voice speaking to the absent family, the scurrying techno-mice that clean the place, the breakfast and dinner making machines, etc.  All of these pieces of technology were, long after the family was, alive and well in a world that most of humanity had been destroyed.

It was technology itself that destroyed the fragile human and animal life that existed on the planet; after the blasts, technology was the only thing that survived, at least for a while.  The humans in the story are completely wiped out, but their home functions without them.  So, the frailty of human life is pretty evident in the story, as being powerless against the force of technology.  I hope that those thoughts help a bit; good luck!