To a certain extent, I agree: Technology for its own sake – which you see more often in modern cars than on motorcycles – can offer just as much grief and potential expense as convenience. But while ride-by-wire does complicate what once was a dead-simple system, it is far from 'needless' technology.

For one thing, ride-by-wire has allowed many current motorcycles to meet stringent noise and emissions requirements despite having highly tuned engines that offer tremendous performance. Under certain conditions, the ECU determines the actual throttle opening, despite what the rider might do with the twistgrip.

Sometimes, those circumstances involve the combination of engine rpm, road speed and transmission gear at which sound levels are officially tested; it the throttle were opened as much as the rider requested, the motorcycle would fail the environmental test. Same goes for certain aspects of exhaust emissions certification: To pass that test, throttle openings might have to be slightly less than what the rider dialed up. And if manufacturers are caught selling motorcycles that cannot meet those requirements, the penalties are severe.

Then there is the rideability factor. Modern sportbike engines, especially those in the liter class, pump out huge amounts of power throughout the entire rpm range. With a manual throttle, even a little too much tsistgrip during a mid-corner lean could cause a crash. But with ride-by-wire (and, when applicable, traction control, which also works via computer-controlled throttles), power can be modulated in a way that greatly lessens the likelihood of such an outcome, regardless of how far or how rapidly the twistgrip is opened.

So, yes, without technology, the world would be a much simpler, potentially less-expensive place. But for motorcycle riders in particular, it might also be a more dangerous place, even though we all could be riding motorcycles that offered less-exciting performance.