So, the gist of the paragraph goes like this: Mozorov is a critic of technology. He presents his idea in such a way that he is usually "blank 1" of the material he presents. However, the current market is impartial towards "blank 2" of technology, so Mozorov should not be blamed for going "all guns blazing". There's a climate of "blank 3" technological optimism, and Mozoov's book tells us to consider using resources that actually offer some return on investment.

Notice, there's a shift in sentence 3 above, so we need something that contrasts with Mozorov's current approach. If Mozorov is very vocal and aggressive while presenting his arguments now, then he surely was very cautious before. Therefore, the answer for blank 1 should be "selective about".

Moving to the third blank, Mozorov's book recommends using a "timely approach" in using resources, so let's think about this: if you had a vast number of choices available, but only a few of them would guarantee gratification; then you would be advised to tread carefully. Similarly, Mozoov's is suggesting to follow the same level of prudence when the climate is filled with "excessive" technological optimism.

Finally, the second blank should be easy now. Remember that Mozorov is a critic of technology; so if the current market is in favour of technology, then Mozorov has to understandably try even harder to make his case against the possible consequences of technological misuse. Hence, only idealistic fits in the context.

That was how I cracked the question. If anyone followed a different approach, then I would love to hear!

Thanks.