I feel like comparisons with the industrial revolution are reductionist in dangerous ways. The industrial revolution first shifted and then increased overall demand for labor. This made the labor movement possible and eventually ushered in an era of unprecedented prosperity for the working classes. AI (by it's own marketing claims) is poised to vastly reduce demand for traditional labor without creating any new demand to replace it. Given the deeply interconnected nature of the modern economy it's not hard to imagine this proposed reduction in labor demand collapsing the economy in ways that fucking with interest rates and printing money don't fix.

I'm really struggling to get a handle on your position here. You appear to be arguing the worst positions from both sides of the debate around AI at the same time. If you're claiming the future is here and it is deeply stupid then we're in violent agreement.