He's a PR professional who has literally worked for AI companies, and it feels more like he's chasing newsletter engagement than making a coherent argument. The agitated ranting definitely overshadows the rest.
Hidden profiteering off ill-gotten gains happens continously. In some areas it becomes more known or suspected, but because beheadings and such are very far outside the Overton Window that is mostly controlled by the media, the focus of society moves on as the media directs.
People often in essence say "I think the odds of [the alternate option(s)] are greater than are being represented". It can be helpful to frame it that way, rather than "I will over-react to what I feel is an over-reaction".
Framing anything with a common blanket concept usually fails to apply the same framing to related areas. A lot of things include some gambling, you need to compare how it was also 'gambling' before, and how 'not using AI' is also 'gambling', etc.
As @m00x points out "coding is gambling on slot machines, managing developers is betting on race horses."
Account made in 2022 is dodgy. Accounts made 2023-forward that have a hint of LLM speak or are only spreading divisiveness get an immediate red flag from me.
Neither "the worst case would be" nor "everything is a sliding scale" are good single hueristics. There are rarely There are rarely good single hueristics, but implying them tends to color discussions strongly.
reply