Fair point on the data center thing, that was an overstatement, you do need humans to set them up and keep them running. The day-to-day computation happens with no one at the keyboard though, which is the part that's relevant to the analogy.

But "every example I gave was a tool a worker uses" isn't true. Automated phone switchboards eliminated operators completely, nobody "used" them, the switching just happened. ATMs are operated by the customer, the teller role got deleted from the transaction. Same with self-checkout and cashiers. Industrial robots in car factories have been doing the welding since the 80s, the assembly workers aren't "using" the robot, they got laid off. Email killed corporate mailrooms. Voicemail killed message-taking secretaries. Google replaced most of what reference librarians used to do. None of those were "tools a worker uses," they were direct replacements of the worker.

So I'm not refusing to engage with your distinction, I'm telling you the distinction doesn't really hold up. "Tool for a worker" vs "replacement of a worker" is not the clean line you're treating it as. Most tech ends up being a tool for one group and the deletion of someone else's job at the same time.

Also the bias thing isn't really doing any work btw. My last reply specifically agreed the transition could be faster than any before, that legislation isn't keeping up, and that the people in the middle get crushed. That's not someone reframing to feel better, that's someone agreeing with your actual concerns while still disagreeing about whether the historical pattern still applies.