Consider cars kill easily a million people every year, and they are totally normal. Thats not some crazy experimental technology. People decided. Cars are/were worth millions of deaths.
If you are still not convinced, consider what I said but in the context of airplanes in the 1910s.
Nobody should be forced into it. I did not say they should. And they should be well aware of the risks. Short term and long term. Potential unknown risks as well. But poeple use technology and enjoy it, despite dying from it.
So, this is not to say that any of this tech should be banned or regulated. Regulation itself is at risk of being irrationally/dishonestly captured.
It's just that there's no cause for celebration either. A lot of people are going to suffer, and ultimately even if the tech does mature, people will find far more ways to enshittify it for a quick buck.
In other words, even if in the best case scenario we might have new gadgets etc. the world won't really change. The shape of our conflicts (information vs. misinformation) will remain roughly the same, and the balance of our power in those conflicts will remain roughly the same.
As a consequence: the probability that you (or yours) will get to benefit, rather than merely be the temporarily-disgraced winners will remain roughly the same: quite low.
And youre the one going on about politics, regulation, and utopia. Its just not relevant.