It’s the first revolutionary technology that his first goal is to make money for VC investors instead of really change the world, the perceived benefit for society is just a sub-product of the ponzi scheme behind those VC firms.
It's true that social benefit is incidental to the development of nearly all the big AIs, but that applies to every venture in capitalism.
Of course, the assumption is it is going to be a lot bigger as the decades give it time to fully roll out. It is impossible to guess precisely but it'll probably be bigger than the industrial revolution by the time all the 2nd order effects start settling in. We just don't know what it looks like when the entire management and political decision making apparatuses are suddenly stuffed with counterintelligence. It'll be a shock to the system compared to the current leadership.
Is that true?
Steam technology and factory machinery were created and used to make the pit, mill, and factory owners more money than with human workers. The railway mania in the 1840s was a period where vast sums of money were invested in railway lines and engine technology.
It's definitely not wanting to talk to people, and even employment is a bit of a practical joke for now.
Comparing with Internet or electricity here is ridiculous thus far as well.
If we had actual intelligence instead of pretty nifty text robots, then it would be perhaps more true.
Back then and today, you find plenty of true believers, and plenty of people who are in it for the money.
Similar, when people financed eg canals and railways or factories in the past, many participants cared about the money.
(Or are you saying it's not about the money, but specifically VCs?)
Those things were tangible and their advantages/disadvantages more immediate than something intangible like ``AI''.
Btw, there were plenty of people who thought electricity or the internet were just toys or fads.
We don't even know if we want LLMs in more devices. Likewise we likely do not want Internet/email in every toaster.
LLMs staying the same would be the death of this technology. Even minor improvements don't matter enough.
Voice activated devices are not necessarily paradigm shifting either. We had these for over 25 years now.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity#Cultural_perceptio...
> It is said that in the 1850s, British politician William Ewart Gladstone asked the scientist Michael Faraday why electricity was valuable. Faraday answered, "One day sir, you may tax it."
That admittedly apocryphal anecdote is set 30 years before the turbine you mentioned was invented.
Now look what's happened to the Internet.
The problem, if you want to call it that, is purely social/cultural.
I can't tell what your point is.