The author says>> "Not being in control of course makes people endlessy frustrated, but at the same time trying to wrestle control from the parasites is an uphill battle that they expect to lose, with more frustration as a result."
While this reaction is understandable, it is difficult to feel sympathy when so few people are willing to invest the time and effort required to actually understand how these systems work and how they might be used defensively. Mastery, even partial, is one of the few genuine avenues toward agency. Choosing not to pursue it effectively guarantees dependence.
Ironically, pointing this out often invites accusations of being a Luddite or worse.
> "Mastery, even partial, is one of the few genuine avenues toward agency."
Philosophical claims have been made around this point. See, for example, "The Moral Obligation to Be Intelligent", an essay by John Erskine.
So many problems would be solved if a fraction of people would be more inclined to understand what's in front of them.
*Existence* of a situation as inevitable isn't so bold of a claim. For example, someone will use an AI technology to cheat on an exam. Fine, it's possible. Heck, it is mathematically certain if we have a civilization that has exams and AI techs, and if that civilization runs infinitely.
*Generality* of a situation as inevitable, however, tends to go the other way.