This comment is much more tempered and I do not think would generate a strong response. But I would suggest to take care when acting as an evangelical of a product. There's a big difference between "this technology shows great promise and warrants more funding as it won't be surprising if the benefits more than a decade's worth of losses at DeepMind" vs "this is a product right now generating billions of dollars a year".
The big problem with the latter statement isn't so much exaggeration, but something a bit more subtle. It is that people start to believe you. But then they sit waiting, and in that waiting eventually get disappointed. When that happens the usual response often feeds into conspiracies (perpetuating the overall distrust in science) or generates an overall bad sentiment against the whole domain.
The problem is that companies are bootstrapping with hype. The problem is that this leads to bubbles and makes it a ripe space for conmen, who just accelerate the bubble. There's no problem with Google/Microsoft/OpenAI/Etc talking to researchers/developers in the language of researchers/developers, but there is a problem of them talking to the average person in the language of the future. It's what enables the space for snakeoil like Rabbit or Devin. Those steal money from normal people and takes money from investors that could be better spent on actually pushing the research of the tech forward so that we can eventually have those products.
I understand some bootstrapping may be necessary due to needing money to even develop things, but certainly the big companies are not lacking in funding and we can still achieve the same goals while being more honest. The excitement and hope isn't the problem, it is the lying. "Is/Can" vs "will/we hope to"