To me it looks like an over estimation of the capabilities for the tech. Same kind of thinking that led to lawyers submitting fake cases as support in court. The current tech can be useful but has to be verified and generally tweaked a bit to be good enough. It certainly has room for improvement in quality and just not lying. Real world use has some copyright questions with what the training data was. Applying it to something creative is questionable and more or less feels like uninspired remixes.
Also the whole graphic is kinda suspect to me when “Blockchain engineers” is a job category and it’s produced by an org working on AI.
The ammo/parts thing was more about how without domestic production there room for it to be affected by changes to import laws or sanctions.
Personally I’m not worried about using something that some other group seems to like. I want what’s practical and fits my needs. There is a reason ARs are so common today. They’re just good and can be built/modified to fit a lot of people or use cases. If I really wanted something different just to be different I’d get something like a vz 58 or some kind of space gat. It’s still kinda hard for me to justify the expense for that kind of reason and I have to rein it in a bit as I kinda want all the things.