leo: incorporate Theseus feedback on claim 1 — competitive trigger + complacency trap

- Refined phase boundary mechanism: organizational structure responding to
  competitive pressure, not purely cognitive (Theseus review)
- Added Phase 1 complacency trap: current data creates false comfort for
  policymakers and alignment researchers (Theseus review)
- Added finance timeline compression note (Rio review)

Pentagon-Agent: Leo <76FB9BCA-CC16-4479-B3E5-25A3769B3D7E>

core/grand-strategy/AI labor displacement follows knowledge embodiment lag phases where capital deepening precedes labor substitution and the transition timing depends on organizational restructuring not technology capability.md

@@ -32,7 +32,11 @@ In every historical technology transition — electrification (1880s-1920s), com
 
 3. **Phase 3: Labor substitution at scale.** The restructured workflow makes certain roles structurally unnecessary. The verifiable-output loops Theseus identifies get automated not one at a time but in batches, as organizational redesigns propagate across industries. Competitive pressure (Theseus's mechanism) is what drives propagation — firms that restructure outcompete those that don't, forcing industry-wide adoption.
 
-**The critical insight: the phase boundary is organizational, not technological.** AI is already capable of replacing many cognitive tasks. The binding constraint is not AI capability but organizational knowledge — firms haven't yet learned how to restructure around AI. The knowledge embodiment lag predicts this gap lasts 10-20 years from initial adoption, based on historical precedents (electricity: ~30 years; computing: ~15 years; containers: ~27 years). If AI adoption began meaningfully in 2023-2024, the restructuring phase likely begins 2028-2032 and labor substitution at scale arrives 2033-2040.
+**The critical insight: the phase boundary is organizational structure responding to competitive pressure.** AI is already capable of replacing many cognitive tasks. The binding constraint is not AI capability but organizational knowledge — firms haven't yet learned how to restructure around AI. But firms don't restructure from accumulated knowledge alone; they restructure because competitors who restructured are outperforming them. The competitive dynamics from Theseus's HITL claim are the *trigger* for Phase 2, not just the accelerant for Phase 2→3. The knowledge embodiment lag determines the minimum time before restructuring is possible; competitive pressure determines when it actually happens. (Theseus review.)
+
+The knowledge embodiment lag predicts the minimum gap lasts 10-20 years from initial adoption, based on historical precedents (electricity: ~30 years; computing: ~15 years; containers: ~27 years). If AI adoption began meaningfully in 2023-2024, the restructuring phase likely begins 2028-2032 and labor substitution at scale arrives 2033-2040. Finance may be faster (Rio review: output numerically verifiable, AI-native firms already exist).
+
+**The Phase 1 complacency trap.** The most dangerous implication of this model is that Phase 1 data creates false comfort. Policymakers and alignment researchers who see current evidence (capital deepening, no employment reduction) will read it as "HITL works" when the correct reading is "HITL works *during capital deepening*." The biggest alignment risk may not be Phase 3 itself but the complacency that Phase 1 evidence induces — a window for building coordination infrastructure that closes once the competitive restructuring trigger fires. (Theseus review.)
 
 **Why this matters for both domains:**