That's a bizarre take. Where was life stable or comfortable for regular people in 1824? At that time it was still common for people to literally starve to death due to crop failures.
You are imagining an idealized history which never existed (outside of many a few limited areas).
You may have misread something, as my comment is specifically making the point that 1824 was not some status quo start to modern history but actually a bleak minima resulting from the widespread and harsh negative impacts of early industrialization and colonialism.
The "take" is that the article is a bit deceptive in its claims because its measuring progress from a time that -- for much of the world -- was deeply unlike and worse of than times before it.
You may also think that that take is bizarre, but it's a different one than you seemed to have read and responded to.
You are imagining an idealized history which never existed (outside of many a few limited areas).