I agree with your main point, but I have a nick-picky side question:

Copenhagen is a philosophical interpretation of QM, which makes metaphysical claims about wavefunctions coming into existence and then collapsing.

In what sense is the Copenhagen interpretation making "metaphysical" claims about wavefunctions coming into existence and then collapsing? My sense was that proponents are making a straightforward physical claim, on par with physical claims make by non-QM atomic theory. Copenhagen has not been empirically proved (or empirically disproved), but that does not make it metaphysical.

In other words, I think you might be using "metaphysical" as a synonym for "nonsensical."

The CI as such is minimal in its commitments, and is not committed to the existence (or non existence) of a real wave function. You comment seems to reflect EY;s habit of conflating the CI with Objective Reduction.

ETA:

This is about how scientists sleepwalked themselves into a philosophical theory about QM without fully realizing they were doing philosophy at all.

Bohr and Heisenberg were in fact quite self-aware about their philosophical presumptions.

As far as I can tell the Copenhagen Interpretation basically is a shut-up-and-calculate interpretation. It's an operational theory that is only capable of predicting subjective-ish experimental results, and doesn't make claims about the "contents of reality". That is to say, all its predictions are of the form "if I did [EXPERIMENT] I would observe a result according to [DISTRIBUTION]". Which is somewhat respectable (although what exactly counts as an observation is naturally ill-defined, since the theory doesn't encompass the observer itself).

The real problem is that having the CI as the majority view sucks people into philosophical positions where you're not allowed to even wonder what reality is made of, or how these observations are manifested. See: "the EPR experiment proved there's no such thing as reality, right?"