Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer...
Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.
As software gets more reliable, people come to trust it.
Software still has bugs, the trust means those bugs still get people killed.
That was true with things we wouldn't call AI any more, and still does with things we do.
Doesn't need to take over or anything when humans are literally asleep at the wheel because they mistakenly think the AI can drive the car for them.
Heck, even for building codes and health & safety rules, they're written in blood. Why would AI be the exception?
The apocalypse will only happen once. Just like global nuclear war.
The fact that there was not a global nuclear war until now doesn't mean all those fearing nuclear war are crazy irrational people.
Your analogy doesn't hold up because weapons were real, mass mobilization conflict between industrial societies was real. Plus you've now switched it around - first it was people who warned against the risks of nuclear war (effectively everyone), now it's people who didn't believe nuclear weapons were possible in 1940 (effectively nobody), etc. There has to be more to an argument than a mention of turkeys and rhetorical swerves.