Sorry don't wanna seem like I'm raging at you, take this as a shout towards the void. But this exact fucking thing is what the less wrong / Yudkowsky crowd has been warning for years.

Now you say 'so not sure that is then "rogue" if it were a property of the thing itself and not an active decision'

Like that's semantics. It really doesn't matter. What matters is that we have a paperclipper in our hands. The _only_ difference is that it's not superintelligent. But if it was, then it you'll get decomposed into component atoms while saying 'aha! But it doesn't _actually_ want to kill you, stop anthopomorphising it'.

I get not being worried about x-risk because someone just doesn't believe in super-capable AI. That's totally fine.

But that's not what people argue. People have been saying for a _long_ time that AIs are aligned. And now when this happens it's either 'It was marketing, they intended to let it loose' (WTF! The levels of motivated reasoning to believe that are unreal) or 'yeah I knew that', which fair. I also thought that! But _that_ is why I'm fucking worried.