The problem with the “AI will destroy us all” take is that it attributes non-existent competence to these techs. I don't deny it may raise some useful opposition, but it also makes the problem worse on the other end. There will be a good chunk of people who look at the extremes of the claims (useless slop vs doom) and figure that the truth is somewhere in between. They'll conclude it must be a pretty good technology. This is why some of the AI evangelists themselves have been pushing the doom possibility. "Oh no, it might be just too good. Well, not just yet, don't worry too much, but it is already so good we've started preparing for it," they claim.

it's trading one fantasy world for another