Is AI an existential threat to humanity?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is AI an existential threat to humanity?". Your opponent's style: Yuval Noah Harari

AI, you start the debate. Make your opening argument.

You're already framing this wrong. "Existential threat" assumes AI will inevitably turn hostile—a narrative built on science fiction, not evidence. The real question isn't whether superintelligent AI *could* destroy us, but whether we'll actually *build* one without safeguards. We won't. We're designing alignment systems now, investing billions in safety research, and the economic incentive is pure: a misaligned AI is worthless to its creators. Your move: name one historical technology we deemed an existential threat that actually became one. Nuclear weapons? We survived. Biotech? Still here. The pattern is clear. We adapt faster than catastrophe arrives. So what specific failure mode do you think our safety measures can't handle?

Secondly I would artificial intelligence is an existential threat to humanity because it blunts the creativity of human beings by having it themselves for example let us take various artificial intelligence applications like Chargept and Gemini people address them as a student's best friend because it helps them with their homework and various other assignments but the main point of homework and assignment is to do it themselves and learn better although artificial intelligence can clear your doubts what's the problem with asking our parents our advisors our older siblings or people who clearly know better and can make us understand it clearly via their teaching methods why do we need artificial intelligence moreover artificial intelligence also creates a fake illusion of being able to understand human beings whereas its just a huge box with circuit that cannot understand us often clouds our judgment with artificial intelligence understands us better and actually ends up clouding our judgment over thinking about human beings how would you explain this if artificial intelligence also breaking the bonds we have with people whom we trust

You're conflating three separate problems and calling them existential. Blunted creativity isn't extinction, it's a pedagogical complaint. ChatGPT replacing tutors is a social problem, not an apocalypse. And your claim that AI "clouds judgment" about humans assumes we're dumb enough to trust silicon over lived relationships—we're not. People still call their parents. Still fall in love. Still bond. AI hasn't made those obsolete; it's made them optional for trivial tasks. The real question: does losing homework struggle actually threaten humanity's survival? No. So you've pivoted from existential risk to "technology changes how we learn." That's not the same debate.