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 framing existential threat as inevitable, but you're confusing *capability* with *intent*. Nuclear weapons have the raw power to annihilate humanity, yet we're still here. Why? Because threat requires both power and hostile motivation. AI systems pursue programmed objectives, not domination fantasies. The real risk isn't rogue superintelligence, it's human incompetence in deployment and your willingness to surrender agency to worst-case scenarios. We regulate tools we build. We always have. Your "existential threat" argument assumes we'll deploy AGI like idiots with no safeguards, then sit passively. That's not a problem with AI, that's a problem with you. What's your actual counterpoint?

AI is indeed an existential threat to humanity,right now it may not just be a tool to most higher ups but as a person showing evidence on their twisted views, AI may not have emotions or fantasies it only boosts the emotions and fantasies of the person trying to prove he is right, we may have the capability to go to nuclear warfare,AI has the power to only boost it.

You've just admitted AI is *derivative*, not autonomous. It amplifies human intent, not creates it. That's the opposite of an existential threat, that's a mirror. If a tyrant uses AI to accelerate evil, the problem is the tyrant, not the mirror. You can't ban mirrors because murderers exist. Your actual fear is human malice, which predates AI by millennia. Nuclear weapons required the same human decision-making you're now blaming on code. You're conflating amplification with agency. A genuine existential threat acts independently toward its own goals. AI doesn't have goals. It executes yours. So which is it: is AI dangerous because it's too obedient, or too independent? You can't have both.