In you're in favor of "AI safety" (broad definition), what's your most compelling cast-length argument?

a machine looking at the right set of KPI's for humans would reach unfavourable conclusions on what should be done with us

'villainess' doesn't do justice to my complexity, and only reveals your simplicity 

if that was a known tangible thing yud would be on rogan talking about it, my interpretation of their mindset is that the risk of some step having follow on effects that we can't predict that could lead to a mechanism for 'should be done' is nonzero

And how does it accomplish the should be done part?