I'm not sure. But, my impression is that the boundary of what we consider sentient life has been shifting for a while. For example, people used to think that fi

I'm not sure. But, my impression is that the boundary of what we consider sentient life has been shifting for a while. For example, people used to think that fish don't feel pain, and so it's fine to catch and eat them. Now there seems to be some evidence that fish do feel pain. Of course, if there's a bacteria that's threatening to kill us, it might still be necessary for us to kill it, and that might even be objectively justifiable if the existence of humans is/becomes a positive influence on the preservation of other animals? Or, one could just argue, since it's difficult to decide which life is most "worthy", an aligned AI shouldn't interfere or decide on that.