It's a detail, but I disagree with the fact that looking at who is worrying is not a good element to evaluate if the problem in question has legitimate argument

It's a detail, but I disagree with the fact that looking at who is worrying is not a good element to evaluate if the problem in question has legitimate arguments to generate worry. If someone usually optimistic is worried about the subject X, it is a good indication that this subject X has good arguments, as it has convinced the optimistic person. If the subject Y is a worry only for the "worriers", then it is a good indication that this subject Y does not have good arguments, as it failed to convinced people who are more difficult to get worried. (and, sure, one can talk about "are people informed" or whatever, but this is a second order effect and is just a slightly disguised they-disagree-because-i-am-a-misunderstood-genius fallacy) For the AI subject: you cannot put in the same bulk people who worries that AI will be used tomorrow for bad things and people who worries that AI will become intelligent and be a threat for humanity, because those are two things very different with very different consequences. What you need to do in case of worry of bad usage of AI is very different of what you need to do in case of threat for humanity, sometimes opposed (bad usage is about putting rules and fair access, while threat for humanity is about forbidding or controlling fundamental research). It's a bit like if in a parallel universe, someone says "people are worried about immigration. Sure, some people are worried that migrants are invading us, and others that migrants are being treated unfairly. But they are worried, so it is the proof that worrying about immigration is legitimate, and any criticism about these worries are just people who cannot have a logical argument". For example, I don't think people who are worried that AI can have a bad usage and that we should be careful about that are feeling attacked by the "coffeepocalypse" argument. People that are worried about a bad usage of AI are not worried about AI itself, they are worried about a bad usage of technology in general, and it includes thousands of things that don't even involved LLM or recent development in AI. I think it is more directed at the lesswrong-pseudo-intellectuals who think they are deep and smarter than everyone else when they are just playing around with basic concepts and misguided ego trip.