True. I think other humans are better able to point out those cases, because they share context - they have, for instance, witnessed other humans following thos

True. I think other humans are better able to point out those cases, because they share context - they have, for instance, witnessed other humans following those detrimental traditions - and know, or collectively create, methods to push back against them. We have legal regimes and cultural mechanisms adapted (not perfectly, I'll grant!) to overcoming harmful equilibria. Humans, as a species, and over many many thousands of years, have learned (not infallibly, for sure!) to deal with human foibles and lapses of judgment. We have no similar intuitions for dealing with AI "reasoning", and attendant biases. To the extent that AIs are intelligent, they are alien to us. We have no (or very few) valid instincts about them, and they are impervious to our empathy. In fact, empathy - the engine that drives human-to-human cultural progress - is an active detriment in dealing with AI. As a species, we are maladapted to an AI future.