It's proper to suspect arguments that are motivated by self-interest. The stronger that self-interest, the more one should suspect the argument. This is what

It's proper to suspect arguments that are motivated by self-interest. The stronger that self-interest, the more one should suspect the argument. This is what you're saying? In that case, the anti-AI Luddite arguments are maximally impeached, since they are motivated by fear of personal disaster. Tao doesn't need AI to succeed; the Luddites desperately need it to fail. So they are willing to say anything, jumping right to ad hominem arguments when they lack any real substantive rebuttal.