I'm honestly not sure if I misunderstood OP's argument or if you did. I understood his argument as such: 1) Our current economic system is already a form of AI

I'm honestly not sure if I misunderstood OP's argument or if you did. I understood his argument as such: 1) Our current economic system is already a form of AI. Using the wikipedia definition, it is a system that perceives its environment and takes actions that maximize its chances of success. Humans that are in this system are inputs in the environment. They may have individual agency, but cannot direct the system as a whole. 2) The "success" that this AI is maximizing is not currently in line with optimizing human interest. 3) Instead of theorizing about how to make sure a future AI system is in line with human interest, we should look at the current dominant AI and attempt to improve that. All three of those premises can be argued, and I've come to reasonable arguments on both sides just on my own with a few minutes of thought. But I think those are the premises to argue.