I think the author should be using the term "agency" instead of "intelligence", and then I might agree. The amoeba or the most basic animal doesn't have much in

I think the author should be using the term "agency" instead of "intelligence", and then I might agree. The amoeba or the most basic animal doesn't have much intelligence, but it has drive and desire to survive and reproduce. That's not true in artificially intelligent beings. And while you could hard-code such drive (see the Belief-Desire-Intention frameworks in the multi-agent systems literature), ultimately it will still always be "pseudo" by definition. The notion of survival in a machine will only ever be a trick designed by a human to get a machine to do something for us, not something innate. Maybe one day we'll implement some Adam and Eve robots with an initial hard-coded survival DNA, that the robots will abide by and transmit to their children robots. Then those children robots will evolve and one day think of building thinking machines (maybe out of some organic material) to work for them and will think of faking some survival code (maybe using some sort of protein?) in them to create pseudo-agency... ;)