Yeah.
Until the robots decide to KILL ALL HUMANS.
As long as they start with the Bowel Movement Splatters terrorists first.
I was in a serious discussion with an AI expert / advocate, and she was critical of my anti-AI view until I explained I was an engineer with IT experience.
AIs make decisions based on criteria they are given, such as the value of a person’s life and quality of life. The artificial intelligences deciding what care a patient should receive have a U shaped graph - babies worth almost nothing, old worth almost nothing.
The quality of life years model says if you’re old, over 70, don’t bother with cancer screenings and offer pallative care first and foremost life extension treatments because it isn’t seen as worth it - a value judgement put in the AI’s equations to say “do we treat the patient with the best care, basic care or no care except pain relief?”
In such a system, with the low valuations for life when someone isn’t worth bothering to save, the first mass murder of people by an AI isn’t with bombs - it is the AI that says it is cheaper to round up and kill the infected than treat them, and doctors will go along because cost constraints in Medicare and Medicaid require them to go along with it to get paid and various officials will applaud it for solving the problem effectively while saying “it isn’t our fault - it is the logical solution, because the computer came up with it!”
Next, add in the political information doctors collect and AIs correlate, such as if you own guns. Now you can have conservatives denied the higher quality of care because they are crazy/undesirable. Kid has an ear infection? Suffer for a while, then we give antibiotics, instead of planning for ear tube surgery. Dad’s diehard gun owner? No pacemaker, just pills.