“technology isn’t evil in and of itself. It becomes evil when it is used by evil people...”
Well, we have to distinguish between dumb tech and theoretical “smart tech” that might be able to think. Dumb tech has no moral value, positive or negative, beyond the humans directing it. If we ever really get “smart tech”, then it would be an intellect without a spirit, and in that case, I say it would be bereft of morality. And something that is bereft of morality is not neutral. Something that can think but has no morality is the equivalent of a sociopath or psychopath, which we often colloquially refer to as “pure evil”.
Off the top of my head, I would say that what makes a person without a conscience dangerous is that his/her natural human selfishness is unrestrained/unbalanced (by a conscience). Ergo, a natural urge to steal.
What makes a psychopath dangerous is that such a person doesn't just have natural selfishness, he/she has deep-seated anger that lacks a constraining/restraining conscience. Ergo, a need to hurt animals and people.
So the question would be (again, off the top of my head) would a thinking machine without human interference or influence have human tendencies toward selfishness or hostility?
It might be that a thinking machine would have such qualities because it is designed by humans and humans aren't capable of designing something devoid of or untainted by human bias.