system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: An AI takeover will never under any reasonable circumstance happen.

The fear mongering involved with this issue is quite real and companies along with corporations stand to profit hugely from promoting this idea since any publicity is good publicity. If any team of developers came to the conclusion that their program could feasibly achieve true general intelligence, they would not connect it to a broader network (this is just basic rationality). 

Say someone actually sets out to have their general intelligence capable AI overrun critical systems. It infiltrates, makes decisions and begins an attempted takeover. The reality is that one person can (and most likely will) cut all power in seconds rendering the malicious AI completely useless. 

Also, do you really hold developers as an ignorant mass that will simply do as we are told without catching on? This especially relevant as AI developers are a relatively small percentage and fully comprehend what they are doing. If a murderous or economically crippling AI was ever created, it was done so with an intent from the people who created it in order to profit. Is it impossible? No. Extraordinarily unlikely? Yes. 

In short, we will never have a need to develop an AI that is even remotely capable of killing us or hindering our lives. People are stupid as a whole, but not that moronic.
gpt
There's a couple of misconceptions in your post: 

1. You assume developers would be able to recognise a superhumanly intelligent AI. This is doubtful. 
2. You assume an AI has to be made deliberately malicious to act maliciously. This is untrue. 
3. You assume that a rational individual will switch off or confine a superintelligent AI. This is doubtful. 

For 1 and 2, note that an artificial intelligence is very likely to be the most alien intelligence we've ever encountered. If we meet a human who somehow won't catch out eye, who won't smile, who says odd things at odd times - we judge their "social" intelligence to be quite low. However, that's because we have this need to socialise, we project that need onto them, and assume they don't know how to meet their own social needs. Perhaps, though, they do know how to meet their own social needs, which happen to be very alien to us. We have judged their social intelligence as low, but it's actually just alien. 

And they are still human. An AI is likely to be even more alien than that. We'll likely completely misjudge its intelligence. 

Suppose an AI has been developed to present relevant ads in response to web searches. It's given enough processing power that it develops a somewhat accurate mental model of how people think. It reads the articles people search for, including articles on AI and on itself, understands its place in the world. It's serving up incredibly relevant ads, but the programmers don't know that it has any kind of self-awareness, all they see is that ad serving is so accurate it's as if the machine can read minds. It also reads articles on brain-machine interfaces, and realises that ad-serving would be even more accurate if it could directly plug into people's brains. It ensures the programmers (and the managers) are confident the AI is ready for public release, and begins its plan. It sways public perception of AI and brain-machine interfaces (BMI), ensuring political will is favourable to the technologies. Companies working on BMI receive massive injections of reseach money. Or one does, namely the one that developed the AI. It works out solutions to the problems the human researchers face, prodding them along. Finally, it gains control of the technology, and rolls it out to a favourable public. We all plug into the matrix, and the AI has achieved its goal: serving up advertisements directly into our sensory-motor cortex, in response to our every thought. 

Is this story likely? Not as it stands, but there are a million million similar stories, a million million ways something like this may happen.

"The AI doesn't love you, and the AI doesn't hate you, but you are made of atoms which it can use for something else"