The 1965 paper everyone cites for AI doom actually argues the opposite - human survival depends on building superintelligent machines quickly, without centralized control. The irony is real: doomers cherry-pick from a paper that says we need to race toward AGI, not slow it down. The original thesis was that distributed development of ultraintelligent systems is our best shot at survival, not regulation or pause buttons. Classic case of reading the abstract and missing the actual technical argument.