I was so sure this would be about the paperclip maximizer: "The paperclip maximizer is the canonical thought experiment showing how an artificial general intelligence, even one designed competently and without malice, could ultimately destroy humanity." http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Paperclip_maximizer beware!
Yeah, but the paper-clip maximizer theory is pretty awfully flawed. It rests on the idea that a generally human-level of intelligence necessarily leads to a super-human explosion of intelligence. This is clearly not the case.
Also you should justify "this is clearly [1] not the case". You're probably taking the "necessarily" phrasing really literally, instead of as "with non-negligible risk", and thinking of corporations or evolution as "superhuman"? On the other hand, evolution and corporations respectively did and plan to produce smarter entities so that's not so clear cut.
1: https://medium.com/science-and-technology/how-to-spot-a-weak...