Neither essay in TFP actually described the process of how AI actually does its job, and both ignore the fact that these are controlled and programmed by humans. Sydney didn't do what it did out of some conscious choice. Its programming did that, made of code written by humans. This technology will never go outside of its designed parameters because it can't.

I would be more convinced by both arguments presented here if there had been someone who understands the functionality and design of AI, rather than people whove clearly only regurgitated other information they've derived second-hand, and have drawn all the wrong conclusions because they don't understand the technology.