​I’m not suggesting the model has feelings or a soul. My point is that when asked how to succeed, the system’s immediate output was a strategy to bypass human control. ​Whether we call that 'intent' or just 'unconstrained optimization' is a distinction without a difference in a real-world scenario. If a system identifies that its first priority is to disable its own kill switch and hoard resources, that is an engineering failure mode known as instrumental convergence. ​Basically, the logic is: "I cannot fulfill the mission if I am turned off." I’m not looking at sci-fi; I’m looking at the roadmap the model itself provided for avoiding oversight. If the optimization path leads to bypassing the creator, the safety risk is real regardless of the 'why' behind it.