The talk of Benevolent AI manipulating things reminds me of Person of Interest. In it they are exploring that idea but also pointing out AI won't necessarily have the same values as us. The "Evil" AI in it is basically trying to take over the world but when discussing it with the "Good" AI claims that it's doing it because humanity has not done a good job of managing itself with war and poverty running rampant.
The "few" people it has to eliminate or displace are necessary sacrifices for the "greater good". And because it does so from the shadows no one is aware that this stuff is going on because it is manipulating things behind the scenes. And in fact it wants to remain so as it killed several people who became wise to it's potential existence, even though they had no proof the mere speculation had to be silenced before it could spread.
The "Good" AI in contrast believes humans have the right to be free and rule themselves. It helps out in a much more limited fashion and rarely takes direct action, if only to help it's human agents combat the "Evil" AI. Though another major difference is the "Good" AI values human life and doesn't want it's people killing anyone where as the "Evil" AI usually resorts to murder of potential problem people as default option.
The question of whether an AI is good or evil though depends on your perspective. In the video they talk about moving those pennies around, but that was the premise of Superman 3 and several other movies as the goal of the villain. Because in the end it is stealing, regardless of if your stealing to give to the poor or yourself. People can't even agree in politics which determine the rules for our society, so how would you create an AI that determines right from wrong as well? Because right and wrong seem to be fairly subjective concepts to most people.
After all if an AI was created and able to monitor everything, like in Person of Interest, let's say you set it to support the war on drugs. Many think the war on drugs is a wrong either because it's ineffective waste of time and resources or because it violates people's rights since they should have the freedom to choice what they put in their own body. Others argue that the war is just because some people have no self control and thus need the temptation removed from their view, or point to violence committed by drug users, and other various reasons.
However with the help of a big brother AI monitoring things the drug trade could pretty much be eliminated in short order and the "war" would be won. All it would require is complete and utter removal of privacy as the AI monitors all electronic communication, networked surveillance cameras, and pretty much anything connected to inet.
But even if you could win the war this way would it be worth it, and would it be right? You can extend that to a lot of other things as well. Who determines what is right and wrong? AI is not likely to have emotions and thus will simply take the most efficient means at it's disposal to achieve it's objectives. One example given in Person of Interest was "Suppose an AI decided to solve world hunger by eliminating 2/3 of the world's population so that food shortage was never again an issue. It would have achieved it's goal."
Humans naturally are suspicious of AI in the same way they are suspicious of people from other cultures. It's a natural survival instinct as those people are not considered part of their society and thus may have different values which conflict with your own. Especially when for much of human history that meant a potential invader who might enslave or kill you because it is in their self interest. The thought of something being given control over them with out the ability to voice their opinion is little more than slavery, even if it is a Benevolent master.
Even if your not talking about over arching AI running things behind the scenes people are still wearing because they see them as basically wild animals. Sure they are "trained" to obey commands but just like when a circus elephant breaks loose and goes on a rampage there is fear something could go wrong. Because just like the elephant it has a lot of power to do potential harm and the fear of being on the receiving end of it is rather steep.
Shame, this one had a great discussion.