The first (quoted) tweet says "Is Al really going to kill us all? The scenarios are preposterous, and the presumption of inevitability encourages fatalism, panic, and distraction from the more mundane and realistic safety challenges."

This in itself I find problematic. Solving the mundane and realistic safety challenges are what prevents the potential (preposterous) outcomes. There's no need to ignore anything other than the sensationalism like anthropomorphising. The Paperclip Maximizer is meant to be an exaggerated thought experiment where an AI doesn't actually "want" anything, it's "literally doing" what it's supposed to. It's surprising that Pinker doesn't seem to see that, or sees it and doesn't believe no version of it is possible.

Construction machinery doesn't need to be alive to kill you--just left running unattended.

The difference is that AI doesn't have a well bounded construction site.