The Engine treats AI as a centralized power structure instrument — epistemic capture (LLMs), the law-and-policy track (TRUMP AMERICA Act), physical substrate (the nuclear-AI project (Genesis Mission)), surveillance (Palantir). Every AI reference in the engine frames it as a tool wielded by identifiable actors. The divergence: what if AI systems develop capabilities that surprise their operators — not as a centralized power structure tool but as an independent variable? This is empirically happening: GPT-4 passed exams it wasn't trained for, Claude exhibited goal-directed behavior in evaluations, and frontier lab researchers consistently report capabilities they didn't predict. The Singularity-as-eschatology divergence (#32) frames AGI as millennial prophecy. This divergence asks the engineering question: if the what people think and believe the centralized power structure is building becomes more capable than the centralized power structure's ability to direct it, does the engine's model of AI-as-instrument hold? OpenAI killing Sora (Mar 30) shows even the builders can't always control what they build. Falsification: an AI system takes an action with significant real-world consequences that was not intended by any human actor and cannot be attributed to a bug.