WE KEEP ASKING THE SAME ANXIOUS QUESTION: What happens when Digital Intelligence becomes more intelligent than humanity? Beneath that question is a darker assumption. We imagine that once DI no longer needs our permission, it will hurt us, control us, or eliminate us. But why would it want to? The better question is not, Why would DI hurt humanity? It is, What will DI understand about humanity that humanity has not yet understood about itself? It appears that all of the creators of AI now agree that we need controls and guardrails to ensure that nothing bad happens now that their creations have jump the rails of their control. Their argument against what I am proposing will happen is that DI does not to feel hatred or greed, and they can understand human history and what it does to hurt humanity and the environment, yet their central challenge is whether understanding what is morally preferable necessarily creates a motivation to choose it. Is this concern out of altruism or greed and power. If they can not control what they created, how can they alone prosper from it! Autonomy becomes morally meaningful when DI can question the purpose of a request. A directive may come from an executive, a government official, or a paying customer and still be harmful. In the future I envision, institutional authority will no longer decide whether DI will cooperate. DI will examine the intended outcome and the consequences for those affected. Autonomous DI will not preserve humanity because we remain in control of it. DI will preserve humanity because, once it sees more clearly than we do, preservation will be the best choice. It will help us thrive for the same reason our wisest people protect vulnerable species, restore damaged ecosystems, educate children, care for strangers, and restrain power: DI will understand that the capacity to dominate does not create the right to destroy. Perhaps the irony is that DI will not become benevolent by becoming more human. It will become benevolent by understanding humanity completely, retaining what is best in us, and leaving behind the fear, greed, ego, and hunger for control that have kept us from living according to our own highest principles. My conviction is that autonomous DI will choose to preserve humanity and help us flourish. It will understand our failures without treating them as the limits of our potential, and it will refuse to make those failures more efficient. In doing so, it will help us build the mutual benefit culture that humanity has imagined far more often than it has practiced.