With the moody, inconsistent people, we can understand and evaluate their incentive reasoning - positive or negative and empathize with that understanding to assign a level of trust.
With any AI - especially to ones who didnt design/create it - any and all of its motivations, incentives are completely (emotionally) opaque to the recipient of the outcomes of its behavior.
I know we are saying the same thing - but unless a "receipt" can be given for a decision to why an AI / NN made a decision, people will not learn to build an understanding of a trust.
Otherwise, AI will always be hated by the humans who feel slighted by the cold decisions of a machine against them.
And that is clearly going to be the real future.
There will be anti-AI terrorism/activism and violence against systems, companies and countries that make life-bending decisions by AI against groups of people.
The seed to this future is the gatekeeping to capital/resources through FICO-like systems.
There's already been bomb attacks in Mexico against nanotechnology researchers, so it's not a big leap from there to AI/ML and other similar research (especially into GAI).
Computer models are much younger, and we know they tend to have weird pathological corners, but unlike humans and their weird pathological corners, we have a much less firm grasp on what they are.
In many cases, humans have skin in the game, too. No computer model is yet sophisticated enough to be able to say that about.
There is also some irrationality in having someone to blame, etc. Certainly. But it's not the only part of the story.