What happens when it decides that the human interfering in the example is the source of the problem and needs to be eliminated?

All I could think of watching that video was I would not want to be that guy.

As far as I’m aware the only “robots” we have at the moment that are capable of large scale physical damage, without direct human involvement while the damage is occurring, are military drones and missiles.

And neither missiles nor drones are capable of functioning totally independent with both requiring large amounts of weapon systems infrastructure. You may be able to argue missiles could be deployed almost independently if failsafes are circumvented but that would require modernization of missile weapon systems which is about as likely as the colonization of space.

At present I’d be more worried about network and social engineering attacks using LLM which I’m sure is already happening and will continuously increase.

The household robot that can cook will be able to use a knife to cut anything it arbitrarily thinks needs to be cut which could lead to it being directed to assist with serious criminal acts. Self-driving cars out on the streets have already killed people, but those were just bugs, not intentional behavior, as might occur if they were driven by LLMs.

Then the bad person gets charged with the crimes. It's not like a judge would just throw their hands in the air because there is a small amount of indirection.