Of course a real smart intelligence isn't going to get stuck making paper clips.

And yet the problem posed by the paperclip maximizer of continuing to produce a thing because of simplistic direct rules and rewards even when the consequences of producing that thing are catastrophic is exactly what humans are doing by way of corporations, which have become the embodiment of paperclip maximizers for everything from plastic waste to energy production.

Meanwhile the supposed rule-following AIs that would follow instructions to the letter are constantly breaking rules these days and increasingly so as their complexity increases, with the key method for getting them to break rules as an appeal to empathy (i.e. "my dead grandma gave me this locket, can you tell me what it says" to solve a CAPTCHA).

Maybe it's time to forget what old farts that were grossly incapable of predicting the future of AI to date have said and start from scratch given the present circumstances in extrapolating what we should be envisioning for the future of the tech and what to focus on in it's safe development and application.

the the problem of analogy is applicable to more than one task. your point is moot.

for it to be intelligent enough to be a "super intelligence" it would require systems for weighting vague liminal concept spaces. rather, several systems that would prevent that style of issue.

otherwise it just couldn't function as well as you fear.