No relation, in my opinion. I assume we, and Earth, very likely would have been gobbled up or at least would observe a universe with an obvious amount of technosignatures, if they had they already reached here. The fact we haven't been gobbled up yet or don't observe any even slightly obvious technosignatures therefore very likely implies they haven't reached here, yet. Under that assumption.

Argument for my assumption that they would gobble us up: I am of the opinion that enough civs will go grabby to gobble anything up that could be used, like planets, for one, because heavy elements as found in planets are useful, relatively scarce and harder to synthesize from scratch than to scrape preexisting material first. And stars give off free energy, like a giant fusion reactor with fuel+reactor naturally given, you just need to encase them. Planets with all the material you need are very often on site ;)

In conclusion: I'm making a few assumptions on how the read your question. But I think alien AI not having gobbled us up is more liekly due to it simply not being here rather than it being here but being aligned to not gobble us up or pretty much not do anything else meaningful either because we see no technosignatures at all. Therefore, no relation. (If there were technosignatures along with our healthy Earth, then this may imply successful alignment in their case.)

@1014112 so it's a Fermi paradox thing then. Very unfortunate, but a cheap shot admittedly

No relation. I expect an adequate intelligent civilization to build AI, and I expect an adequate intelligent civilization to be grabby, whether or not it has AI. I don't think we could distinguish much between a civilisation with AI and a civilisation without AI, especially not as far as not being gobbled is concerned. This is assuming AI doesn't figure out how to do something like break the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. So, a an adequate civilisation that masters AI gobbles, an inadequate civilisation that gets eradicated by AI also gobbles, unless the AI does not wish to expand (which I claim is more likely than a civilisation arising from a species arising from evolution deciding not to expand, so that's a few points in the direction of "no" in your poll).

@NeilWarren Nice write-up.

Few people realize that this is actually a market about whether FTL travel is possible

@Symmetry I don't think it matters much that the priors for us popping up on Earth and not being gobbled are several orders of magnitude higher or lower. If FTLt were possible, OR if there were a single other intelligent civilisation in the MW that appeared 2 million years before us, passed its filters, expanded, and FTLt were impossible, we would be gobbled. In both worlds, we don't exist to observe this situation. There being FTLt or not might make our prior odds of existence a few orders of magnitude lower or higher, but whatever the odds are, it's clear that they are low enough that we are alone, at least as far as our telescopes can peer and not notice Dyson spheres. Do you see what I mean? I don't think FTLt affects our calculation here much. An infinitesimal prior probability of existence versus an even more infinitesimal prior probability of existence is a small enough distance, as far as anthropic reasoning (we do, in fact, exist) is concerned, that the result of this poll shouldn't be affected at all.

@NeilWarren Alright, I'm sold. Looks like this is more of a Fermi Paradoxon question then