Big Tech likes to push the trope that things are moving and changing too quickly and there's no way that regulators could really keep up --- better (on their view) to just let the innovators innovate. This is false: many of the issues stay stable over quite some time. Case in point: Here's me 5 years ago pointing out that large language models shouldn't be used as sources of information about the world, and that doing so poses risks to the information ecosystem:
@emilymbender @futurebird
Other things in my lifetime I've been told "shouldn't be used as sources of information":
Social media
Wikipedia
Web search engines
YouTube
The Internet
Web pages
Anything you see on TV or film
Anything from a politically affiliated source
Anything from an astronaut
Anything from a Freemason
Anything from an interested party
Anything from a detached academic (particularly economists)
Anything from a corporation
Anything from any elected official
Anything from any government agency
Anything from any Western medicine doctor or Big Pharma
Anything from an advocate of [economic system]
Anything from a [gender]
Anything from a [race]
Anything from a [nationality]
Anything from a believer of [specific religion]
Anything not in [ancient text]
Anything from a believer of any religion
Anything from an atheist
Everything you read
Everything you hear
The point here is that such advice is generally non-actionable, and that people are almost always better served by practical risk- and harm-reduction strategies than abstinence-only advocacy.
-do not display AI responses to questions typed into search engines at the top as if they are the definitive response.
-demote pages that use LLM generated content in searches and algorithms
-refrain from integrating AI responses for content questions in company chatbots.
there are a lot of ways this is actionable. Not often things individuals have control over, but this tech is being injected into all sorts of paces where it doesn't belong.