In this case, I think we are going to see such improvements because there’s a direct benefit to companies operating LLMs to save costs.

I’m not so sure, not when a lot of venture capital money often rides on grandiose promises to dazzle investors (including vague promises of nuclear fusion payback from a startup in four years in Microsoft’s case)

There’s no putting toothpaste back in the tube at this point.

Considering the already present socioeconomic consequences of this unregulated technology, from career/reputation threatening deepfaking to further working class precarity, saying “nothing can be done” in response to such harm sounds like tech inevitabilism to me. Should the same be argued about the worsening surveillance state (which is also being boosted with this technology)? Would it have been worthwhile to say nothing could be done about, say, CFCs, high fructose corn syrup, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, or leaded gasoline? Saying “this product is doing bad things but oh well it’s already invented” is tiresome fatalism to me.