I’m confused. I did respond to your argument which is that these things can do harm so people are trying to be responsible. My response is “actually no harm is being done so what’s the ethical problem”? The part that’s BS is when people who espouse this argument wave their hands and pull actual tangible harm out of thin air and and claim that these models are capable of causing it.
(You also suggested some impending moral panic. I don’t buy it.)
You should strive to respond to the strongest interpretation of what you read and not the weakest one.