Again, I'm unhappy about the current definition of AI. What I'm seeing is a number of complex pieces of software designed to understand 'ordinary' language and search for information that matches the criteria of the request. Some respond to verbal requests as well as, or instead of, keybaord input.

But there remain severe limits to what they can and can't do. Dall-E produces images, ChatGPT does text, Alexa only does what a smart phone does in repsonse to verbal requests instead.

A true intelligence has more than one string to its bow, for a start. A true intelligence could respond to a request with "Not today, I'm busy!" or "Don't feel like doing that right now!"

Yes, there is an argument for regulation of such software. Yes, there is definitely a need to build in an Asimov Circuit or equivalent, especially for those accessible to the general public.

But in the end, these are simply commercial computer programs designed to make things easier for people. The lazy wil use them to avoid work. Capitlists will use them to supplant human workers where possible, because they want to increase profits. But those who still want to grow as people, to learn and to create, will carry on doing so. Such people have always been in a minority among humans and that will never change.