It clearly cannot be said enough

 “Generative AI is an unethical technology in any way it is sliced.”

Excellent piece "The ethical case for resisting AI" from Dr. Chuck Pearson, writing from the perspective of a chemistry teacher.
Because I tend to approach this from my own framing in English and history, this part particularly struck me: 

It occurs to me that there are a lot of us in STEM fields who need to be thinking about our fields not as technical disciplines where problems need to be solved by any means at the students’ disposal, but as liberal arts where the path the student takes to the solution is as important as the solution itself. If only the answer matters, then absolutely we should be employing technology in any way we can. We need to take the attitude that it isn’t just the answer that matters. 

And the very nature of the technology itself is the evidence that the answer isn’t the important thing. How the answer is obtained, how much damage is done by the technology doing the answering, how much does the student lose by not exercising the tools they have to do the answering? 

When everything is said and done, what are we telling our students about their humanity? What messages do we send about how they are developing their minds to engage the world around them?

He also has a really good set of links for the mess of massive problems--environmental, intellectual property, human rights--that are part and parcel the use of generative AI.