The advent of the internet was collaborative and based on introducing shared protocols for a couple of decades. It deserved criticism when globalised capitalism got involved, and monopolies started forming, leading to rent-seeking, excessive centralisation, and enshittification.

The impact is that the internet has a fraction of the value to improve people's lives as it should have. It is a very poor free market, incredibly poor competition because of lack of standards and protocols and interoperability. People's minds are ground down by social media, search engines don't work well any more and so on.

So yes - every new technology deserves many criticisms, so they can be addressed, and as a society we can gain the benefits of that technology and minimise the disadvantages.

The printing press lead to copyright, public libraries, universal literacy... All things which are now widely celebrated. They took centuries to work out, and are all government and regulatory intervention to fix problems critics noticed and campaigned about.

AI is the same, only it is at risk of moving much faster and having a much large negative impact before society reacts.

So no, most of the criticism of LLMs are not wrong - they are correct, as are the people saying the technology of LLMs is useful to people and the economy.

Critics are friends of a new technology - without responding to every criticism in a significant way, AI will rapidly lead to a Butlerian jihad. If you like AI, you should love criticism of AI even more.