Socio-technical entanglementIt can be difficult to pinpoint, and causally explain the origins of, the harm that is inflicted through the use of generative AI systems. For instance, experts often disagree on whether a given AI output is hazardous [130], the time horizon over which harms from AI systems manifest can be months if not years, and the impact of AI can be multifaceted and subtle rather than deterministic and direct [131]. This is because AI systems are socio-technically entangled, which means that "the interaction of technical and social components determines whether risk manifests" rather than either component singularly [16]. Further, this entanglement makes it challenging to predict what harms may be caused when a generative AI system meets existing socio-technical contexts, and it is difficult to precisely pinpoint their causal impact. Indeed, assessing the causal impact of AI models on the people who interact with them is a well-established (and largely unresolved) research question in social media studies [132, 133, 134, 135, 136]. One approach is to consider counterfactuals. For instance, Mazeika et al. [114] argue that safety assessments of models should consider what is enabled by using an AI model "above and beyond what a human could accomplish with a search engine." Examples exist in the algorithmic audit literature, but this is methodologically difficult to implement [137].