In practice the difference is generally not that significant, but there is some increase in risks.
Personally, I would prefer a different label for new GMO foods. Presumably, the odds of finding an undiscovered issue drops over time. So using a different label for the first 20 years is reasonably appropriate. Plenty of people are going to take slightly higher risks, so they can benefit from and thus test new cultivars.
Except for random mutations, which are, well, random changes to DNA.
There is a reason the nightshade family[1] is so varied.
So it’s not just a question of random chance adding something harmful at this point, but also malicious actors. Someone could easily decide to try and reduce the human population by reducing fertility or whatnot and new GMO crops aren’t tested for such things.
Of course /nothing/ meets the goal posts of "arbitrary" including state of the art genetic modification.
As I said it’s probably not that meaningful of a difference, but malicious actors have serious tools to work with here not just random changes.