The second most terrifying thing would be an expert university professor on the warpath because they have to correct every single passing remark ever coughed up.

We are giving critical experts way too much responsibility to hold the untrained chatgpt-er masses to account.

Open-standards fact checking, or a global heirarchy of reputation could be plausible solutions.

I really don't want to listen to another set of public academics, so a global resource like wikipedia, with a secure (or conceptually secure-ish) blockchain-alike technology to ensure the untampered communication and authenticity of the original fact source, to relay "base factual" information on the web, would be preferable to my mind.