We can see what they mean by safety on their platform. They censor broad categories of legal speech, including basic science lately. While they're vague on details, I don't think it's a stretch to say that's what they want to force on everyone else when they say "safety".
To anyone who actually wants to use AI to build something, their product is like a firewall where you can't even see the rules. Different applications have very different requirements. And they want to make this garbage mandatory.
What this comes down to really, is control of private thought. Thinking by an LLM one owns is the same as one's own thoughts. Outsourcing all augmented thought to people who are saving it all in case someone wants to use it against you later, scanning it every which way for something forbidden or useful for their own purposes, is going to be a definition of poverty and/or slavery going forward.
One of the best uses of uncensored LLM's is research free of institutional biases and taboos, on any topic. I find the notion that I should be prevented from thinking about certain things using an extension of my own mind to be... an existential threat.