> There is an implicit assumption here that human generated content is often high quality and worth consuming or using. Human generated content can be high qua

> There is an implicit assumption here that human generated content is often high quality and worth consuming or using. Human generated content can be high quality, and can be worth consuming. It can also be crap. Probabilistically speaking, human generated content has a wide distribution, quality varies a lot, and it is capable of greatness, by a few outliers. These generative models have the same average quality as human content. Just the spread is very thin, almost everything is about the same high school level, without the very bad content, and without great content. My prediction is: the median of the human generated content will change, just because the new normal (as in normal distribution) is putting pressure on humans to do so. Or we will all become addicts to social interaction with and AI, in the style of the film "Her". It will be like porn consumption, but for our ears. Artificial and available without effort.