I've joked it's like the lecture scene in "Real Genius": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB1X4o-MV6o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB1X4o-MV6o The problem is

I've joked it's like the lecture scene in "Real Genius": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB1X4o-MV6o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB1X4o-MV6o The problem is, there is value in: A) Generating content by bot B) Generating summaries by bot It's just that the "lossiness" of each conversion step is going to be worrisome when it comes to the accuracy of information being transmitted. I suppose you can make the same argument when it's real humans in the chain. However, my fear is that we get into this self-feedback loop of bot-written articles that are wrong in some non-obvious way being fed back into knowledge databases for AIs, which in turn are used to generate articles about the given topic, which in turn are used in summaries, etc. I think traditionally referring back to primary sources was a way of avoiding this game of telephone, but I worry that even "primary sources" are going to start being AI-cowritten by default.