I don't think so. Instead of SEO, I think we'll soon see 'LLMO' dominating such uses, where LLM summaries are reshaped by vendors and etailers to misrepresent

I don't think so. Instead of SEO, I think we'll soon see 'LLMO' dominating such uses, where LLM summaries are reshaped by vendors and etailers to misrepresent facts in ways that favor them over others. I suspect this can be done simply by poisoning a query with supplemental suggestions of sources to use in a RAG, many of which don't even have to be publicly available but are made accessible to the LLM (perhaps by submitting hidden URLs that mislead the summary along with the query). But even after such a practice is uncovered and roundly maligned, that won't stop the infinite supply of net con men from continuing to inject their poisons into the background that drives deep research, so long as the LLM maker doesn't actively oppose this practice actively and publicly -- which none of them have been willing to do with any other LLM operational details so far. In fact, I predict that if a LLM summary like DR's does NOT soon provide references to the sources of the facts it relies on, in no time users will disregard such summaries to be yet more uselessly unreliable pfaff from yet another net disreputable -- as we do with search engine summaries now.