One question seems obvious:
With AIs and stuff, are we saving humanity's digital history, or are we saving a swarm of potentially biased auto-generated content published by the few that can afford the large scale deployment of LLMs?
Let's consider SEO practices as an example. SEO spam probably IS very likely always reviewed by a person before publishing.
It is still biased and garbage anyway, because the reviewer only cares about its effect on affecting ranking algorithms, not the heritage of digital human history.
Maybe recent pages this is true, but in 2013, AFAIK AI was not yet a thing.
But too bad these sites generated by AI are not tagged in some manner. But an argument could be made that these AI pages are reviewed by a person before they hit the WEB. One can hope anyway :)