Thanks, James for this amazing comment - that could very well be an article in itself!

I'll go bit by bit.

"Rather, they tend have a multiplicity, or superposition of perspectives." I agree with this. One of the things I've realized is that LLMs allow you to write a lot, but you can't simply direct them to write what you want. Intent is uniquely human and I don't see LLMs developing it in the future.

"Human writers/artists will continue to differentiate." I agree with this one, too. However, I think we'll suffer the most between the settling of AI as expert writers and the reaction of human writers to the new scenario. Afterward is a matter of acceptance and adaptation - like painters did when the camera was invented.

"The most compelling work will come from human creators who embrace AI technologies as collaborative tools." Agree with the whole paragraph.

"The time required for human consumption will become the bottleneck." This is one of the issues I too see in the future, but as you say, people could simply choose to read human work instead of AI work.

I agree with most of what you said, but the main problem I see is that humans may find profit using these AIs without their audiences knowing. Even if AIs can't write a specific defensible argument on a topic or a coherent long-form article, they will eventually manage to confound most people.

Having to choose between human work and AI work is only a problem if you can differentiate between the two.

It's for sure a complex issue. How it'll unfold only time will tell. I don't think we can predict the consequences, just be prepared.