I am not totally sure about this. I think that AI writing is just a progression of current trends. Many things have made writing easier and lower cost - printing press, typewriters, word processors, grammer/spell checkers, electronic distribution.

This is just a continuation. It does tend to mean there is less effort to produce the output and thus there is a value degradation, but this has been true all along this technology trend.

I don't think we should be a purist as to how writing is produced.

I like the author's idea that people should publish the prompts they use to generate LLM output, not the output itself.

Hypothetically, what if the AI-generated blog post were better than what the human author of the blog would have written?

I see no evidence or logical argument here. You have feelings ... fine. Mine are different.

LinkedIn marketing was bad before AI, now half the content is just generated emoji-ridden listicles

I already found it insulting to read seo spam blog posts. The ai involved is beside the point.

It’s a cherry on top to see these silly AI-generated posts to be seriously discussed in here.

Well Firefox just got an AI summarizing feature, so thankfully I don't have to...

If you use AI to write a blog post, I'll use AI to summarize it.

By all means , use AI. Just don't make it longer than it needs to be