I see this as a part of the trend towards a bleak future of auto generated low quality generic content flooding the web. It already feels like it has been going on for a long time even though it has not been fully AI-driven before. This is a natural evolution of the direction things are going towards. I believe that non-algorithmic curation and aggregation will become even more important services that people will be willing to pay for.
I disagree with this perspective as it implies gate-keeping. Making websites easier to create is a good thing. If a tool like this gets more content onto the web then that's a good thing IMHO.
Besides, search engines already deal with a deluge of duplicated and low-quality websites...
Not all content is equal. "More content" does not imply good, useful or even correct.
Pandora's Box has open for a long time, but automation tools now are more convenient and accessible than ever. I shudder to think at the ammount of drivel that will keep flooding the internet. I concede it will be "fun" (for lack of a better word) to see the eventual search algorithm changes necessary to keep the web useful for research. That, or a massive curation effort. The sad thing is, for such a massive body of knowledge, the curation effort itself will have to employ automated tools, and the algorithms for these tools can eventually be cheated to allow for low-effort content as well.
Interesting product, but the examples are weak. I expect AI to personalize landing pages for every visitor in the future. Still, right now, I don't trust it enough to touch my bottom line.
