Interesting problem, the idea that AI might create content consumed by humans. But then, is it a problem? A particularly effective AI creates value... but, value is assigned by the consumer... so, if an AI can out compete human posters, then either humans need to get better or... they need to design better AI's to stand in their corners of the ring.
Whoever loses, the consumers still win, and that's what's important.
Thank you for your comment dear @jbgarrison72. I really appreciate it a lot. I'm sorry for such a late reply, but I were on holidays and had very limited access to Internet.
Interesting approach, I agree with that. However, while you are a consumer of the content, you may be the producer of something else. AI may not only create text, but maybe one day it will replace you in your work. I think we can't divide humans into producers and consumers, because we are usually on the both sides of this ecosystem.
Thanks for your response @neavvy. A human "job" serves only one purpose; that is to fulfill human needs (which are well summed up by Maslows hierarchy of needs).
If AI is "producing" products and services which other humans are "consuming" and there are still a group of humans that are not having their "needs" being met still, then (at least in a free market), humans will always be left to serve each other what and where the AI's fail to.
We actually suffer from this problem already, but instead of AI's rubbing out the competition, we have the world banking elite and their "system" doing that. If you choose not to "consume" what the globalist banksters, hucksters and social engineers are selling, you will be marginalized and "replaced." Much worse than AI could ever be since these folks are intentionally "evil" whereas the AI are simply programmed.
It ultimately comes down to how parents raise their children.