False. False. False.

1. People could forcibly seize and redistribute content already made in years 1980-2020. Even that would be better than slop.

2. People could read only those - like scientists or open source and public domain authors - either funded by the state or otherwise willing to publish their works for free at high quality without the monetization slop text. The content exists, but monetized slop hides it.

3. Actually good AI can compress multiple slop articles into useful, non-sloppy content.

I'd be perfectly fine if the internet consists of just math textbooks and science papers, and actually good articles automatically distilled from slop.

It has the potential to give us what we need.

The problem is that slop hides all that!