As personal websites become less and less frequent, it become easier for governments to disregard them and regulate them out of existence. Expect the barrier to entry for building a website to become so high only corporations can afford it.
HTTP+HTTPS is a fine solution for personal websites.
But, I'll counterpoint that LetsEncrypt isn't the only ACME provider. Should they behave badly others can step into the gap.
The 90 day thing isn't a barrier. Certificates in general are automated- it's no harder to be HTTPS than HTTP.
Promoting HTTPS and dropping HTTP is ultimately valuable to all sites, because it prevents HTML injection. Given that your reader will be accessing the web via an ISP it prevents that ISP from injecting things into your site.
As an author of my own websites, I'm https only, and I think LE improves the indie web experience. There is a long chain of big companies between my site and my reader (Isp, LE, DNS, browser etc) but HTTPS offers me the best way of making sure the contect I create is the content delivered.
Maybe less so in the West, but on a permanent basis in the East.
So the best solution is HTTP+HTTPS on the server and using HTTPS till it inevitably breaks (for legal, technical, social, or other reason), then the HTTP is there to keep things accessible. I'm not anti-HTTPS. I'm anti-HTTPS-only. And you should be too if you care about human persons over corporate use cases.
This is why cacert.org still has value and is worth trying to preserve, donate, and contribute.
All of this can be automated away.
Updates can be automated too.
You need a mass media license for a website.
For example, Tencent: https://cloud.tencent.com/developer/article/1396101
The are, basically, two kinds of licenses, for websites participating in commercial activity (ads, shops), called ICP证，and for smaller websites, not directly involved into commercial activity, ICP备案.