I care because in most (not all) cases, (a) AI UGC is one- to few-shotted with no concern for accuracy or readability, and (b) why would I read the results of someone else's prompt if I can achieve more or less the same result for free on ChatGPT?

For example, I was searching for a guide for realigning the v-brakes on my wife's hybrid bike and found this: https://volatacycles.com/how-to-adjust-bike-brakes-rubbing/

Now, this is for disc brakes, so not applicable in my situation. I've never ridden a bike with disc brakes, so I can't vet for the accuracy of this guide. Maybe it's totally right; I'm sure someone reading this will know.

However, just look at this article! Zero pictures for a process that _really_ needs it. It just drones on. Imagine following this guide only to discover that the 12-15 Nm rotor torque the article is asking for is actually too high!

A similar article from before AI would at least have (stolen) pictures describing the process. It would also very likely be shorter. Which creates the rub: if I know how to write something engaging and correcting AI's copy will take _just as much time_ as writing it myself, why would I use AI to do it?

In short, AI content is lazy content. My time is valuable and finite; if I'm reading your stuff, I want to know that you at least tried to give a shit about my time as a reader while producing it.