LLM Accordions

A new unintended consequence of the GPT era is the sheer volume of text with which we are constantly bombarded. There is now no activation energy, neither cost nor time nor effort, to produce a large document. Because many of our brains are still wired for the pre-GPT world, when the existence of a document implied a level of time spent or dedication in research, this is still a semi-effective technique. The amount of content, text and visual, that has been produced in the post-GPT era has dwarfed everything that was published to the internet in the decades prior.
With our shorter attention spans, we don't have interest in reading ten-page manifestos, so we use AI to get a summary. I call this the LLM accordion. One kernel of human thought is expanded into an endless scroll of AI-generated text, which is then understood through a shorter AI-generated summary. The response can also be produced by AI, and the quantity of text grows once more. The accordion is a mechanism by which we expand and contract one original, human idea. I think of this as Google translation of a paragraph across every language back to English or physical objects expanding and contracting in heat and ice. It is near impossible to imagine the original state is preserved or improved once the accordion has finished its song. 
In the corporate world, it's easier than ever to produce a document and push it to someone else in a cross-functional team. Passing lengthy documentation onto the next person makes it their problem. It may be in an employee’s rational self-interest to do this at scale. The person who has received this document may also use an LLM to further warp it and then pass it back once again, making it the original author’s problem. We are seeing this accordion effect in the hiring markets. Candidates generate lengthy cover letters, the review of which recruiters automate through AI workflows. 
This process degrades experience and has second-order effects. It causes us to look with more skepticism at every document we see on the Internet and in our workplace, and thus apply a discount which we would not have earlier. So, the natural response for most writers of documents may imply an overcorrection to account for this discount. They may assume their work gets less human attention, and so they optimize for SEO, GEO, and bluntness of language (that is, bashing the reader over their head with an argument). 
Just as we risk losing richness of knowledge with the dethroning of Stack Overflow, Quora, and Reddit as the go-to community forums for answering questions, we may also lose quality in how we share our thoughts or consume the thoughts of others. While there is no financial cost to every play of the accordion, there is something lost. And if we do not continue to create and contribute new ideas to the corpus of human knowledge, if instead we let the accordion play 20 times, the songs the future accordions play will have even less value still.