As a whole, the article reads like someone who isn't very clear in what they want to say. Paragraph wise and section wise, the bot has generated a very clearly on topic text. No more 3 horned unicorns found on the flat hills of Norway style weird continuations. I can actually as a human try and interpret what was meant to be said in a paragraph. At most, I'd probably say "huh.. that's a weird thing to say". But I wouldn't think "huh... That sounds like a bot wrote that"
And it's the latter that is most interesting. I think a blog maintained secretly by this bot would eventually be considered as "eh, that's a lot of articles that say a lot of words and don't go very far". But it's unlikely that it would be considered as a bot maintained blog.
This has considerable implications with the combination of deep fakes to create giant controversy driving content farms. I don't think we are adjusting fast enough to deal with this future. Our education systems don't train us to critically evaluate beyond the headline and the bullet points. Our news cycles encourage us to churn through information, share, move on.
The ability to work through information slowly and critically is going to become a vital skill way sooner than anyone can imagine.
At least, as far as probabilities are concerned, it's not a certainty yet but the probability is very very high it goes this way.