Different forms of art (ai or human made) are good for different situations. Commenting on hacker news has a different set of needs and depth that ChatGPT cannot replicate. But I do switch over to chatGPT when trying to get background information about things. Different 'tools' for different needs.
Eh, this is a two sided argument.
For example, lots of people look at porn. This doesn't mean when I pull up an art/picture site I want to have porn displayed to me. In addition sites that allow porn are typically flooded with massive amounts of that kind of content. If you are a site that wants to show non-pornographic artistic content, in general you have to ban and heavily moderate it or it takes over the site.
I can see where the same will be true for AI generated art. Where for human art, one work could take hours, maybe days or far longer to create. Nearly unlimited amounts of AI art could flood a site in days, so much so that even attempting to host content would not be feasible in any way.
Lower ranked how? Not everything has a Reddit-esque upvote/downvote system. Plenty of sites let you browse by fandom/character/artist tags and just return chronological results (thinking primarily pixiv + all the booru-likes). Those sites were the ones where there was universal backlash to AI art and all of them require an AI-generated tag now.