We once considered text to be generated exclusively by humans, but this assumption must be tossed out now.
I usually reject arguments based on an assumption of some status quo that somehow just continues.
Why? I’ll give two responses, which are similar but use different language.
1. There is a fallacy where people compare a future state to the present state, but this is incorrect. One has to compare two future states, because you don’t get to go back in time.
2. The “status quo” isn’t necessarily a stable equilibrium. The state of things now is not necessarily special nor guaranteed.
I’m now of the inclination to ask for a supporting model (not just one rationale) for any prediction, even ones that seem like common sense. Common sense can be a major blind spot.