I am always amazed when interacting with some people how much it "helps" them to ask a (couple of) questions to LLM rather than (just) using google. I (am many IT friends) never need that. But there are many "low skilled workers" (and that can include people not being able to use technology) for which an LLM will improve their productivity.
To the point I think I am the exception, and that's why LLM will have a larger impact than I would estimate.
As we have witnessed episodes like https://arstechnica.com/?p=1942936 witch pose a big and so far unsolvable problem. Personally I tried khoj on my org-mode notes just for curiosity, it was able to produce some meaningful results, but fails to find much while a mere rg (ripgrep) succeed without special tricks. Similarly a classic Google Search tend to produce meaningful results quickly and with much less computation needed than ChatGPT.
If that's the current bar well, LLMs cost way too much for the results they produce. Of course things change so at a certain point in future we might get much better results and to achieve such goals research, so data, experiments etc is needed but from research and release early and often vs "Artificial Intelligence is here" from PR there is a big gap in the middle.
It does not help me either. C++ answers are flat out wrong and you develop bad habits. If I wanted to plagiarize and had no morals, I could take code from GitHub directly.
And, as you say, Google provides links to better answers in 2 seconds.
I suppose some people like the interaction with the machine. I'm much more exhausted after an LLM session and my brain is literally fried until the next morning. I stopped using LLMs and am much happier.
Googling for answers and reading them strangely enough energizes me.
To the point I think I am the exception, and that's why LLM will have a larger impact than I would estimate.