Any information that whatever you're working on hinges upon, you need to already know and have confirmed before you start working on it. So not only did you need to look it up anyway, only you know what aspects of that information are most important for the goals of your work. Of course, there can also be less vital pieces of information that you may consult as you work, like maybe you want to compare the size of something with football fields, to make it harder to understand. Undoubtedly an AI can do that for you, but in the end you still need to look it up to verify it, so you haven't really saved any time or effort.

It's a similar kind of story for things like generating PowerPoint slides. Slides based on what? An article? The script? Slides that just summarise the prose make for a terrible presentation and aren't any better as a starting point for one. Also, anything that can be described using less time and (cognitive) energy than to just write it in Mermaid code, isn't worth making a diagram out of.

At that point why not code in Notepad instead of relying on the stupid machine assisted IDEs?

This is comparison makes no sense, because an IDE is the very opposite of AI. There is little value in a person manually performing the same algorithms over and over again, other than maybe for a learning process. So if they can be automated, it just means that people can focus their efforts on doing the work that requires, you know, personhood. AI is the opposite in that it's useless for procedural automation, and the only thing it can do automatically is the kind of work that can only have value if a person is doing it.