It’s the same reason some people don’t like generic pop music due to its formulaic commercialism.
So if people are discriminating AI art because they want to experience the emotions that the authors put into the pieces, then I’m ok with that right up until it can be argued that AI experiences emotions.
Show me an AI with an opinion; an aesthetic preference.
Show me an AI that has emotions.
Show me an AI that’s chosen to make sacrifices to produce its art.
AI cannot produce art. Images are not intrinsically art. Sound is not intrinsically art. Art requires thought and intent. AI is not capable of either.
I won’t argument on the art part, but these common AI stereotypes are not true.
After all, there are artists that collate "samples" from other artists and produce music from all those different samples. They did not play any instrument, they merely arranged and modified these samples into a product that they presumably find pleasing.
Doesn’t mean the result is ideal, far from that. But your “bullet points” imply some specialness which has to be explained. Personally I don’t love the style of refusal you’re demonstrating, because it’s similar to if you know you know and other self-referential nonsense. At least add some becauses into your arguments, because “it has no X” is a simplification far below the level of usefulness here.
Anyway, how does that prevent creating AI personas again?
All the emotion serve as a shortcut for behaviors that make evolutionary sense.
Things suck before they get better and then keep on getting better.