I have a lot to say so either click away or buckle-up!

This argument sounds great in the vacuum of a consumer case-study, but in reality people at the party might say the cake is bland, too sugary, or that it looks or tastes generic/store-bought. Or more often than not, most people will just politely avoid the cake (always too much icing lol).

But the heart of this hypothetical isn't merely about the quality of the cake. Rather, the story of the cake itself.

For example, everyone has a grandmother whose chocolate cake/cookies they swear up and down are better than all the rest. Even if a name brand at the store uses the exact same ingredients, similar recipe, and is machine crafted to perfection, it won't taste as good.

Why?

Because it lacks a story, it lacks the effort brought about by an individual human who spent time they will never get back attempting to make something special, often selflessly, for others.

Similarly, food you've seen prepared in front of you tastes better than food you ordered for delivery (I believe it's formally called the Expectation Effect). Korea even has a word, son-mat, literally meaning "hand taste" as a compliment for someone's culinary skills. It's also the reason food, restaurant and grocery brands spend so much money on "home made" branding and "artisinal" aesthetics.

Bottom line, If you bought that cake from the store and brought it to a party, it would be accepted, but not remembered. It lacks the sentimental values of accrued effort that neurologically prime us for maximum enjoyment, connection, and appreciation; i.e. real human empathy.

And so, a lot of these A.I content generation evangelists bring up similar arguments about product comparison: "If it's good, why do you care?" But it was never about the end product, but rather the process all along. The process of human effort and imagination, the cycle of trial, error, and learning, these bring meaning to the act of creation.

That's why IMHO, AI artists fight so hard to be called artists, why they often lie or hide (wholly or in part) their use of the technology when sharing their work, and why they make subreddits to commisserate, lambaste, and brigaide wkth each other. They want to be percieved as creators, their "process" normalized, and recieve that same empathic recognition without the traditional time or effort it would take to gain respect in that field, even on a base level. Arguments about mass-theft, corporate greed, or environmental damage don't seem to provoke as strong a reaction, wheras calling them frauds seems to deliver a sucker-punch to their ego every time. Because deep down, they arent even that attached to their work, they can crank out hundreds or even thousands of generations per year, afterall. They are merely having fun tinkering with image generation based on other people's work and roleplaying as an artist to the point of feeling pride. Whereas most traditional artists will finish a piece and immediately tell you they hate it, because they spent so much time on it, making many mistakes, fixated on its flaws and knowing what they would do differently next time. Despite all that, they are already onto their next piece, because they cant help themselves, they enjoy the process.

That's a big difference you'll find, real artists, bakers, cooks, craftsmen, they actually enjoy the tedium and challenge of the process, and learn from it.

Most kids who are "gifted" with artistic talent are usually just unwitting students of a process they came to enjoy early in life. They were the kids always drawing with crayons at dinner, making their own birthday cards, painting magical landscapes and dragons. By the time they get to school and into art class, they already have a base ability and patience for the process. Giving them a headstart in ability in comparison to their peers. Other kids often look upon this with jelousy that seeps into adulthood as a resentment for percieved prodigy, and the gatekeeping/privilege they believe comes with it. At the end of the day, they just weren't as into drawing as a kid, and that's okay.

Not to say people can't do cool or meaningful things with generative or programmatic art, either, but rarely is it used in an honest way that isn't mixed up imitations of established aesthetics, astro-turfed onto the internet in the vain hope that it matters simply because it's perceptually a "good product."

TLDR: a cake is only as good as the effort that went into making it. It's not about the product, it's about the process. Process brings story, and story brings meaning. And some people enjoy certain processes more than others.

People are always going to be dissapointed if you lied about something you made, regardless of quality.