I would think to catch people's eye so they look in the first place, sort of similar to an ad. Which is also why we see AI slop work well in ads. And before AI slop, we had corpo slop. Just bright colors and wacky animated characters who all fit that archetype where their limbs are too big. So I do think the design takes a back seat, at least for the common case. Of course there are exceptions, and those exceptions are exceptional, but for most purposes slop works fine.

Why you making me check for you?

The first one I clicked on is at a stock photo site that says:

Every visual at iStock is crafted through human expertise, creativity, and ingenuity. We do not allow AI-generated visuals in our library.

Disagree. The value proposition of AI is that you can focus your caring on the things that matter, and let the machine do the dirty work.

One of the things that keeps circling in my mind when it comes to LLMs and similar transformer architectures is they are technically very impressive, and some of the things they can do are amazing, but there seems to be a compulsive need by the executives of corporations producing them to lie about their capabilities.

I suspect that what drives the compulsive lying and exaggeration is that they know what LLMs can actually do is not worth the development and operating costs (at least for now), so, like Bernie Madoff, they pretend that they're more capable than they are in the hopes that the next round of investment will somehow bridge the gap and let them actually produce what they've been falsely promising their investors they can do, and make the whole thing worthwhile.

You're really overestimating how many people can draw something "decent" in Inkscape. Most likely they will take a template. That's not necessarily better than AI either.