I'm sorry, but that painting experiment is bafflingly silly. The same two artists painted 11 paintings based on independent majority votes of a bunch of general

I'm sorry, but that painting experiment is bafflingly silly. The same two artists painted 11 paintings based on independent majority votes of a bunch of general criteria, and then made a shocked-Pikachu-face when all the paintings looked the same? Does a culture where the vote of sharp angles vs. soft curves was 55% vs. 45% get the same painting as where the vote was 90% vs. 10%? Did everyone vote for the painting to have a single tree exactly 3 inches from the right side of the canvas? Give me a break. Even putting aside the fact that these same-same paintings were literally painted by the same artists, the fundamental experiment is mind-boggling: "We asked a diverse group of 10 people to choose a cool unique color, and then we mixed them all thinking we'd get a Super Unique Color!!, but instead we just ended up with a bland brown! We conclude that everyone in the world sucks." WTF? And by the way, those AirBnB interiors don't all look the same. They just all have white walls. And those city skylines don't all look the same, either. Nor really do the apartment buildings, to my eyes. Nor do the Instagram models look the same. The cars are a good example, but they state exactly why they look the same: it's a good design. What the authors seem to really hate is that function is ever put above form, and that trends exist. Sorry? Another factor is just that lots of things exist. "Movies with creepy eyes on the poster" is just a sub-sub-sub-genre of movie that exists, and there are so many movies that they can find 10 examples. Okay? So? It offends them that genres exist? Watch a different damn movie then; there are plenty.