I like effective complexity in graphic layouts. Since all decisions are made by a person, it is disputable whether it can be called a complexity formed by a system (probably not). Still, the most intriguing graphic layouts to me are the ones that seem based on strict, well-informed rules, but that also arbitrarily escape them for a more graphically pleasant outcome.
On The Problem of Authenticity:
I like early 20th century oil paintings. I enjoy staring at them and sort of tracing the painter's intentions. An aesthetic composition in paint mediums can provide that unique, warm firsthand experience as if you're talking to the artist. Most generative art, as with the postmodern approach explained in the article, tend to lack this quality.
1A) Something that demonstrates effective complexity is some of the first Pixar animators used mathematics and fractal geometry to create realistic mountains. Although I could not find a great picture to highlight these first mountains since I watched in in a documentary, these mountains gives the appearance of looking seemingly more toward the side of total randomness and higher complexity even though it is derived from a pretty rigid formula. Therefore, it lies somewhat in the middle with pull toward total randomness.
1B) Regarding the problem that if generative art can "diminish the value of the art when unique objects can be mass‐produced?" I believe that although art can be produced on a mass scale, the value of the artist whether that be their individual artistic abilities or stylistic code does not diminish simply because generative art allows many unique objects to be created. Being massed produced and being unique are just some characteristics of a much more complicated system regarding the appreciation of art.