They explicitly said it’s benefiting them in a way they care about.

Similarly, when I put my user hat on (as opposed to my SWE hat) I appreciate the curation, at least compared to the Wild West of downloading applications off the internet.

If those autogenerated apps don't get downloads, reviews, or in-app purchases then they wouldn't perform well in the search results. What the user is asking for are good tools to find good apps. That can include curation and metric based solutions. Having a million apps doesn't change anything because most people stop looking after a handful, if that.

They won't be included in the App Store's search, just on whatever store they're shipped on. And search is tough even on a single app store.

The consumer won't feel the developer struggling with less margin. They won't feel the pain as the developer has to work 30-40% harder.

But the impact to global productivity is substantial. Less innovation occurs. Less energy to try new things. Money doesn't spread as widely as it should.

I find this argument difficult as this is kind of how China operates. This free sharing of IP was claimed to enable untold amounts of innovation. However what I actually see for the most part is a market flooded by shitty clones of original IP.

For example, take this dumb phone[1]. It is powered by a Mediatek processor whose IP is freely shared. The innovation that resulted is not something better like an iPhone. Instead 1000s of different shells or an additional button here or there.

[0]: https://hackaday.com/tag/mt6260/

[1]:http://bunniefoo.com/fernvale/fernvale-phone-spread.jpg

I guess this scenario might be a bit different since we are talking about software...but i'm not so sure.