Aside from what others are saying, I think you're also making a mistake in interpreting people's interest in generative AI. Most people making/using AI art aren't looking for "good art", they're looking for a "good enough asset" to fufill a niche they don't or can't value. For example, a small buisness owner might use AI to create their logo. It won't be good, but its only competing with what they can draw as a non-artist. It only needs to be passable, not good. Similarly, big buisnesses like it because it can create images to add visual flair, without the cost and personality of stock photos. In the same vein from the viewer perspective, they often aren't looking for something high-quality or thought provoking (esspecially on a platform like Tik-Tok). Generally, people scrolling on Tik-Tok aren't looking for something good, they're looking for something mindless to distract them, thus the emphasis on mindless scrolling over guided or curated content.

As others have pointed out, I don't think you have solid evidence to suspect that this is a neurotypical vs ADHD thing.

Personally I think it's just a matter of poor taste. The sad truth is most people cannot appreciate good art, and the only reason why most works of art are as high quality as they are is because artists make them, and artists do appreciate good art and have high standards. From the artists point of view, their piece needs to meet criteria X, Y, Z, etc. to be a good satisfying piece. But from the point of view of the tasteless plebian masses, it probably only needs to meet criteria X. I first noticed this when I saw that almost every highly upvoted artwork on Reddit years ago was a really hyper realistic pencil drawing, usually of a pretty girl. Most people don't appreciate form, composition, subtle meanings, abstraction, etc. Those things require more thinking and are therefore too difficult for many people to engage with. Instead, "how hard does this seem to make" and "how much do I like this at first glance" become the proxy standards used by tasteless lazy people to judge art, and hence the "best" art by those standards is a super realistic pencil drawing of a pretty woman became "zomg I thought this was a photo!!!!" and "I couldn't do this in a million years!!! So impressive!!!" As if the point of art is just to flex on people?

But it gets worse, because even when people decide to half-ass their ingestion of art by flattening it down to a single dimension of "how realistic is it", again, because people aren't artists and have never even tried to engage in art (and this I actually don't hold against them, unlike their prior laziness), they don't have a trained eye. So sometimes you'll see just a mediocre pencil drawing of a pretty girl, and people with less art skills will be like "wow 10/10 it's perfect!!!", but people with art skills will be able to notice things like "well if the shadow on the neck is like that the shadow on the nose should be going the other way, you mixed up your light sources", or "the perspective is off on the angle of the eyes here". Sometimes these improvements would be subconsciously picked up by the masses, but many times not. Often the subtleties that make an artwork go from mediocre to amazing are lost on the masses. As a result, the masses are equally satisfied with poor quality AI-generated images as they are with high quality human-generated images.

TLDR; The lack of media literacy among many people strikes again

Why would you assume it's neurotypical specific? I'm neurodivergent and I like generating AI videos and images, as it allows me to visualise stuff that was in my mind.