Love your point that machine learning systems aren't designed for new input - things like GPT-3 just remix what already exists. Some people think humans operate the same way though - that no create act is truly novel. Who knows. But regardless, agreed that algorithms are probably shrinking the creative window.
That aside, these recommendations and autocompletions are especially pernicious because they seem so small and benign, to the point that we barely notice them happening. What's the big deal - you clicked on Descartes instead of Magritte today. But as we get hundreds (thousands?) of these algorithmic recommendations and autocompletions a day, the impact is very material.
Great points. "...shrinking the creative window..." is a good way to put it. I agree that humans may not have truly original thought. But if humans express a part of the broadest aperture, then it seems like technology is hardening around an even narrow part of it.
I also like your catch around how minor the individual acts can be, but the impact in aggregate. It feels like an example we see play out constantly right now. Minor impact on attention from a specific notification system or algorithmic feed, but it adds up. Minor impact from 'frictionless consumer purchasing', but it adds up to a new level of consumerism and materialism. And so on. That incrementalism that turns into a much larger effect over time will likely be one of the most stunning patterns when we look back.
Love your point that machine learning systems aren't designed for new input - things like GPT-3 just remix what already exists. Some people think humans operate the same way though - that no create act is truly novel. Who knows. But regardless, agreed that algorithms are probably shrinking the creative window.
That aside, these recommendations and autocompletions are especially pernicious because they seem so small and benign, to the point that we barely notice them happening. What's the big deal - you clicked on Descartes instead of Magritte today. But as we get hundreds (thousands?) of these algorithmic recommendations and autocompletions a day, the impact is very material.
Great points. "...shrinking the creative window..." is a good way to put it. I agree that humans may not have truly original thought. But if humans express a part of the broadest aperture, then it seems like technology is hardening around an even narrow part of it.
I also like your catch around how minor the individual acts can be, but the impact in aggregate. It feels like an example we see play out constantly right now. Minor impact on attention from a specific notification system or algorithmic feed, but it adds up. Minor impact from 'frictionless consumer purchasing', but it adds up to a new level of consumerism and materialism. And so on. That incrementalism that turns into a much larger effect over time will likely be one of the most stunning patterns when we look back.