As the world becomes ever more chaotic, we must rely on creative principles that Ripplty tries to employ if we want to create a more desirable future
It shows a lack of creativity, intellectual rigour and perhaps most of all laziness that may lead not just to a homogenisation of art, but also a homogenisation of culture.
This quote from a recent article in the New Statesman titled AI art and the ruins of human creativity resonated with me.
The author critiques the impact of AI on creativity, warning of a future where artistic expression becomes bland and repetitive. While I agree with the concerns raised, I believe the roots of this problem extend far beyond AI. The laziness and homogenisation of creativity began with Web 2.0 (or the start of social media, which for many is considered the first real wave of AI with Big Data feeding recommendation algorithms, but it believe it started way before, since humans have made machines to optimise things, starting with the plough). The shift wasn’t just technological — it was driven by economic and social incentives that prioritised efficiency and over-performance over genuine creativity.
Following the 2008 crash, financial constraints pushed the creative act to become “efficient, optimized, and performant.” But creativity thrives on resistance, not shortcuts. You see this in the film and television industries, where studios endlessly recycle old ideas, stretch movies into series, or squeeze every last drop from existing franchises. Music platforms like Spotify once introduced users to novel sounds, but with major publishers in control, the platform now leans toward promoting formulaic pop hits for easy profits.
Social media further amplified this trend. As content became global, creators aimed to appeal to the lowest common denominator to maximise likes, shares, and engagement. Having worked in Global Marketing Design, I know firsthand how campaigns designed to resonate across diverse cultures often end up watered down, sacrificing impact for mass appeal.
Even the tools and platforms we rely on are designed for performance rather than creative exploration. TikTok is a glaring example — five-minute dance routines garner millions of views, while artists who dedicate years to mastering their craft receive only a fraction of that recognition.
The underlying issue is clear: incentives favour “more of the same” over “diversified quality.” This isn’t a phenomenon exclusive to AI. The AI era, Web 2.0, the PC and software era, and even the machine age are all products of economic and social systems that reward efficiency above all else.
There was a time when the question was, “How can I create something valuable for society using the least amount of energy and resources?” But in our societies, lulled by the illusion of limitless resources, the prevailing mindset has shifted to, “How can I make more money by doing the least amount of work, as quickly as possible?” Too often, this pursuit comes at the cost of mindless natural and human resource exploitation, the manipulation of politics and public opinion, and even wars — all to sustain this false sense of abundance.
If we are to break free from this cycle, we need to change the incentives. True creativity cannot flourish under the pressure of constant optimisation and profit extraction. Instead, we should foster environments where experimentation, curiosity, and risk-taking are celebrated. As we move into an increasingly chaotic world, we have a choice: either combat the chaos with ever more of the same incentives, more mindless natural and human resource exploitation, more manipulation of politics and public opinion, and ever more wars, leading to dystopian futures of extreme surveillance, rigid rules, and endless bureaucracy in the name of optimising performance. Or, we can courageously embrace the chaos by shifting towards genuine creativity, the kind that is needed to build systems that are resilient, dynamic, and capable of thriving in uncertainty.
This feels perhaps counter-intuitive, but over-combatting the chaos will only lead to more ever more chaos, generating very high entropy in the system. Of course we need some level of order, but it has to be done not in an over performative way, otherwise you will be judged guilty of crime until proven otherwise. In opposition, letting go and embracing it will reduce the entropy level in the system. It’s about this fine line to walk between order and chaos, just enough challenge and support, freedom and safety to allow for the creative beauty to flourish.