That's a solid dose of insight and care! Many valid points along the way, and a big mouthful to reply to, but I will just, for now, look at one thing, the value of words, and its consequences.
I can see a possible future where we don't have anyone designated as the author of books, and we are not producing them at all, only to be distributed and bought by an audience – rather, books are being generated directly on the spot, for the listener (because they will more often than not be automatically converted to audiobooks) in an endless stream that even could be adjusted along the way, depending on the receiver's reactions.
The AI in the smartphone, or wherever the receiver gets the stories from, can sense reactions through the phone's sensors, but can also ask directly, "how do you like the story?" and "what would you like to happen next?"
The death of the book can, this way, become much more massive than you suggest in your article. Books will exist in the moment only, perhaps recorded for the one to whom they were made, but nobody else.
The same, of course, with movies and music (and news, talk shows, etc.)
There is a potential revolution coming up that will turn everything related to communication on it's head.
And the value? A few people will own the mechanisms for doing this, and they will probably also be able to claim a full copyright on everything produced. They will become more wealthy than anyone ever has been. They do not need to care about ethics, they'll have money instead.
We are talking about a big value for these words. In a sense. The combined value of all entertainment and communication. That is probably not peanuts.
One one hand, Jorgen, I do like the idea of "hyperpersonalisation" – when it comes to the creation of books, art or entertainment by the consumer. On the other hand, I think it would take a lot of mystery and the "sense of wonder" from the experience itself.
So, we could also ask, in this way, to what degree or extent is this idea of "hyperpersonalisation" beneficial for the consumer, for their experience and appreciation of the given piece? On one hand, I have seen TV series where you could choose what happens next – a compelling idea. Maybe this could somehow get intertwined even with the gaming experience, books, movies etc. On the other hand, if I were to imagine that I could tinker with, for example, movies like The Lord of the Rings, and change endings etc. – it seems like it might lose a ton of its value, because the value resides in how it was made in the first place (with what was in the cast's disposal etc.) – I believe this also gives value to many other pieces of literature or art (it's either the colours or the atmosphere of the given age, or the language that was used at the time etc.)
When it comes to value, then, or producing something timeless – I guess we are already "over" that, and no such things will exist? Everything will be hyperpersonalised and changing. The value then, it seems and as you suggest, will no longer reside in the words/picture/colour.. or even the idea (or whatever the artist created), but rather in the experience of the consumer?
I am not myself a fan of the idea, but as it is possible, and as people like both streaming contents without too much trouble to pick what they want, as well as a nurturing treatment from the surroundings, I believe that many people will buy in to the idea.
Actually they already do, more or less, with their Spotify or Audible subscriptions where they get a lot of things they had never even known existed.
I think that it is so easy and smooth that people will buy it.
But even if they won't, then, what happens if this is the only way to get entertained? If publishers have stopped publishing the traditional books? I think that we are under the influence of business interest already, and there is obviously more focus on names of the presence, and streaming contents of dubious quality, than on the classics.
I agree that we lose a lot of value by abandoning the traditional, fixed, story, but there is already so much value being lost these days that it looks to me like most people don't care about it. They want an immediate kick, not a connection to the past.
From a provider's point of view, the personalized model will be amazing: nobody will copy anything, as there is always something new available, just for you, and if everything is personalized, then it won't be interesting for others anyway. People cannot gather around texts, not even news, cannot riot – because they do not have the same image of the world, have no idea what each other knows, and all they can do and want to do is to have their personal storyteller in the ear all the time. Like having their mother read bedtime stories to them non-stop.
It will be a too tempting perspective for many to ignore.
I think you're absolutely right that we will see this sort of personalisation. We already do with our social media feeds, our streaming network recommendations and our suggested playlists in streaming media.
I do think though that there may be a human led backlash against it, purists as such, like artistic luddites. Whether they too (and I'd count myself amongst them) become a footnote in history, or an Amish-esque curiosity, is another matter.
Yes, I agree. There will be reactions, and we see that already from techniques-tired young people who go "dumb phone" and no TV. So, no matter what future we can imagine, there will not only be that.
The world has several strings on which we climb, and also some strains that we cannot avoid. But between all this is a space where we can hide for a while, until we are found. A bit like "Brave New Electron World" by Ira Levin, that offers a refuge, but only in order to catch those who aim for it.
That's a solid dose of insight and care! Many valid points along the way, and a big mouthful to reply to, but I will just, for now, look at one thing, the value of words, and its consequences.
I can see a possible future where we don't have anyone designated as the author of books, and we are not producing them at all, only to be distributed and bought by an audience – rather, books are being generated directly on the spot, for the listener (because they will more often than not be automatically converted to audiobooks) in an endless stream that even could be adjusted along the way, depending on the receiver's reactions.
The AI in the smartphone, or wherever the receiver gets the stories from, can sense reactions through the phone's sensors, but can also ask directly, "how do you like the story?" and "what would you like to happen next?"
The death of the book can, this way, become much more massive than you suggest in your article. Books will exist in the moment only, perhaps recorded for the one to whom they were made, but nobody else.
The same, of course, with movies and music (and news, talk shows, etc.)
There is a potential revolution coming up that will turn everything related to communication on it's head.
And the value? A few people will own the mechanisms for doing this, and they will probably also be able to claim a full copyright on everything produced. They will become more wealthy than anyone ever has been. They do not need to care about ethics, they'll have money instead.
We are talking about a big value for these words. In a sense. The combined value of all entertainment and communication. That is probably not peanuts.
One one hand, Jorgen, I do like the idea of "hyperpersonalisation" – when it comes to the creation of books, art or entertainment by the consumer. On the other hand, I think it would take a lot of mystery and the "sense of wonder" from the experience itself.
So, we could also ask, in this way, to what degree or extent is this idea of "hyperpersonalisation" beneficial for the consumer, for their experience and appreciation of the given piece? On one hand, I have seen TV series where you could choose what happens next – a compelling idea. Maybe this could somehow get intertwined even with the gaming experience, books, movies etc. On the other hand, if I were to imagine that I could tinker with, for example, movies like The Lord of the Rings, and change endings etc. – it seems like it might lose a ton of its value, because the value resides in how it was made in the first place (with what was in the cast's disposal etc.) – I believe this also gives value to many other pieces of literature or art (it's either the colours or the atmosphere of the given age, or the language that was used at the time etc.)
When it comes to value, then, or producing something timeless – I guess we are already "over" that, and no such things will exist? Everything will be hyperpersonalised and changing. The value then, it seems and as you suggest, will no longer reside in the words/picture/colour.. or even the idea (or whatever the artist created), but rather in the experience of the consumer?
I am not myself a fan of the idea, but as it is possible, and as people like both streaming contents without too much trouble to pick what they want, as well as a nurturing treatment from the surroundings, I believe that many people will buy in to the idea.
Actually they already do, more or less, with their Spotify or Audible subscriptions where they get a lot of things they had never even known existed.
I think that it is so easy and smooth that people will buy it.
But even if they won't, then, what happens if this is the only way to get entertained? If publishers have stopped publishing the traditional books? I think that we are under the influence of business interest already, and there is obviously more focus on names of the presence, and streaming contents of dubious quality, than on the classics.
I agree that we lose a lot of value by abandoning the traditional, fixed, story, but there is already so much value being lost these days that it looks to me like most people don't care about it. They want an immediate kick, not a connection to the past.
From a provider's point of view, the personalized model will be amazing: nobody will copy anything, as there is always something new available, just for you, and if everything is personalized, then it won't be interesting for others anyway. People cannot gather around texts, not even news, cannot riot – because they do not have the same image of the world, have no idea what each other knows, and all they can do and want to do is to have their personal storyteller in the ear all the time. Like having their mother read bedtime stories to them non-stop.
It will be a too tempting perspective for many to ignore.
I think you're absolutely right that we will see this sort of personalisation. We already do with our social media feeds, our streaming network recommendations and our suggested playlists in streaming media.
I do think though that there may be a human led backlash against it, purists as such, like artistic luddites. Whether they too (and I'd count myself amongst them) become a footnote in history, or an Amish-esque curiosity, is another matter.
Yes, I agree. There will be reactions, and we see that already from techniques-tired young people who go "dumb phone" and no TV. So, no matter what future we can imagine, there will not only be that.
The world has several strings on which we climb, and also some strains that we cannot avoid. But between all this is a space where we can hide for a while, until we are found. A bit like "Brave New Electron World" by Ira Levin, that offers a refuge, but only in order to catch those who aim for it.