When Everyone Can Make Everything, Your Fingerprints Matter Most

Black gloss bowl from Satricum showing the fingerprints left by the potter in the clay slip while dipping. Photo by A.E.M. Dekker (courtesy of Satricum Research Project).

My take on why AI won't kill creativity—it'll force us to become more creative in how we use and adapt to it. But there's a catch.

As generative AI swirls around us everywhere, a slow hunch is crystallizing. The easier technology makes it to create something, the more we need to find ways to leave our fingerprints on what that technology helped us create. It's like we're collectively discovering that when the barriers to making things disappear, the question shifts from "Can I make this?" to "How do I make this mine?" And the examples are everywhere.

When Cameras Made Painters Bolder

Picture this: 1878, Eadweard Muybridge settles a bet by capturing something no human eye had ever seen—all four hooves of a galloping horse suspended mid-air. One photograph, and suddenly everyone could freeze reality with perfect precision.

Logic says this should have killed painting. Instead? It set painting free. When cameras took over documenting what things looked like, painters discovered they could explore what things felt like. The Impressionists weren't trying to compete with cameras—they were doing something cameras couldn't touch.

But here's the part that keeps me up at night: not every painter made this leap. Some saw the writing on the wall and started experimenting early. Others... didn't.

The Vinyl Paradox

Fast forward to today's music world, where this pattern gets gloriously absurd. We made music practically free and infinitely accessible through streaming. The logical response? Vinyl records—the most analog, hands-on way to experience music—are outselling CDs for the first time since 1986.

Meanwhile, live concerts have become more precious than ever. When you can stream any song instantly, there's something almost magical about being in a room with other humans, watching someone create music in real time. We didn't abandon the digital revolution; we just discovered what it couldn't replace.

The AI Plot Twist

Which brings us to now. Silicon Valley keeps telling us AI will replace human work, that we'll all be lounging on universal basic income while robots handle the productive stuff. But I think they're missing something fundamental about what it means to be human—our deep need to create meaning, not just consume it. WALL-E is still my favorite movie, ever.

What if, instead of replacing human creativity, AI forces us to become more creative in how we use and adapt to it? What if it pushes us to develop entirely new forms of creative expression we haven't even imagined yet?

I'm seeing early signs everywhere, and they're pulling in fascinating directions. While AI can generate images, there's an explosion of interest in handmade crafts. People are paying premium prices for things that show clear human fingerprints—the slight irregularities, the creative decisions, the story of how it came to be.

But it's not just about going backward to older forms. Some of the most moving examples of human creativity are happening through new technology, not despite it. The Norwegian documentary "The Remarkable Life of Ibelin" reveals the rich, hidden creative life of a young man with ALS who built deep relationships and expressed profound humanity through World of Warcraft. Artists like Hsin Chien Huang are pushing VR and digital art into territories that feel more emotionally resonant than anything we could create without these tools.

The pattern isn't anti-technology versus pro-technology. It's about finding ways to leave your fingerprints on whatever medium you choose—whether that's clay, code, or virtual worlds.

The Lag Problem (This Part Actually Matters)

But here's the catch that keeps me awake: this transition isn't automatic, and the gap between old and new can be brutal. The American Rust Belt shows us what happens when entire communities aren't prepared for technological shifts. Some manufacturing cities recovered and thrived; others never did. The difference? Preparation.

We're in that crucial window right now with AI. The adjustment period that took decades in manufacturing is compressed into years. That's simultaneously terrifying and thrilling.

What Becomes Valuable When Anyone Can Create Anything?

When AI makes content creation accessible to everyone, the premium shifts from technical skill to something more interesting: cultural sophistication. Anyone can ask AI to write a story, but only humans can make that story matter—can infuse it with context, emotion, and genuine purpose.

It's like the photography-painting shift, but accelerated. The technical barriers are dissolving, but the cultural intelligence required for meaningful output is skyrocketing.

Some Thoughts on Not Getting Left Behind

Based on patterns from previous transitions, here's what seems to work:

Start experimenting with AI tools now, but focus on directing them toward uniquely human purposes. The goal isn't becoming a human computer—it's understanding how to use these tools while developing the cultural and emotional intelligence machines can't replicate.

Invest in "slow skills"—craftsmanship, deep thinking, relationship building, sourdough... While everyone else rushes to automate everything, these become more valuable as AI handles the fast stuff.

Document your process. In a world where AI can generate convincing content, your ability to show your thinking becomes valuable. Plus, it helps others learn from your expertise.

Build bridges between different domains. The most resilient people during technological transitions are those who can connect ideas across fields.

The Transparency Question

As AI gets better at mimicking human creativity, our ability to distinguish between human and machine output becomes crucial—not just for authenticity, but for navigating truth from fiction. The craftsperson who documents their process, the musician who shares their creative journey, the writer who reveals their research—they're not just creating content, they're creating context.

The Real Pattern

If I'm right about this, we're not headed toward a world where AI makes human creativity obsolete. We're headed toward a world where human creativity can become more intentional, more diverse, and more valuable—not despite AI, but because of it.

Some will go full analog, some will push the boundaries of human-AI collaboration, and many will dance fluidly between handcraft and high-tech. The key is starting that exploration now, while the possibilities are still wide open.

We're living through a moment of unprecedented creative possibility. The easier it gets to make things, the more human our choices about what to make become. And honestly? I find that pretty exciting.

What patterns are you noticing in your own field? Are you seeing this weird push-and-pull between automated creation and human-made meaning? I'm genuinely curious about your observations.

Report abuse