The need for self-expression influences individuals in their preferences for goods and how they obtain them. One way for individuals to express themselves is through the prosumption of original unique goods. It is explained how the traditional trade-off between the originality and economy of such goods can be addressed through applications of artificial intelligence. However, although applications of artificial intelligence can transcend the originality/economy trade-off, they cannot transcend differences between cultures that value scarcity and cultures that value sharing. Nonetheless, applications of artificial intelligence can expand human self-expression because they can reduce barriers, such as lack of production skills, to prosumers realizing their own original ideas. With reference to technologies’ cultural domestication, it is explained that rather than artificial intelligence being either a miracle or a monster, the potential of artificial intelligence is mediated by multiple considerations.
AchterhuisH (2002) Borgmann, technology and the good life? And the empirical turn for philosophy of technology. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology6(1): 64–75.
2.
AgrawalMKumareshTVMercerGA (2002) The false promise of mass customization. The McKinsey Quarterly38(3): 62–71.
3.
AndersonC (2006) The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More, New York: Hyperion.
4.
AndersonCW (2012) Towards a sociology of computational and algorithmic journalism. New Media & Society15(7): 1005–1021.
5.
ArnouldEJThompsonCJ (2005) Consumer culture theory (CCT): Twenty years of research. Journal of Consumer Research31(4): 868–882.
6.
BanduraA (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
BongMClarkRE (1999) Comparison between self-concept and self-efficacy in academic motivation research. Educational Psychologist34(3): 139–153.
9.
BowlbyR (2001) Carried Away: The Invention of Modern Shopping, New York: Columbia University Press.
10.
BrynjolfssonEMcAfeeA (2014) The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
11.
BuehenAKarmannASchneiderF (2009) Shadow economy and do-it-yourself activities: The German case. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics165(4): 701–722.
12.
CalasibettaCTortoraPAblingB (2002) The Fairchild Dictionary of Fashion, 3rd edn. New York: Fairchild Books.
13.
CampbellC (2005) The craft consumer: Culture, craft and consumption in a postmodern society. Journal of Consumer Culture5(1): 23–42.
14.
ContiMDasbSKBisdikianCet al. (2012) Looking ahead in pervasive computing: Challenges and opportunities in the era of cyber–physical convergence. Pervasive and Mobile Computing8(1): 2–21.
15.
Cosido O, Iglesias A, Galvez A, et al. (2014) Hybridization of convergent photogrammetry, computer vision, and artificial intelligence for digital documentation of cultural heritage. In: Proceedings of cyberworlds (CW) 2014 international conference on cyberworlds, Santander, 6–8 October, pp. 369–376. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
16.
DescartesR ([1642] 1984) Meditations on first philosophy. In: CottinghamJStoothoffRMurdochD (eds) The Philosophical Writings of Descartes (Vol. 2), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–50.
17.
FeatherstoneM (1991) Consumer Culture and Postmodernism, London: Sage.
18.
FoxS (2011) A preliminary methodology for generative production systems. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management22(3): 348–364.
19.
FoxS (2014) Potential of virtual-social-physical convergence for project manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management25(8): 1209–1223.
20.
FranklinA (2007) Posthumanism. In: RitzerG (ed.) The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 3548–3550.
21.
GoldbergK (2015) Multiplicity has more potential than singularity. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering12(2): 395.
GrusecJ (1992) Social learning theory and developmental psychology: The legacies of Robert Sears and Albert Bandura. Developmental Psychology28(5): 776–786.
24.
GurtooASarupVWilliamsCC (2010) Explaining the do-it-yourself (DIY) retail market in a developing country: Preliminary lessons from India. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research20(3): 335–351.
25.
Habib L (2005) Domesticating learning technologies in a higher education institution: A tale of two virtual learning environments. In: Bjarnø V (ed.) New Teaching and Learning Practices: Experiences with e-Learning Projects at Oslo University College 1998–2005. Oslo: Oslo University College, pp. 79–87.
26.
HendlerJ (2008) Avoiding another AI winter. IEEE Intelligent Systems23(2): 2–4.
27.
HirschF (1977) The Social Limits to Growth, London: Routledge.
KindA (2001) Putting the image back in imagination. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research62: 85–109.
32.
Knorr-CetinaK (2007) Postsocial. In: RitzerG (ed.) The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 3578–3580.
33.
KopytoffI (1986) The cultural biography of things: Commoditization as process. In: AppaduraiA (ed.) The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 64–91.
34.
KrishS (2011) A practical generative design method. Computer-Aided Design43(1): 88–100.
LeeDKimHSKimJK (2012) The role of self-construal in consumers’ electronic word of mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites: A social cognitive approach. Computers in Human Behavior28(3): 1054–1062.
37.
LehtonenT-K (2003) The domestication of new technologies as a set of trials. Journal of Consumer Culture3(3): 363–385.
38.
LichtmanSA (2006) Do-it-yourself security. Journal of Design History19(1): 39–55.
39.
MarxLSmithMR (1994) Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
40.
MillerLJ (1995) Family togetherness and the suburban ideal. Sociological Forum10(3): 393–418.
41.
MoisioRArnouldEJGentryJW (2013) Productive consumption in the class-mediated construction of domestic masculinity: Do-It-Yourself (DIY) home improvement in men’s identity work. Journal of Consumer Research40(2): 298–316.
42.
NelsonMK (2004) How men matter: Housework and self-provisioning among rural single-mother and married-couple families in Vermont, US. Feminist Economics10(2): 9–36.
OlssonT (2012) Arduino Wearables, New York: Springer Science + Business Media.
45.
PaganoU (1999) Is power an economic good? Notes on social scarcity and the economics of positional goods. In: BowlesSFranziniMPaganoU (eds) The Politics and the Economics of Power, London: Routledge, pp. 116–145.
46.
PantzarM (1997) Domestication of everyday life technology: Dynamic views on social histories of artifacts. Design Issues13(3): 52–65.
47.
PerkyCW (1910) An experimental study of imagination. American Journal of Psychology21: 422–452.
48.
PhanVTChooSY (2010) Interior design in augmented reality environment. International Journal of Computer Applications5(5): 16–21.
49.
PowC-PKongL (2007) Marketing the Chinese dream home: Gated communities and representations of the good life in (post-)socialist Shanghai. Urban Geography28(2): 129–159.
50.
RadinM (1996) Contested Commodities, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51.
RitzerG (2013 [1993]) The McDonaldization of Society, Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
52.
RitzerG (2014) Prosumption: Evolution, revolution, or eternal return of the same?Journal of Consumer Culture14(1): 3–25.
53.
RitzerG (2015) Automating prosumption: The decline of the prosumer and the rise of the prosuming machines. Journal of Consumer Culture15(3): 407–424.
54.
RutkinA (2014) Art by algorithm: Computer evolves new artworks. New Scientist223(2979): 20.
55.
SassL (2007) Synthesis of design production with integrated digital fabrication. Automation in Construction16(3): 298–310.
56.
SchauHJ (2000) Consumer imagination, identity and self-expression. In: HochSJMeyerRJ (eds) Advances in Consumer Research (Vol. 27), Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, pp. 50–56.
57.
SilverstoneRHaddonL (1996) Design and the domestication of information and communication technologies: Technical change and everyday life. In: MansellRSilverstoneR (eds) Communication by Design, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 44–74.
58.
SilverstoneRHirschEMorleyD (1992) The moral economy of the household. In: SilverstoneRHirschE (eds) Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Spaces, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 15–31.
59.
SinghVGuN (2012) Towards an integrated generative design framework. Design Studies33(2): 185–207.
60.
SlaterD (1997) Consumer Culture and Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press.
61.
SmitM (2006) Taming monsters: The cultural domestication of new technologies. Technology in Society28(4): 489–504.
62.
SongHGuimbretiereFLipsonH (2009) Capturing freehand annotations and edits to facilitate the 3D model design process using a digital pen. ACM Transactions of Computer-Human Interaction16(3): 14–33.
63.
ThomasJBPetersCO (2011) Which dress do you like? Exploring brides’ online communities. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing2(3): 148–160.
64.
TianKBelkRW (2005) Extended self and possessions in the workplace. Journal of Consumer Research32(2): 297–310.
65.
VaidyanathanRAggarwalPStemDEet al. (2000) Deal evaluation and purchase intention: The impact of aspirational and market-based internal reference prices. Journal of Product & Brand Management9(3): 179–192.
VigneronFJohnsonL (1999) A review and a conceptual framework of prestige-seeking consumer behaviour. Academy of Marketing Science Review23(1): 1–15.
69.
WatsonMShoveE (2008) Product, competence, project and practice. Journal of Consumer Culture8(1): 69–89.
70.
WhiteA (1990) The Language of Imagination, Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
71.
WilliamsCC (2004) A lifestyle choice? Evaluating the motives of do-it-yourself (DIY) consumers. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management32(5): 270–278.
72.
WoodwardI (2003) Divergent narratives in the imagining of the home amongst middle-class consumers – Aesthetics, comfort and the symbolic boundaries of self and home. Journal of Sociology39(4): 391–412.
