>you 're speaking of a different thing. No, I was responding to your claim of smartphone technology being the barrier to creativity by the mainstream audience:

>you 're speaking of a different thing. No, I was responding to your claim of smartphone technology being the barrier to creativity by the mainstream audience: >smartphone [...], it just removes most of the optionality for creativity leaving a device that does one thing well: consume mindnumbing amounts of trivial information.[...] But when all that creativity is funneled through single-purpose devices, it evaporates. That claim assumes that there's a pent up wave of creativity that's being held back by smartphones. However, that misunderstands the fact that new technology doesn't really change the ratio of the people expressing creativity vs those that consume it. There wasn't really any massive creativity to "evaporate"; the desire to "be creative" was never there in the mainstream audience. You can't put the blame on technologies such as smartphones / Gutenberg press / pen & paper.