I don't think they're getting more digital and disembodied. I do think they've become far more homogenised and corporate and far less individual and authentical

I don't think they're getting more digital and disembodied. I do think they've become far more homogenised and corporate and far less individual and authentically creative. And tech has enabled that. There are countless examples. In the arts, artists would literally start with a blank canvas and fill it with imagination. Trad media are almost infinitely flexible. You can paint extreme photo-realism with oils, or extreme abstraction, or something between them. The limiting factor is imagination, not the medium. Photoshop, Illustrator, and AI art generators are far more limited. You start with a set of standard tools which force you to approach creativity in standard ways. If you're in a hurry you can click-bang with a plugin. Behind this are uniform corporate expectations of how art and design are supposed to be styled. Example: currently images are supposed to be generic flat cartoony characters doing useful things. There's plenty of inoffensively tame corporate blue and/or green, some nice rounded maybe slightly quirky sans serif fonts, and standard layouts and sections. Sites that want to seem a little more exciting use red and orange - still pale though - and perhaps some actual photos. It's all so tame. So is corporate productivity culture - to do lists, self-improvement, efficiency, fitness. And so on. There's almost no randomness, unscheduled weirdness, surprise, or creative passion. (Real passion, not corporate "yes I'm passionate please hire me.") When was the last time anyone was genuinely surprised by something they saw online? Not in the "Cool meme!" or "OK quite edgy" sense - but in the "Who ordered that and where did it come from, actually this is amazing" sense. There's a sense in which all of this is like Newspeak. It actively trains people not to be too original or imaginative. I don't think that's a good thing.