There is more to it than being information-rich or information-poor. A pile of junk is information-rich, but it's not beautiful. It comes down to style and tast

There is more to it than being information-rich or information-poor. A pile of junk is information-rich, but it's not beautiful. It comes down to style and taste. The house looks organic. Like it has been grown instead of built. Gaudi's buildings have the same style. I think there is a lot of appeal in the organic style, it's a pity it's so rare. The computational properties of style are explored in Douglas Hofstadter's book "Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies" (I recommend it to any hacker interested in aesthetics or cognitive science, but it is not an easy read): http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465024750?ie=UTF8&tag=descidecom-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0465024750 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465024750?ie=UTF8&tag=... Interestingly, computers can eventually make an assembly line produce unique stylish (organic or otherwise) things. Fractal images are, after all, beautiful, even being totally regular. Certain amount of randomness can do wonders. Of course computers are similarly supposed to enable mass customization for physical things which is probably more important economically, and it hasn't happened yet.