"intention density" is behind the visceral difference between AI outputs that feel beautiful, human, designed vs. uninspired/slop
it points at something much more specific than taste: how many distinct, willful decisions went into an output? how much of its structure can be attributed to intentionality vs. inevitability?
when I watch a Ghibli film, I know that every detail and expression in every frame has been crafted with specific intent (Miyazaki personally drew/edited 80,000 of 144,000 frames in Princess Mononoke). I can feel the creator through the creation.
in contrast, AI tools encourage work with far lower intention density by default.
starting from a blank canvas, you're forced to confront thousands of micro decisions to create a final output. but now that you can write a one-sentence prompt and get a full app or video one-shot, all of these decisions get outsourced, often without you noticing they exist. there can still be high intention in the final work (ex: codex generated apps still feeling pretty good), but the source of this intention is "the way things are usually done" (coming from the model) rather than a particular vision or design.
there's no reason AI output has to be like this though
we can think of the creative process in 2 parts:
1. intention - what do you want to create? why?
2. execution - how do you create it?
AI agents will clearly replace ~100% of the execution part of the creative process. they already have in software and will soon be in film/animation. as they shift up the chain and replace intention as well, creative output starts to feel more trite and indistinguishable.
but for those who are careful to preserve and expand rather than offload their intentionality, they have more time than ever to focus on the details and create far more/better software, art, etc.