Scarcity, value, and image generation AI

We have heard the arguments for image generation AI, that it allows you to unleash your creativity even if you do not have the artistic skills necessary for giving form to the images in your mind. But before we plunge deep into AI, we need to ask ourselves, what is value?

Economics may sound like some deep academic stuff, but at its core, it is just a way of trying to explain how we make certain decisions in life, as an individual and as a group (whether as small groups, markets, countries, or society as a whole). One basic economic concept is the relationship between value and scarcity. Put simply, a thing has value because it is scarce, i.e. there is a limited amount of it available. For example, in the early days of the Industrial Revolution, business owners paid people to work in their factories because human labour was limited (a factor of the population size). An example closer to image generation AI would be the Mona Lisa, which is valuable because there is only one such copy in existence. The works of Leonardo da Vinci are valuable because no new da Vinci work can ever be created now that he is dead.

What then is the value of an illustration, for example? An illustration comes from two elements: the imagination and creativity of the illustrator, plus the skill of the illustrator. Imagination and creativity are subjective, but skill takes time to develop and is therefore easier to peg a value to, in terms of how scarce it is. While the overall value of an illustration may come from both the subjective element (imagination and creativity) and the illustrator's skill, in the end, in a practical sense, it is largely affected by skill.

So if we take skill out of the equation through the use of image generation AI, what remains of the value? Why would anyone pay anything for your work, which is based on the subjective element of your imagination and creativity, when they can easily generate their own works that appeal to their own tastes? If we see art as valuable because it is scarce, due to the limitation in the number of people with the skills to create them, would not the removal of scarcity result in the removal of value from art itself? In the end, does image generation AI allow us to generate more value, or does it remove the concept of value from art?

Update 7 February 2024: A comment I made on YouTube.

"AI will kill skill-learning, which in turn kills the evolution of that skill. So, if as a society, we think a skill is not worth keeping and don't mind it dying, then I think AI should be used to substitute that skill."