Sometimes I think researchers do not understand second-order effects of their pet theories.
The societal/market result of stuff like this will inevitably be something like "Let's crowdsource more of these creative activities, so we can drive down the already rock-bottom compensation rates of the few jobs that cannot be automated - this research says we're not going to lose anything on the quality side anyway". In the (laudable) quest to make amateurs respectable, they might well end up stripping even professionals of what little respectability they had accrued.
It's likely that democratization of creativity is a fundamentally unstoppable force in itself (like we've seen in photography, music, video etc); there is no need to hasten its rise though.
The societal/market result of stuff like this will inevitably be something like "Let's crowdsource more of these creative activities, so we can drive down the already rock-bottom compensation rates of the few jobs that cannot be automated - this research says we're not going to lose anything on the quality side anyway". In the (laudable) quest to make amateurs respectable, they might well end up stripping even professionals of what little respectability they had accrued.
It's likely that democratization of creativity is a fundamentally unstoppable force in itself (like we've seen in photography, music, video etc); there is no need to hasten its rise though.