ODM (Original Design Manufacturing)
OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturing)

Fabless manufacturing/Foundry

국내에 크고 작은 화장품 브랜드 2만8000여 개가 치열하게 경쟁한다. 이렇게 많은 이유는 코스맥스, 한국콜마 같은 세계적인 ODM 업체가 품질 좋은 화장품을 위탁 생산해주는 덕분에 자체 공장 없이도 아이디어만으로 얼마든지 창업할 수 있기 때문이다. 시장도 한국을 넘어 세계를 대상으로 한다. 지난해 화장품 수출은 사상 처음 100억달러를 넘었다. 전년 대비 20.6% 늘었다. 올리브영의 호(好)실적은 선순환의 ‘K뷰티 생태계’에서 유통을 전담해 동반 성장한 결과라는 점에서 의미 있다.

자체 공장 없이도 아이디어만으로 얼마든지 창업

생산에 있어 비용 절감 → 아이디어 만으로 생산
시스템 속에 귀속된 것이 아니라, 시스템을 넘어서 시스템들을 무수히 생산하기

이것이 시스템 아트와 어떤 연관을 가질 것인가?

시스템 아트의 Significance: 시스템은 시뮬라시옹이다. 시스템이 시뮬라시옹임을 고발한다. 시스템을 넘어선다. 시스템을 계속해서 생성한다. 시스템을 무수히 많이 생성한다. 이제 문제는 시스템 속에서 어떻게 살아남을지가 아니라 시스템을 어떻게 생성할지, 어떤 시스템을 생성할지이다. 니체적인 의미에서 낙타/노예 → 아이. 아이는 시스템을 가지고 논다. 무수히 많이 생성하는것이다. ‘아이디어’ 만으로. 이것이 시스템 아트가 보여줄 수 있는 것.

이전까지의 인류는 시스템의 노예에, 부품에 불과하였다. 이제 인류는 시스템에 복수를 가한다. 무수히 많은 시스템들을 만들어냄으로써.

시스템을 넘어선 시스템의 생산들. Rapid Contextual Change. 시뮬리사옹에 대한 보복.

산업공학이 만들어낸 감옥을 산업디자인이 해방시킨다.

The text proposes that contemporary industrial practices—such as ODM, OEM, and fabless manufacturing—exemplify a system where production is no longer tied to owning physical factories but can be executed merely by an idea. In this context, any innovative concept can be rapidly transformed into a product because the manufacturing process has been abstracted and outsourced to highly efficient, scalable systems. This phenomenon exposes a key insight of system art:
System art reveals that systems themselves are simulacra.
 In other words, the industrial system is not a singular, static entity; rather, it is a reproduction—a series of automated, interchangeable, and rapidly generated processes. Just as Warhol mass-produced Campbell’s soup cans by merely changing the “flavor” (the superficial signifier) while retaining the same underlying form, modern industries enable the production of countless systems based solely on ideas. This mirrors Baudrillard’s notion of simulacra, where signs have detached from any fixed original and become self-referential.
Key points include:
Decoupling of Production from Physicality:
With world-class ODM companies, entrepreneurial ventures need only an idea to launch a product, illustrating how the traditional, factory-bound system has been replaced by a networked, automated production model.
This mirrors system art’s notion that the true “system” is hidden. We only see the output—like a facade—but not the underlying dynamics, just as we only perceive a fraction of a hyperobject (the elephant).
Rapid, Contextual System Generation:
The industrial model’s ability to mass-produce systems (and products) with minimal investment in physical infrastructure parallels the artistic concept of “rapid contextual change.”
System art envisions an environment where users can switch contexts quickly—substituting one sub-system (or “subgraph”) for another—thus generating a new system on the fly. This is a form of creative “rebellion” against the static, rigid production models of the past.
From System Slavery to System Creativity:
Historically, people were merely cogs in the industrial machine. Now, empowered by technology, individuals can generate and control entire systems simply through ideas.
In Nietzschean terms, the transformation from the “camel/slave” to the “child” represents the emergence of a playful, creative agency that “plays” with systems, generating new ones—effectively taking revenge on the system that once constrained them.
Industrial Engineering as a Double-Edged Sword:
Industrial engineering created highly efficient, optimized systems that functioned as a kind of “prison” for creativity. However, industrial design and system art now offer a way to break free from that rigidity.
By embracing rapid contextual changes, new generative processes, and modularity, system art not only critiques the mass reproduction and homogenization of industrial systems but also proposes a liberated mode of system creation.
In summary, the approach asserts that contemporary systems—by enabling mass production through ideas rather than physical assets—exemplify simulacra. System art, by adopting a state-based, modular, and interactive design (often expressed through multi-device web artworks), aims to expose this phenomenon. It challenges the status quo by proposing that instead of struggling to survive within a fixed system, humanity can take control by producing countless new systems. This shift, from being mere parts in an industrial mechanism to becoming creators of multiple, ever-changing systems, represents a radical liberation—a kind of “revenge” against the industrial engineering–created confinement.

Analysis from the Second Text’s Perspective (Auto-Generative Systems → K-Beauty ODM/OEM Phenomenon)
\t•\tThe second text proclaims a shift from serving a single monolithic system (the old industrial paradigm) toward multiplying and owning systems, generating new systems at will.
\t•\tIn that sense, Korea’s booming ODM/OEM cosmetics industry exemplifies auto-generative capacity: any individual or small group can rapidly create a new brand (a new “system”) without the burden of building factories or supply chains.
\t•\tThe second text imagines a future where you “no longer serve the system; systems serve you.” Likewise, with K-beauty’s ODM/OEM structure, the entrepreneurs no longer need to bend to a single, massive cosmetic manufacturer—they simply plug their idea into a generative/production ecosystem that spins up their brand.
\t•\tIn short, the K-beauty ecosystem concretizes the second text’s philosophy: we see the real-world manifestation of “Humans creating factories” rather than “Humans forced to become part of one large factory.”
Analysis from the First Text’s Perspective (K-Beauty ODM/OEM Phenomenon → Auto-Generative Systems)
\t•\tThe first text depicts a highly flexible, open-access manufacturing environment, allowing tens of thousands of brands to coexist and flourish. The system is no longer scarce or closed-off—any new idea can be turned into a product via ODM/OEM services.
\t•\tLooking at the second text’s grand vision of “infinite systems, infinite factories, infinite custom designs,” the K-Beauty example reveals how it works in practice:
\t•\tA single “factory system” (ODM) can spawn unbounded cosmetic brands (“systems” of their own).
\t•\tTraditional constraints of capital, scale, and industrial organization are loosened because the infrastructure is shared and on-demand.
\t•\tThus, from the vantage of the first text’s real market phenomenon, we see that the second text’s notion of “auto-generative systems” is not mere theory: we already witness a scaled-down, yet very real, version in K-Beauty.
A “Contaminated” Conclusion: Merging Both Texts
\t•\tBoth the proliferation of K-Beauty brands and the proclamation of “auto-generating auto-generative systems” share the same contextual continuity:
\t1.\tLiberation from a singular industrial system: Instead of one or a handful of giant factories dictating the terms, ordinary creators can command the means of production—or at least readily access them.
\t2.\tExplosion of multiplicity: Whether it is “creating infinite brand variations” or “generating infinite design factories,” the emphasis is on multiplying possibilities rather than being locked into standardized mass-production.
\t3.\tHuman-First vs. System-First: The second text’s reversal of Taylor’s dictum (“the system must be first”) clearly resonates with the K-beauty phenomenon, where entrepreneurs’ ideas—not monolithic corporate factories—take center stage. ODM providers become enabling tools rather than dominating owners.
Ultimately, the K-Beauty ODM/OEM case shows a tangible form of the second text’s philosophical vision:
\t•\t“Stop living in flats” / “Stop living in grids” is mirrored by the proliferation of thousands of unique cosmetic brands that break from uniform mass-production.
\t•\t“Create infinite amounts of alternative designs” is mirrored by the endless niche and mainstream product lines these new brands concoct.
\t•\t“From the labour for the system to creating system(s) that labour” becomes you, the brand founder, harnessing manufacturing systems so you don’t become someone else’s laborer.
In short, the two texts contaminate and amplify each other:
\t•\tThe K-Beauty example provides the concrete blueprint of how a multi-system, auto-generative future can operate at scale.
\t•\tThe second text’s philosophical stance interprets and elevates the K-Beauty phenomenon as a stepping stone toward an even more expansive “mass generation” of systems—be it cosmetics, factories, or entire business ecosystems.
Conclusion
Together, these texts illustrate a reality and a vision seamlessly woven: the ODM/OEM-driven K-beauty marketplace is a living instance of the second text’s ideal of auto-generative systems, where creativity is unchained from industrial constraints, and entrepreneurs author new systems rather than serving them. This “contamination” suggests a broader social and technological shift—from mass-producing identical goods in central factories to mass-producing the very factories, brands, and design logics themselves, all at human scale, on human terms.