Steam, Steel, and Infinite Intelligence

深潮發佈於 2025-12-29更新於 2025-12-29

文章摘要

Steam, Steel, and Infinite Intelligence Each era is defined by its core technological material: steel forged the Gilded Age, semiconductors enabled the digital age, and now, AI arrives as infinite intelligence. History shows that those who master the material define the era. Today, AI often resembles a supercharged search engine, but we are in an uncomfortable transition period. The future of knowledge work can be envisioned through historical metaphors. At the individual level, AI transition is like moving from a bicycle to a car. Top practitioners, like programmers, are already becoming managers of infinite intelligence, achieving 30-40x productivity gains. For others to follow, two key problems must be solved: fragmented context across dozens of tools and a lack of verifiability for general knowledge work. Once these are addressed, billions will move from "bicycles" to "cars" and eventually to "autopilot." For organizations, AI is the new steel and steam. Companies historically lose efficiency as they scale, burdened by human-scale communication. AI, like steel, can provide coherent context and decision-making support, allowing companies to scale without decay. Like the steam engine, it will enable a complete reimagining of workflows beyond simply replacing old tools, moving from water wheels to powerful, always-on intelligence. For the entire economy, this shift mirrors the transition from a human-scale city like Florence to a modern megacity. The knowledge economy, ...

Written by: Ivan Zhao, Notion CEO

Compiled by: AididiaoJP, Foresight News

Each era is shaped by its unique technological raw materials. Steel forged the Gilded Age, semiconductors ushered in the digital age. Today, artificial intelligence arrives in the form of infinite intelligence. History tells us: those who master the raw materials define the era.

Left: Young Andrew Carnegie and his brother. Right: A steel mill in Pittsburgh during the Gilded Age.

In the 1850s, Andrew Carnegie was a telegraph messenger running through the muddy streets of Pittsburgh, a time when six out of ten Americans were farmers. Just two generations later, Carnegie and his peers forged the modern world—horses gave way to railroads, candlelight to electric light, iron to steel.

Since then, work has shifted from factories to offices. Today, I run a software company in San Francisco, building tools for thousands of knowledge workers. In this tech town, everyone is talking about Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), but the majority of the two billion office workers worldwide have yet to feel its presence. What will knowledge work look like soon? What happens when organizations are infused with intelligence that never rests?

Early films often resembled stage plays, with a single camera pointed at the stage.

The future is often hard to predict because it is always disguised as the past. Early phone calls were as brief as telegrams; early films were like recorded stage plays. As Marshall McLuhan said: "We look at the present through a rear-view mirror. We march backwards into the future."

Today's most common form of AI still looks like the Google search of the past. Quoting McLuhan: "We look at the present through a rear-view mirror." Today, we see AI chatbots that imitate the search box. We are deep in that uncomfortable transition period that occurs with every technological shift.

I don't have all the answers for what the future holds. But I like to use a few historical metaphors to think about how AI might operate at different levels: the individual, the organization, and the entire economy.

Individual: From Bicycle to Car

The first signs can be seen in the "high-level practitioners" of knowledge work: programmers.

My co-founder Simon was once a "10x programmer," but lately he rarely writes code by hand. Walking by his desk, you'd see him orchestrating three or four AI programming assistants simultaneously. These assistants not only type faster but also think, making him a 30 to 40 times more efficient engineer. He often queues up tasks before lunch or bed, letting the AI work while he's away. He has become a manager of infinite intelligence.

A 1970s Scientific American study on locomotion efficiency inspired Steve Jobs' famous "bicycle for the mind" metaphor. But for decades since, we've been "pedaling bicycles" on the information superhighway.

In the 1980s, Steve Jobs called the personal computer a "bicycle for the mind." A decade later, we paved the "information superhighway" called the internet. But today, most knowledge work still relies on human power. It's like we've been riding bicycles on a highway.

With AI assistants, people like Simon have upgraded from riding bicycles to driving cars.

When will other types of knowledge workers get to "drive cars"? Two problems must be solved.

Why is AI-assisted knowledge work harder than programming assistance? Because knowledge work is more fragmented and harder to verify.

First is contextual fragmentation. In programming, tools and context are often centralized: the IDE, code repository, terminal. But general knowledge work is scattered across dozens of tools. Imagine an AI assistant trying to draft a product brief: it needs information from Slack threads, strategy docs, last quarter's data in a dashboard, and organizational memory that only exists in someone's head. For now, humans are the glue, copy-pasting and switching browser tabs to piece everything together. As long as context isn't integrated, AI assistants will be limited to narrow uses.

The second missing element is verifiability. Code has a magical property: you can verify it through tests and errors. Model developers use this, training AIs to code better through reinforcement learning, etc. But how do you verify if a project is well-managed or a strategy memo is excellent? We haven't found a way to improve general knowledge work models. Thus, humans must remain in the loop to supervise, guide, and demonstrate what is "good."

The 1865 Red Flag Act required cars on public roads to be preceded by a person on foot waving a red flag (repealed in 1896).

This year's programming assistant practice shows that "human-in-the-loop" isn't always ideal. It's like having a person check every bolt on an assembly line, or walk ahead of a car to clear the path (see the 1865 Red Flag Act). We should have humans supervising the loop from a higher level, not being inside it. Once context is integrated and work becomes verifiable, billions of workers will shift from "pedaling bicycles" to "driving cars," and from "driving" to "autopilot."

Organization: Steel and Steam

Companies are a modern invention. They become less effective as they scale, eventually hitting limits.

1855 organizational chart of the New York and Erie Railroad. The modern corporation and its structure evolved with railroads, the first enterprises requiring coordination of thousands over long distances.

A few hundred years ago, most companies were workshops of a dozen people. Today we have multinationals with hundreds of thousands of employees. The communication infrastructure—meetings and human brains connected by messages—buckles under exponentially growing loads. We try to solve it with hierarchies, processes, and documents, but this is like building skyscrapers with wood—using human-scale tools to solve industrial-scale problems.

Two historical metaphors show how the future might look different when organizations gain new technological raw materials.

The miracle of steel: The Woolworth Building in New York, completed in 1913, was once the world's tallest building.

The first is steel. Before steel, 19th-century buildings were limited to six or seven stories. Iron was strong but brittle and heavy; add floors, and the structure would collapse under its own weight. Steel changed everything. It is strong and flexible, frames can be lighter, walls thinner, buildings soared to dozens of stories, making new types of architecture possible.

AI is the "steel" for organizations. It promises to maintain contextual coherence across workflows, presenting decisions when needed without noise. Human communication no longer has to be the load-bearing wall. Weekly two-hour alignment meetings might become five-minute asynchronous reviews; executive decisions requiring three layers of approval might be done in minutes. Companies can truly scale without the efficiency decay we've come to accept as inevitable.

A mill powered by a waterwheel. Water power was powerful but unreliable and limited by location and season.

The second story is about the steam engine. In the early Industrial Revolution, early textile factories were built by rivers, powered by waterwheels. When steam engines appeared, owners initially just replaced the waterwheel with a steam engine, everything else remained the same, and productivity gains were limited.

The real breakthrough came when owners realized they could completely break free from the water source. They built larger factories near workers, ports, and raw materials, and redesigned the layout around the steam engine (later, with electrification, owners further broke free from the central power shaft, distributing small motors throughout the factory to power different machines). Productivity exploded, and the Second Industrial Revolution truly took off.

An 1835 engraving by Thomas Allom depicting a steam-powered textile mill in Lancashire, England.

We are still in the "replacing the waterwheel" stage. Stuffing AI chatbots into workflows designed for humans, we haven't yet reimagined what organizations will look like when old constraints vanish and companies can run on infinite intelligence that works while you sleep.

At my company Notion, we've been experimenting. Besides 1,000 employees, we now have over 700 AI assistants handling repetitive work: taking meeting notes, answering questions to consolidate team knowledge, handling IT requests, logging customer feedback, helping new hires with benefits, writing weekly status reports to avoid manual copy-pasting... This is just toddling. The real potential is limited only by our imagination and inertia.

Economy: From Florence to Megacities

Steel and steam changed not just buildings and factories, but cities.

Until a few hundred years ago, cities were on a human scale. You could walk across Florence in forty minutes; the pace of life was set by walking distance and the range of the human voice.

Then, steel frames made skyscrapers possible; steam engine-powered railroads connected city centers with hinterlands; elevators, subways, and highways followed. The scale and density of cities exploded—Tokyo, Chongqing, Dallas.

These are not just enlarged Florences; they are全新的 ways of life. Megacities are disorienting, anonymous, hard to navigate. This "illegibility" is the price of scale. But they also offer more opportunity, more freedom, supporting more people in more diverse combinations doing more activities than was possible in human-scale Renaissance cities.

I believe the knowledge economy is about to undergo the same transformation.

Today, knowledge work accounts for nearly half of US GDP, but its operation mostly remains on a human scale: teams of dozens, workflows dependent on meeting and email rhythms, organizations that struggle past a hundred people... We've been building "Florences" out of stone and wood.

When AI assistants are deployed at scale, we will build "Tokyos": organizations composed of thousands of AIs and humans; workflows that run continuously across time zones without waiting for someone to wake up; decisions synthesized with just the right amount of human input.

It will be a different experience: faster, with more leverage, but also disorienting at first. The rhythms of weekly meetings, quarterly planning, annual reviews might no longer fit; new rhythms will emerge. We will lose some legibility, but we will gain scale and speed.

Beyond the Waterwheel

Each technological material demands that people stop looking through the rear-view mirror and start imagining the new world. Carnegie gazed at steel and saw city skylines; the Lancashire mill owner looked at the steam engine and saw factory floors away from rivers.

We are still in the "waterwheel stage" of AI, cramming chatbots into workflows designed for humans. We shouldn't just settle for AI as a co-pilot; we need to imagine: what will knowledge work look like when human organizations are reinforced with steel, when trivial work is delegated to intelligence that never rests.

Steel, steam, and infinite intelligence. The next skyline is ahead, waiting for us to build it.

相關問答

QWhat historical metaphor does the author use to describe the transition of knowledge workers with AI assistants?

AThe author uses the metaphor of moving from 'riding a bicycle' to 'driving a car' to describe how AI assistants will transform knowledge work, similar to how personal computers were once called 'bicycles for the mind' but AI now enables a more powerful shift.

QAccording to the article, what are the two main problems that must be solved for AI to assist general knowledge work effectively?

AThe two main problems are contextual fragmentation, where knowledge work is scattered across dozens of tools, and verifiability, as it's harder to validate the quality of general knowledge work compared to code which can be tested and debugged.

QHow does the author compare AI to the historical impact of steel on architecture?

AThe author compares AI to steel by stating that just as steel allowed buildings to scale to skyscrapers by being strong and flexible, AI will allow organizations to scale efficiently by maintaining contextual coherence and reducing reliance on human communication as 'load-bearing walls'.

QWhat does the 'waterwheel phase' refer to in the context of AI adoption?

AThe 'waterwheel phase' refers to the current early adoption stage where AI is being awkwardly integrated into existing human-designed workflows, similar to how steam engines were initially used to replace waterwheels without reimagining the entire system.

QWhat future shift in the knowledge economy does the author predict using the analogy of cities?

AThe author predicts that the knowledge economy will shift from human-scale 'Florence-like' operations to AI-enabled 'Tokyo-like' mega-organizations, with thousands of humans and AIs collaborating across time zones, enabling greater scale, speed, and opportunity despite initial disorientation.

你可能也喜歡

越过“内存墙”,AI推理时代的晶圆级革命与算力路线

2026年,AI产业进入新拐点:全球主要云厂商的推理资本支出首次超过训练。这意味着算力需求核心从“炼模型”转向“用模型”,瓶颈也从计算规模变为“内存墙”——即数据在GPU与片外存储间搬运带来的高能耗与延迟。 为突破内存墙,Cerebras公司选择了“晶圆级计算”的激进路线。其核心产品WSE-3不切割晶圆,直接制成超大芯片,集成90万个AI核心和44GB片上SRAM,带来远超传统GPU(如英伟达B200)的片上内存带宽。其架构将模型权重存储于片外MemoryX,按需流式传输至芯片计算,从而在LLM推理,尤其是首token延迟和长上下文任务中展现出显著优势,token生成速率可达GPU的1.5-5倍。同时,其芯片内互联功耗也远低于当前GPU。 但这种极致物理优化也带来挑战:通过先进制程提升SRAM容量的路径已近天花板;整片晶圆发热量大,需专用液冷;片外I/O带宽有限,难以高速扩展形成大规模集群;软件生态也与主流CUDA不兼容。 与此同时,行业巨头正通过多条路径围剿:1)自研ASIC推理芯片(如谷歌TPU、微软Maia);2)利用台积电SoW等先进封装技术将“晶圆级”能力通用化、平民化;3)探索光互联/光计算作为终极解决方案。 Cerebras还面临商业转型的挑战,巨额订单迫使其从芯片商转向云服务商,需快速建设专用数据中心,交付压力巨大。 最终,AI推理时代的算力架构呈现路线分野:Cerebras向左,追求单任务下的极致低延迟;英伟达向右,以通用性应对多变负载。技术变革仍在继续,谁将主导未来,尚无定论。

marsbit13 分鐘前

越过“内存墙”,AI推理时代的晶圆级革命与算力路线

marsbit13 分鐘前

TechFlow 情报局:Anthropic 呼吁全球暂停 AI 开发却正筹备万亿美元 IPO,SpaceX IPO 路演火爆但 S&P 500 拒绝快速纳入

本期科技资讯围绕“信任危机”展开。Anthropic公开呼吁暂停全球AI开发,称其Claude模型存在“递归自我改进”风险,但该公司自身正筹备估值近万亿美元的IPO,引发外界质疑其动机。同时,大量用户抱怨Claude近期体验质量大幅下滑。 在加密领域,比特币价格跌破6.1万美元,导致超11亿美元多单爆仓,市场情绪转向悲观。与此同时,AI在生物医药领域取得突破,全球首款AI设计疫苗完成首阶段人体试验。 芯片方面,英伟达CEO黄仁勋访韩,宣布三星、SK海力士和美光的HBM4内存均已通过认证。但有经济学家警告,英伟达可能面临类似2000年互联网泡沫时期思科的风险。 科技公司动态中,Cloudflare收购前端工具链公司VoidZero,其CEO称互联网上机器人流量已超过真人。字节跳动的AI应用“豆包”推出付费订阅后,月活用户锐减超600万,凸显商业化困境。 美股市场焦点在SpaceX,其IPO路演备受追捧,高盛预测其2030年收入将增长百倍。然而,标普道琼斯指数公司明确表示不会为SpaceX等巨型IPO修改快速纳入规则,为其上市后表现增添不确定性。 总体而言,当前科技领域呈现“言行不一”的割裂现象,无论是AI公司、加密货币还是应用商业化,都面临信任拷问,市场狂热叙事与冷静规则之间形成鲜明对比。

marsbit28 分鐘前

TechFlow 情报局:Anthropic 呼吁全球暂停 AI 开发却正筹备万亿美元 IPO,SpaceX IPO 路演火爆但 S&P 500 拒绝快速纳入

marsbit28 分鐘前

交易

現貨
合約
活动图片