Steam, Steel, and Infinite Intelligence

marsbit發佈於 2025-12-29更新於 2025-12-29

文章摘要

The article "Steam, Steel, and Infinite Mind" by Ivan Zhao, CEO of Notion, explores how AI is poised to become the defining technological material of our era, much like steel shaped the Gilded Age and semiconductors enabled the digital age. The author argues that while AI currently mimics past forms—like early films resembling stage plays or AI chatbots resembling search engines—it holds transformative potential. At the individual level, AI can elevate knowledge workers from "bicycles" to "cars," as seen with programmers who now use AI assistants to become dramatically more efficient. However, two key challenges remain: fragmented context across tools and the lack of verifiability in non-programming knowledge work. At the organizational level, AI acts like "steel" for companies, enabling them to scale without the inefficiencies of human communication as a bottleneck. It also parallels the steam engine, which initially replaced water wheels but later allowed entirely new factory designs. Most companies are still in the "water wheel stage," using AI within old workflows rather than reimagining operations around continuous, asynchronous intelligence. On an economic scale, AI could enable a shift from human-scale "Florence-like" organizations to AI-augmented "megacities" of knowledge work—larger, faster, and more complex, but also more powerful. The conclusion urges looking beyond the rearview mirror to imagine and build this new frontier of infinite intelligence.

Written by: Ivan Zhao, CEO of Notion

Compiled by: AididiaoJP, Foresight News

Each era is shaped by its unique technological raw materials. Steel forged the Gilded Age, and 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, and 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 vast majority of the two billion office workers have yet to feel its presence. What will knowledge work look like soon? What will happen 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, and 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. To quote McLuhan again: "We look at the present through a rear-view mirror." Today, we see AI chatbots imitating the Google 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 himself. Walking past 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. It's just that 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 integrated development environment, code repositories, the terminal. But general knowledge work is scattered across dozens of tools. Imagine an AI assistant trying to draft a product brief: it would need to pull information from Slack threads, strategy documents, 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 the 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 leverage this, using methods like reinforcement learning to train AIs to code better. But how do you verify if a project is well-managed, or if a strategic memo is excellent? We haven't yet found a way to improve models for general knowledge work. Therefore, humans still need to stay 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 us that "human-in-the-loop" is not always ideal. It's like having a person check every bolt on an assembly line, or walk in front of a car to pave the way (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 efficient as they scale, eventually hitting a limit.

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

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

Two historical metaphors illustrate how the future might look different when organizations have 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 building heights were limited to six or seven stories. Iron was strong but brittle and heavy; add more floors, and the structure would collapse under its own weight. Steel changed everything. It was strong yet flexible. Frames could be lighter, walls thinner, and buildings soared to dozens of stories. New types of architecture became 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 made 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 the steam engine appeared, factory owners initially just replaced the waterwheel with a steam engine, leaving everything else the same. 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 individual 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 have been experimenting. Besides 1,000 employees, there are now 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 learn about benefits, writing weekly status reports to avoid manual copy-pasting... This is just toddling. The true 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 determined by walking distance and the range of the human voice.

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

These are not just enlarged Florences; they are entirely new ways of life. Megacities are disorienting, anonymous, and 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 a human-scale Renaissance city.

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 the rhythm of meetings and emails, organizations that struggle beyond a hundred people... We have 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 more dizzying at first. The rhythms of weekly meetings, quarterly planning, and annual reviews may no longer apply; new rhythms will emerge. We will lose some legibility, but we will gain scale and speed.

Beyond the Waterwheel

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

We are still in the "waterwheel stage" of AI, bolting chatbots onto 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 tasks are 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 transitioning from riding a bicycle to driving a car car, and eventually to autonomous driving.

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

AThe two main problems are contextual fragmentation the scattering of information across dozens of tools and a lack of verifiability the difficulty in measuring the quality of non-code work like project management or strategy memos.

QHow does the author compare AI to the historical material of steel in the context of organizations?

AThe author compares AI to steel, stating that just as steel allowed buildings to become stronger, more flexible, and much taller, AI will allow organizations to scale effectively by maintaining context, enabling faster decisions, and reducing communication overhead.

QWhat does the 'water wheel phase' of AI refer to in the article?

AThe 'water wheel phase' refers to the current early stage of AI adoption where AI chatbots are being awkwardly fitted into existing human-designed workflows, similar to how early factory owners just replaced water wheels with steam engines without reimagining the entire factory system.

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

AThe author predicts a shift from human-scale 'Florence'-sized organizations to AI-powered 'Tokyo'-sized organizations, which will be composed of thousands of humans and AIs, operate continuously across time zones, and offer greater scale, speed, and opportunity despite initial disorientation.

你可能也喜歡

英国上议院敦促英国央行放宽稳定币规则 担忧竞争力落后

英国议会上议院(贵族院)呼吁金融监管机构重新审视其部分有争议的稳定币提案,警告称若监管不当,国家可能落后于全球领导者。 上议院金融服务监管委员会近日发布报告,敦促英国央行(BoE)重新评估其拟议规则中“在支持创新与风险缓释之间平衡似乎不够恰当”的部分。委员会支持央行关于稳定币需1:1全额储备支持等核心提案,但指出部分内容“需进一步考虑”。 引发争议的提案包括:要求系统性稳定币发行人将至少40%的储备金作为无息银行存款持有,以及提议对个人(1万至2万英镑)和企业(1000万英镑)持有稳定币设置临时上限。 委员会认为,这些资产配置和赎回要求可能带来“巨大的运营负担”,对稳定币发行人的可持续性及英国的全球市场竞争力产生负面影响。持有上限也可能不必要地阻碍英镑稳定币的发展且难以实施。 报告强调,英镑稳定币市场的形态将“深受监管制度方向的影响”,当局必须“创造一个公平竞争环境”,让稳定币能与英国其他支付形式竞争。制度需灵活、响应迅速且清晰,否则英国将面临“落后于监管框架更成熟、为市场参与者提供更明确指引的全球同行”的风险。 此前,行业参与者及其他议员已多次施压反对相关提案。据悉,英国央行副行长近期已承认提案可能“过于保守”,并表示央行“真诚开放”重新审视规则以建立更利于稳定币发展的制度。 委员会最终敦促监管机构遵守当前时间表,确保最终监管制度不被延迟。英国央行发言人表示将于本月晚些时候公布最终政策和规则草案。

bitcoinist1 小時前

英国上议院敦促英国央行放宽稳定币规则 担忧竞争力落后

bitcoinist1 小時前

「老登股」变「新贵」:从戴尔到诺基亚,AI 如何重估旧基础设施?

过去被视为增长慢、故事旧的戴尔、诺基亚、思科等老牌科技股,近期因AI成为市场热点。这并非简单的炒作,而是AI发展进入新阶段的必然结果。 早期AI行情聚焦于模型和GPU算力。但随着AI从研发走向大规模应用,真正的挑战在于基础设施建设:需要服务器、网络、存储、电力等一整套复杂系统的交付与整合。这正是老牌科技公司的优势所在,它们几十年积累的客户、供应链和系统集成能力,在AI基建阶段变得至关重要。 市场重估主要围绕三条主线: 1. **服务器与系统集成**:如戴尔、HPE。它们扮演“AI工厂施工队”的角色,优势在于将GPU等核心部件整合成可交付的完整服务器系统,并拥有强大的企业客户渠道。 2. **网络与连接**:如康宁、诺基亚、思科。AI算力集群规模越大,内部互联和数据传输越关键,驱动了对光纤、高速网络设备的强劲需求。 3. **存储与数据管理**:如西部数据、希捷。AI催生了海量训练数据、日志和冷数据存储需求,使得高容量硬盘(HDD)重新成为刚需。 真正的重估需满足三个标准:有真实的AI相关订单和收入;公司因此上调业绩指引;利润质量能同步改善。AI不会让所有传统公司变身成长股,只会筛选出那些能抓住新需求、并将其转化为可持续利润的企业。 总之,这轮行情标志着AI进入真实建设期,市场开始为“谁能把AI基建建起来”的能力定价。老牌科技股并非焕发青春,而是它们手握的基础设施能力,在AI时代被重新需要。

marsbit2 小時前

「老登股」变「新贵」:从戴尔到诺基亚,AI 如何重估旧基础设施?

marsbit2 小時前

交易

現貨
合約
活动图片