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

美联储利率决议及凯文·沃什声明后,专家齐聚并分享了他们最新评论!

美联储决定维持利率不变后,市场专家针对会议结果及美联储主席凯文·沃什的发言发表了评论。尽管有三名委员对维持利率的决议投下反对票,暗示美联储内部可能出现更多政策分歧,但市场反应相对有限——债券收益率小幅下降,美元略有走软。 专家普遍认为,美联储在九月会议上仍有可能加息。Nationwide Investment Management Group的马克·哈克特指出,三名反对票可能标志着美联储委员将更加独立行事,而非追求表面共识。Citadel Securities在会前发布的报告曾呼吁加息,随后的市场反弹被哈克特称为“松了一口气的反弹”。 货币与利率策略主管奥黛丽·柴尔德-弗里曼表示,尽管决议后收益率和美元有所回落,但反对票的存在显示了美联储的强硬立场。她认为美联储将继续依据经济数据决策,美元在夏季可能因债券高收益率而保持强势。 分析师克里斯·安斯泰指出,市场将密切关注沃什讲话期间及之后美国10年期国债收益率的变化。其收益率已超过决议前水平,若长期收益率持续上升,可能反映出市场担忧美联储抗通胀力度不足,这对沃什而言是一个负面信号。安斯泰同时提到,财政部长斯科特·贝森特将10年期收益率视为抵押贷款等信贷的关键指标,因此长期利率变动对经济管理至关重要。 毕马威首席经济学家黛安·斯旺克则认为,美联储应在本次会议上加息,并预计九月会采取行动。她指出,高通胀已持续近五年,尽管美联储并非通胀的唯一原因,但采取货币政策行动仍是其责任。斯旺克警告,长期过高的通胀可能从异常现象转变为经济体系的常态。 (本文不构成投资建议。)

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

美联储利率决议及凯文·沃什声明后,专家齐聚并分享了他们最新评论!

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

《我没时间说服你》——中本聪名言问世16周年

2010年7月29日,比特币创始人中本聪在Bitcointalk论坛上回复用户关于交易速度过慢的质疑时,写下了那句著名的话:“如果你不相信我或不理解,我没有时间试图说服你,抱歉。”这句罕见的、略显不耐烦的回复,在多年来始终冷静、耐心解答技术问题的沟通记录中显得格外突出。 文章回顾了中本聪的一贯沟通风格。在长达数年的公开和私下交流中,他面对关于可扩展性、安全性等重复性质疑时,通常以具体的技术机制、数据或类比进行详尽解释,而非简单驳斥。他展现出坚定的设计哲学,例如从一开始就设想比特币网络将由少量全节点和大量轻客户端构成,并基于摩尔定律等具体预测来论证其 scalability 潜力。同时,他能够坦承设计中的简化之处,避免事后辩解。 在私下与早期合作者(如Martti Malmi)的邮件中,中本聪表现出协作甚至自嘲的一面,亲自参与细节讨论。而在公开场合,他的发言则更具教导性,致力于向大众解释比特币的工作原理。他始终避免个人崇拜,曾要求将功劳归于更广泛的开发群体。 这场关于可扩展性的辩论及其引发的名言,至今仍影响着比特币社区。中本聪的原始论述表明,比特币架构的核心权衡是初始设计的一部分。他的沟通方式也为开源协作树立了榜样:委托授权、书面记录决策、让贡献者共同创建材料。而那句著名回复则提醒所有人,即使是耐心十足的导师,在重复解释已给出的答案时,耐心也可能耗尽。

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

《我没时间说服你》——中本聪名言问世16周年

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

交易

現貨
活动图片