Technologists have been doing it. Jamie Dimon just did it in his latest letter to shareholders. I am referring to the way people are comparing the transformational impact of artificial intelligence (AI) to that of the steam engine. The metaphor has not only become a cliche; it paints an oversimplified and too-rosy picture of how this technology would reshape our lives.
To be fair to Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase & Co, his examples were drawn from a wider net: “Think the printing press, the steam engine, electricity, computing and the Internet, among others,” he wrote. However, the effects of perfecting steam power pale in comparison with the changes that the next technological development would bring.
It is easy to understand why so many have reached for the comparison.
It was the closest metaphor “to help understand what AI means for humanity,” Microsoft Corp chief technology officer Kevin Scott said at a recent conference.
Yes, harnessing steam pressure to run machinery and trains was pivotal to the industrial revolution, and yes, we are arguably in the midst of a new metamorphosis where AI would drive profound change.
For a start, AI’s impact would be far broader than that of the steam engine, which primarily transformed physical labor, manufacturing and transportation. Today, AI models can generate ideas and art. Marketing firms are using them to brainstorm ideas, video production companies to generate scripts and storyboards, musicians to produce songs. This represents an altogether different and wider impact on decision-making, creativity and even personal identity and the way people socialize. Note the rise of AI chatbots like Character.ai, Replika and Kindroid, which people are using for therapy, companionship and romance.
AI has also been adopted far more quickly (over a few decades) than the steam engine was (over centuries). Thomas Newcomen’s first commercially successful engine in the early 1700s was not improved on by James Watt until more than 60 years later. It would take another 150 years for steam power to be broadly adopted in manufacturing and railway locomotives.
Contrast that with the way machine-learning algorithms have become prevalent in social media, retailing, logistics and more in just the past two decades. The true catalyst, which gave rise to the latest era of “generative AI” that conjures text, images, voice and videos — and tools like ChatGPT and Midjourney — was invented just seven years ago.
There are also big differences in the ethical and social implications of the steam engine versus AI. The former increased the rate of urbanization and the exploitation of human labor. Meanwhile the latter’s ethical challenges are more nuanced and arguably more insidious, relating to our personal privacy, surveillance, an erosion of human agency and creativity, as well as potentially profound effects on personal freedoms.
Finally, nobody in their right mind ever worried about the steam engine going rogue and destroying civilization — but tens of millions of dollars are being spent to research just that possibility for AI.
Analogies are wonderful, but they should be picked with care when language has the power to shape opinion. During the Gulf War, for instance, the use of terms like “smart weapons” implied a bloodless conflict with precise targeting that was not actually possible.
Similarly, the discourse around AI teems with illusory terms like “intelligence” (machines are not intelligent), “neural networks” (they do not have brains) and “machine learning” (they do not understand and experience things in the way humans do), all helping to personify AI systems as something more human than they are in reality. “Steam engine,” whose harmful effects on human labor are a distant memory and which mostly brings to mind positive transformation, also does not give us the full picture of AI’s repercussions. It gives us a rose-tinted view of the future.
Here is a better analogy: the Internet. Not only did it seamlessly weave itself into the fabric of daily life, just as AI is doing, it evolved rapidly from its inception, revolutionizing media, and the way we socialize and communicate. The ethical problems it created around privacy, surveillance and misinformation are rearing their heads once again with AI, as are those around the concentration of power among a handful of Silicon Valley gatekeepers such as Alphabet Inc’s Google, Meta Platforms Inc, Amazon.com Inc and Apple Inc.
Comparing AI to the Internet offers a broader and more nuanced understanding of its potential impacts, not to mention one that has not been softened by the passage of time. We can still feel the positive and negative side effects of the Web on our lives.
Overall, it is a better comparison than the steam engine — as are the printing press, electricity and any other revolutionary inventions from the days of yore. If you are going to draw just one parallel from history for the potential of AI, stick with the Internet.
Parmy Olson is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering technology. A former reporter for the Wall Street Journal and Forbes, she is author of We Are Anonymous.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS