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.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS