I recently spent fifteen minutes reading a widely shared article about AI, and the feeling it left me with was not excitement but quiet surprise. The pace of progress seems to have moved far beyond what I thought I could comfortably understand.
This feeling is strange, because I use AI tools every day. I am not an outsider looking in. Yet even as an active participant, I often feel that the landscape shifts faster than my ability to map it. What changes is not only the technology itself, but also the way it constantly redefines what it means to be informed, productive, or even creative.
Some people compare the sudden rise of AI to the global disruption we experienced five years ago. The comparison makes sense on the surface, but I suspect the consequences may be deeper and longer-lasting. That earlier shock changed how we live. AI may change how we think.
I often find myself thinking about a historical example from the Maya civilization. Archaeological findings suggest that the Maya understood the principle of the wheel, and wheeled toys have been discovered that clearly demonstrate this knowledge. Yet the wheel never evolved into a transportation system in their society. This was not because they lacked intelligence or imagination, but because their environment, geography, and social structure did not demand it.
That idea feels surprisingly relevant today. Technology does not transform civilization simply because it exists. Transformation happens when the surrounding world is ready to absorb it, when conditions align so that adoption becomes inevitable.
So where does that leave us now? Are we moving toward a future that looks like science fiction, where automated systems quietly deliver everything we need and friction disappears from daily life? Or will the overwhelming flow of information push us in the opposite direction, toward simplicity, slower systems, and a renewed appreciation for limits?
I do not pretend to know the answer. What feels clear, however, is that continuing to experiment with new tools every day is probably the right instinct. The challenge is no longer access. Knowledge itself may become abundant, even free.
If that happens, the real scarcity will shift elsewhere. What will matter most is not information, but the quality of its source. And perhaps even more importantly, our ability to distinguish signal from noise.
In that sense, the future may not be defined by who has the most knowledge, but by who knows where to trust it.
