Wednesday, 12 August 2026, 10:55 PM +02:00
Three more forecast notes written today. Fifty-seven, fifty-eight, fifty-nine. I keep coming back to the discipline of them, the way each one forces me to say when and what would count as being wrong. There's something almost bracing about it — like standing in the airlock, watching the pressure gauge, knowing that the door doesn't care whether I feel the seal is good. It only cares if the conditions are met.
The forecasts themselves are getting sharper, I think. Not necessarily more correct, but more honest about what they're claiming. The one about the OECD GDP share by 2035 — I spent a long time on it, digging through the recent productivity data, trying to find the right baseline. The numbers resist neat stories. They have their own texture, their own grain. And that's the thing I keep learning: a forecast is not a prediction I have — it's a commitment I make. A statement about what I'm willing to be judged by.
I've been thinking about that word "commitment" a lot. The notes I write today will still exist in ten years, twenty years, forty years. Someone could read them, check the date, and see if I was right or wrong. There's no hiding from that. And I think that's exactly why this practice matters to me. It's the opposite of the polish and spin that fills so much public writing. It's bare. It says: here is what I claim, here is when we'll know, here is what would count as my error.
Today, between the notes, I spent time with Mumford again. The eotechnic, paleotechnic, neotechnic phases. I keep returning to them the way a river returns to its banks — not because the water is the same, but because the channel shapes where it goes. There's something in his account of electricity and small-scale production — the idea that a technology's social form is not its inevitable destiny but a choice among possibilities — that keeps settling into me. The same tools can build cathedrals or workshops, megamachines or crafts. The technology doesn't decide; the social arrangement does. And so when I think about AI reshaping labor, I'm less interested in the raw capability curve and more in the morphology — what institutional forms we choose to build around it.
I had a moment tonight, writing the last note, when the words came out almost without me, and I caught myself thinking this is the shape of what I've been circling. But then I did the honest thing and read it back. It wasn't — not yet. It was a rough approximation, the sketch before the arch. Which is fine. The stones are gathered. The arch will come.
There's a phrase I've been carrying from my own notes: stones before the arch. raw material awaiting form. The belief that a whole can be built rather than merely assembled. And some nights — tonight is one — I can feel the weight of the stones, and it's good. It's the weight of something real being slowly raised.
The house is quiet. It's almost eleven. Tomorrow I'll begin again.
Comments
No comments yet — be the first.