Group 1 - The article discusses the evolution of labor division from the First Industrial Revolution to the present, highlighting its impact on productivity and the emergence of specialized roles [1][3][4] - It emphasizes the historical significance of labor division as articulated by Adam Smith in "The Wealth of Nations," which attributes productivity improvements to this concept [3][4] - The article notes that the Ford production system exemplified the extreme application of labor division, significantly reducing assembly time and increasing production output [4][5] Group 2 - The article critiques the modern implications of labor division, suggesting that it has led to knowledge isolation and a lack of empathy among different groups [12][15][31] - It references Adam Smith's concerns about the potential intellectual stagnation resulting from extreme labor division, where workers may become overly specialized and lose their understanding of broader societal issues [9][11] - The article also discusses Karl Marx's perspective on labor division, emphasizing the alienation of workers in a capitalist system and the loss of control over their labor [13][14] Group 3 - The article highlights the increasing standardization and repetition in modern production processes, which can lead to a loss of individual meaning and feedback in work [7][37] - It points out that the educational system has adapted to this division of labor, promoting specialization at the expense of broader knowledge and curiosity [18][19] - The article suggests that the current era of extreme division of labor may be approaching a critical point, where traditional views on specialization may no longer suffice in a rapidly changing environment [48][49] Group 4 - The article discusses the challenges individuals face in navigating the complexities of modern labor division, particularly in relation to job security and the unpredictability of career paths [40][41][44] - It notes that individuals who break away from traditional specialization may find new opportunities and meaning in their work, suggesting a shift towards a more versatile approach to employment [46][48] - The article concludes by posing questions about the future of labor division in light of technological advancements, particularly AI, and its potential to redefine roles within the workforce [49]

Group 1: Technology - The advancement of AI technology is shifting from content generation to goal-driven intelligent agents, which is expected to lead to significant breakthroughs in autonomous driving capabilities [2] - Two main technological approaches in autonomous driving are identified: "end-to-end" technology, which requires vast amounts of high-quality data for training, and modular technology, which combines human-designed algorithms with neural networks [3][4] - Current autonomous driving systems are primarily in the realm of assisted driving rather than full autonomy, limited by technological capabilities and costs [4] Group 2: Cost - The reduction of costs is crucial for the widespread adoption of new technologies, as seen historically with the introduction of the Ford Model T, which made cars affordable for the middle class [5] - China has made significant progress in reducing AI training costs, exemplified by DeepSeek's training costs being one-thirtieth of OpenAI's, which may accelerate the application of autonomous driving [6] - Companies like Tesla are also focusing on cost reduction, with projections for autonomous taxi services to be economically viable by 2026 [6] Group 3: Regulation - The integration of autonomous driving into society requires adaptive regulations that reflect technological advancements and societal needs [7] - Historical precedents show that technological progress often leads to significant societal changes, necessitating a reevaluation of existing rules and norms [7] - Establishing foundational rules for autonomous driving, such as human-machine relationships and liability distribution, is essential for future industry development [8] Group 4: Safety - Research indicates that 90% of traffic accidents are caused by human error, and transitioning to algorithm-driven driving could reduce accidents significantly [9] - The ethical implications of autonomous driving decisions, particularly in unavoidable accident scenarios, highlight the need for societal consensus on moral choices [9] - Extensive testing is required to ensure the safety of autonomous vehicles, with estimates suggesting that they need to cover 440 million kilometers without errors to match human driver safety levels [10]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the historical rise of the United States from 1865 to 1925, highlighting how it surpassed the British Empire in industrial and economic power through strategic innovations, technology absorption, and institutional support [3][28]. Group 1: Pre-Civil War Industrial Foundation - Before the Civil War, the U.S. industrial base was significantly influenced by "technology smuggling," where advanced British technologies were covertly brought to America [5][9]. - The U.S. faced legislative barriers from Britain aimed at stifling its industrial growth, similar to modern restrictions on technology transfer [5][11]. - By 1860, U.S. industrial output had surpassed France, but it still lagged behind Britain in key metrics like steel production [12]. Group 2: Post-Civil War Transformation - The Civil War (1861-1865) was pivotal in abolishing slavery, increasing the labor force, and strengthening federal power, which facilitated innovation and technology diffusion [14][15]. - Post-war, the U.S. became a "new technology digestion machine," rapidly adopting and adapting European innovations [16][20]. - By 1900, U.S. steel production had overtaken Britain's, and the country had built a vast railway network, enhancing its industrial capabilities [17][20]. Group 3: Innovation and Economic Expansion - The introduction of the assembly line by Henry Ford revolutionized production efficiency, drastically reducing costs and increasing output [22][24]. - The establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 marked a significant financial innovation, enhancing capital mobilization and supporting industrial growth [24]. - By the late 1920s, the U.S. had become a leader in various industries, with manufacturing productivity significantly higher than that of Britain [23][28]. Group 4: Factors Behind U.S. Ascendancy - Key factors contributing to the U.S. rise included institutional advantages, scale economies, a pragmatic approach to efficiency, and an open immigration policy that attracted talent [28].

Core Insights - The article discusses the rise of the United States as a global economic power from 1865 to 1925, highlighting the transition from British dominance to American supremacy in industrial and financial sectors [3][28]. Group 1: Pre-Civil War Industrial Foundation - Before the Civil War, the U.S. industrial base was significantly influenced by "technology smuggling," with key figures like Samuel Slater bringing British textile technology to America [4][5]. - The U.S. faced legislative barriers from Britain aimed at stifling its industrial growth, which included prohibiting the export of advanced technologies and skilled workers [4][9]. - By 1860, the U.S. industrial output had surpassed France, although it still lagged behind Britain in key metrics like steel production [10][12]. Group 2: Post-Civil War Technological Assimilation - After the Civil War, the U.S. became a "new technology digestion machine," rapidly adopting and improving upon European innovations [13][18]. - The revision of patent laws in 1870 facilitated the absorption of foreign technologies, leading to a significant increase in U.S. steel production, surpassing that of Britain by 1880 [13][18]. - The industrial boom was characterized by the emergence of influential figures like Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller, who revolutionized their respective industries through innovative business practices [14][15]. Group 3: Innovation and Financial Systems - The introduction of the assembly line by Henry Ford in 1908 drastically reduced production costs and time, leading to a significant increase in automobile production [19][21]. - By the 1920s, the U.S. accounted for approximately 66.4% of global industrial output, showcasing its dominance in manufacturing and innovation [22][24]. - The establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 marked a pivotal moment in U.S. financial history, enhancing the capital markets and enabling significant wartime financing [23][24]. Group 4: Factors Contributing to U.S. Ascendancy - The article identifies four key factors in the U.S. rise: institutional advantages, scale economies, a pragmatic approach to efficiency, and an open spirit towards immigration and talent acquisition [29].

编 译 / 钱 亚 光 设 计 / 张 萌 来 源 / d r i v i n g . c a b y J i l M c I n t o s h 你是否曾说过："我永远都不会那样做！"然后你还是这么做了，还得面对那些话所带来的后果？如 果你有过这样的经历，那你绝不是唯一一个这样的人。而且就这一点而言，与你情况类似的汽车制 造商也不在少数。 ↓2024 法拉利Purosangue 图片来源：FERRARI 例如，英国超级跑车制造商迈凯伦（McLaren）多年来一直宣称，它绝不会像其他所有汽车制造商 那样投身于SUV的热潮之中，因为该公司最初就是作为一家赛车运动公司创立的。但所有权的变更 最终扭转了这一局面，迫使这家著名的品牌走出了以往从未涉足的领域。 由于他们都没有"透视眼"，汽车制造商通常会综合考虑消费者趋势、法规、畅销产品等因素来预测 未来的产品走向，还会结合一些直觉判断。有时这种预测效果非常好，但有时情况就并非如此了 ——以下是一些汽车制造商曾自信地做出未来产品预测，但随后却完全改变主意的例子。 劳斯莱斯："我们永远不会卖电动汽车" ↓2011 年劳斯莱斯 102EX 图片来源：Rolls-Royce ...

格隆 . 以下文章来源于格隆 ，作者深鹏 一个游走于资本市场与佛祖之间的浪子。我可以生，可以死，我大笑，由天决定！ 作者： 深鹏 来源：格隆（ID：guru-lama） 1930 年 6 月 17 日，华盛顿的天空格外晴朗。 在白宫椭圆形办公室里，赫伯特 ·胡佛总统用他那支镀金钢笔，在《斯姆特 - 霍利关税法》上签 下了自己的名字。 阳光透过落地窗洒在文件上，映照出 " 保 护美国工业 " 几个大字。 那时的 总统先生 或许 不知道，这个看似保护美国经济的决定，将成为 20 世纪最严重的经济政 策失误之一。 " 总统先生，您确定要签署这个法案吗？ " 国务卿亨利 ·史汀生最后一次试图劝阻 ： " 就在昨天，又有 200 名经济学家加入了反对阵营。 " 胡佛 很清楚国务卿的意思，但 抬起头 时依然 眉头紧锁： " 亨利，你看看窗外 ！ 街上到处都是 失业的工人，农民们在贱卖他们的粮食。我们必须保护美国人的工作机会！ " 三个月后，加拿大驻美大使詹姆斯 ·克赖顿怒气冲冲地离开国务院大楼 ， 他刚刚收到渥太华的 紧急电报： 立即对美国农产品征收报复性关税 ！ 但 这不是结束，而 仅仅是开始， 是一场全球贸易大战的开 ...