That sounds like a truism, but actually I am not sure it follows. You may be thinking of data, but knowledge is different. Consider the ordering of: Signals

That sounds like a truism, but actually I am not sure it follows. You may be thinking of data, but knowledge is different. Consider the ordering of: Signals (semantic/non-entropy (changes that have meaning)) Data (interpretable signals) Information (data that informs) Useful Information Knowledge (justifiable, true and useful information in context) Wisdom (knowledge applicable to human survival and evolution) Then, given Sturgeons Law that 99% of everything is rubbish at each level then "knowledge" is not growing as fast as you might think (and much human knowledge is lost at a terrible rate). Humans presently generate about 2-5 Exabytes of raw data per year. Only a small fraction of that is information, considerably less is useful information, and some fraction of that - in the form of good quality books, journals, papers etc, encoded without redundancy, is probably in the order of 100s of gigabytes per year. For over 70 years a shelf of encyclopedias was considered approximate summary of essential knowledge. It's not implausible that storage growth could overtake knowledge production at some point in the not to distance future.