|
|
|
|
|
|
by maxbendick
1718 days ago
|
|
|
Excellent recommendation. I'll add Designing Freedom by Stafford Beer as a great intro. Available as a book and a series of free lectures here: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/the-1973-cbc-massey-lectures-... You hit the nail on the head with the "disappointing blend" btw. So much thought coming from tech circles is lacking - it's often over-intuitive, self-unaware, and ahistorical. |
|
|
It causes me distress that there isn't a solid discussion ecosystem today that (a) captures it better than "the blend", (b) is easily available to the public, and (c) is a bit more humane than sovereign individual concepts haha, i.e. western democracy is still around in "what's next."
I wonder if, or how, this would ever get bootstrapped, and it feels critical that it is somehow. I know I, and probably everyone else, can list many of the reasons for this (Facebook distraction and... and...). What's disquieting is the list of entities who were not distracted and now apply the implications of cybernetics - if you can phrase it like that.
- RU via thinkers like A. Dugin seem to grasp it and apply it in a fairy adversarial way to western ideology.
- Downstream, Dugin is an input that folks like Bannon draw from the US.
- Intel agencies seem to grasp it, and while I don't have knee-jerk negative views of those entities, equal understanding across democratically elected bodies and the agencies seems important.
- CN grasps it and is building the governance systems they decide proper for what's next. This technical approach is getting exported.
- Lastly, activist groups across the spectrum natively sense the seams present in how western systems were bolted onto tech's impacts, and opportunities for instability exist and are executed on.
That's all to say, and hopefully by not too much of a rant, that it's critical that our public feedback loops find a way to account for how a huge spectrum of systems in our world have changed in a fundamental way because of tech, and we don't try to do so only by bolting on old solutions from the pre-tech era. Very few entities seem to offer clear analysis of this excluding reading cybernetics, humanities<>comp sci hybrid thinkers, and topics related to the above.
Aside - Yang felt more like a figure the tech world would put forward as a solution, but as a result he felt too self-referential to the problem to be a good representative. but, I wonder if he is a spark that leads towards more tech-informed public discourse.