| Ashby's law is the law. If the control system inevitably becomes too complex to control than that's another law and degrowth is inevitable. I kept that answer as short as I could and left out many threads, such as this one: Circa 2000 I had a theory of "the Syndrome" which was that the business cycle is a battle of problems and solutions and that in the 1970s solutions were becoming part of the problem and the solution of the 1980s was taking the foot off the growth accelerator (which a Republican could do more easily than a Democrat) and a bit of tearing down of the solution apparatus. That ideology was absorbed by Bill Clinton and between that and the ongoing progress in microelectronics we got the boom of the 1990s. That kind of analysis which posit "growth" and "degrowth" as phases of a cycle as opposed to two sides of a pulse is key to envisioning a future we want to live in and thinking through how to keep the control system controllable. Also that answer leaned to the right as there is no point in giving the likes of Yarvin excessive space. Yet, that bit about spirit is not just coding or pandering [1], it's a part of the solution. We need faith in ourselves and the possibilities of cybernetics. I came to work one morning to find this stuck on the door of my building https://mastodon.social/@UP8/114356523256174674 Our "moment of reckoning" was not a defeat on the factory floor, in the operating room or on the battlefield. It was a defeat at the ballot box and had it gone differently by a few points, we'd be in different place. We've lost faith in our own institutions. [1] presented so gently it's likely to evade the man-of-the-moment in 2025 |
The business cycle model of yours might have be fully understandable within cybernetics, especially in the time series respect. But are we not also interested in competing/interacting "peer" systems "beyond mean field"? How Apple and Desktop Linux gained ground against MSoft by reducing fragmentation, how MSoft responded by diversifying. You might have other examples for and against?