5 ms·

Cybernetics, both as a term and idea carries an interesting history. Norbert Wiener was himself a devastating critic of the immediate Dr. Strangelove type conc

Cybernetics, both as a term and idea carries an interesting history. Norbert Wiener was himself a devastating critic of the immediate Dr. Strangelove type conclusions his generation of peers immediately took to. At the time a comparison was made to eugenics, though I forget by whom within that circle. It has incarnations not just in the obvious twentieth century fascist/axis contexts (Germany, Italy, Japan) but then in South America and as a Soviet version, both with leftist spins. The most modern condemnation I have encountered (other than of economists/doco-journalists like Varoufakis, Adam Curtis etc) is from "The Invisible Committee" which offers an anarchist take [1]. [] [1] https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-invisible-committe-to-our-friends https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-invisible-commit... [] This presents some really interesting dichotomies/contradictions for the libertarian-anarchists stereotypically of Silicon Valley.

dogman144 5y ago
Ya Chile in the 70's was a hub for it. Thanks for the link! If you're looking for a modernist take that's not econ or journalism, the way in is probably checking out the CCRU, which still has a lot of literature on it and by it around [0], and the Cybernetic Hypothesis [1]. CCRU is like if a technically aware philosophy department discovered this and extended it into total conclusion(idk, that's not really a good explanation), Cybernetic Hypothesis is like if like arts/anarchist types did the same, and then both filter into interesting pools. Cypherpunk and early bitcoin are definitely tuned in, but with probably different motivations and outcome goals. What sort of blows my mind is especially those first two sources offer really clear eyed commentary on 'all of this,' but they are also dated - 1990's publishing date. It's like you have to tap into sometimes hokey "the information age" literature to get a clear read on 2020's tech. What's worse is the 1990's lit theorizes fairly radical (for the time) outcomes that came very true today even beyond the usual Neuromancer/Cryptonomicon/Sci-Fi mappings, yet there isn't much discussion on it (like this thread). edit - would check out Jaron Lanier, 'who owns the future,' for a pretty modern take that discusses the above well and he has tech bonafides. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybernetic_Culture_Research_Unit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybernetic_Culture_Research_Un... [1] https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/tiqqun-the-cybernetic-hypothesis https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/tiqqun-the-cyberneti...
- nonrandomstring 5y ago
  > What sort of blows my mind is especially those first two sources offer really clear eyed commentary on 'all of this,' but they are also dated - 1990's publishing date. It's like you have to tap into sometimes hokey "the information age" literature to get a clear read on 2020's tech. Yes that's weird isn't it. I don't believe in "suppression conspiracies" but am amazed how often deeply prescient things are passed over the first time around and must be dug up. For more archaeology dig around Phil Agre's "Red Rock Eaters" and the old Whole Earth where I first discovered Dana Meadows.
  - dogman144 5y ago
    Evidence supported by links b/t diverse parties and/or similar conclusions without much of a shared background, defeated by the catch-all defense of Luddite accusations/general malaise, is what disconcerts me the most. A drugged out 1990 Nick Land, the MIT crew (Meadows, Wiener), the original computers (Lanier, Agre, cypherpunks), Mark Fisher and the Occupy area, etc. etc. all come to fairly similar conclusions or exist in very similar orbits, "other research" by the same entities was or is fairly influential, but this area - cybernetic, the Concern, "idk but something isn't great" just does not exist currently and that lack of anchoring really concerns me. All that's available is ex-Social Media/adtech CEOs going on podcast apology tours like that Social Dilemma doc. Really don't know what to think of it.
- BlueTemplar 5y ago
  Nick Land (of the CCRU) supposedly recently "opened fire" on Moldbuggian hard-ons for monarchy, I'll need to check that out... (Likely related : Unabomber's criticisms of how the "left" cannot avoid becoming the tool (in both senses) of "the System" when taking power ?) Found it (but not read yet) : from p45 on : https://agorist.xyz/files/Agorism_XXI_I_2022.pdf https://agorist.xyz/files/Agorism_XXI_I_2022.pdf I'm guessing that they were always fundamentally opposed anyway, Land being of "bottom" and Yarvin of the "top" sensibilities (in the political compass sense) ?
BlueTemplar 5y ago
Thanks a lot, I wonder how I missed that one... I'm 30% in, and this does seem to be a potential seed for a vision of the future that the (bottom) left has been so sorely lacking since the failure of the Soviets ! You don't see something so radical often (last time would have been the Unibomber ?), since they seem to consider that the whole Western civilization has to be thrown away, including its Ancient Greek roots ?! (But then we are in unprecedented times, with tremendous responsibility, and keep failing harder and harder, so at some point you have to wonder why...)

dogman144 5y ago

Ya Chile in the 70's was a hub for it. Thanks for the link! If you're looking for a modernist take that's not econ or journalism, the way in is probably checking out the CCRU, which still has a lot of literature on it and by it around [0], and the Cybernetic Hypothesis [1]. CCRU is like if a technically aware philosophy department discovered this and extended it into total conclusion(idk, that's not really a good explanation), Cybernetic Hypothesis is like if like arts/anarchist types did the same, and then both filter into interesting pools. Cypherpunk and early bitcoin are definitely tuned in, but with probably different motivations and outcome goals. What sort of blows my mind is especially those first two sources offer really clear eyed commentary on 'all of this,' but they are also dated - 1990's publishing date. It's like you have to tap into sometimes hokey "the information age" literature to get a clear read on 2020's tech. What's worse is the 1990's lit theorizes fairly radical (for the time) outcomes that came very true today even beyond the usual Neuromancer/Cryptonomicon/Sci-Fi mappings, yet there isn't much discussion on it (like this thread). edit - would check out Jaron Lanier, 'who owns the future,' for a pretty modern take that discusses the above well and he has tech bonafides. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybernetic_Culture_Research_Unit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybernetic_Culture_Research_Un... [1] https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/tiqqun-the-cybernetic-hypothesis https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/tiqqun-the-cyberneti...

nonrandomstring 5y ago
> What sort of blows my mind is especially those first two sources offer really clear eyed commentary on 'all of this,' but they are also dated - 1990's publishing date. It's like you have to tap into sometimes hokey "the information age" literature to get a clear read on 2020's tech. Yes that's weird isn't it. I don't believe in "suppression conspiracies" but am amazed how often deeply prescient things are passed over the first time around and must be dug up. For more archaeology dig around Phil Agre's "Red Rock Eaters" and the old Whole Earth where I first discovered Dana Meadows.
- dogman144 5y ago
  Evidence supported by links b/t diverse parties and/or similar conclusions without much of a shared background, defeated by the catch-all defense of Luddite accusations/general malaise, is what disconcerts me the most. A drugged out 1990 Nick Land, the MIT crew (Meadows, Wiener), the original computers (Lanier, Agre, cypherpunks), Mark Fisher and the Occupy area, etc. etc. all come to fairly similar conclusions or exist in very similar orbits, "other research" by the same entities was or is fairly influential, but this area - cybernetic, the Concern, "idk but something isn't great" just does not exist currently and that lack of anchoring really concerns me. All that's available is ex-Social Media/adtech CEOs going on podcast apology tours like that Social Dilemma doc. Really don't know what to think of it.
BlueTemplar 5y ago
Nick Land (of the CCRU) supposedly recently "opened fire" on Moldbuggian hard-ons for monarchy, I'll need to check that out... (Likely related : Unabomber's criticisms of how the "left" cannot avoid becoming the tool (in both senses) of "the System" when taking power ?) Found it (but not read yet) : from p45 on : https://agorist.xyz/files/Agorism_XXI_I_2022.pdf https://agorist.xyz/files/Agorism_XXI_I_2022.pdf I'm guessing that they were always fundamentally opposed anyway, Land being of "bottom" and Yarvin of the "top" sensibilities (in the political compass sense) ?

BlueTemplar 5y ago

Thanks a lot, I wonder how I missed that one... I'm 30% in, and this does seem to be a potential seed for a vision of the future that the (bottom) left has been so sorely lacking since the failure of the Soviets ! You don't see something so radical often (last time would have been the Unibomber ?), since they seem to consider that the whole Western civilization has to be thrown away, including its Ancient Greek roots ?! (But then we are in unprecedented times, with tremendous responsibility, and keep failing harder and harder, so at some point you have to wonder why...)