I think the point is to say something about the boundaries of "embedded systems," (a vague concept that I'm not convinced makes any sense outside of certain kin

I think the point is to say something about the boundaries of "embedded systems," (a vague concept that I'm not convinced makes any sense outside of certain kinds of world simulations) in the style of Douglas Hofstadter (or that's my guess, as I haven't actually read GEB myself). In part two he says "the goal of this series is to pound a stake through the heart of a certain way of thinking about the world that has become quite popular." Unfortunately I have no idea what that way of thinking is or what he is trying to say about it, and, frankly, at this point I don't care very much. So far his unintentional point is that this style of writing is hard to do well. Sorry Steve - I read the whole thing, but I don't understand it well enough to know if it's actually disrespectful, or if I should be mad about anything. Hopefully parts four and five will shed some more light.