|
| Pr0ject217 wrote:
| There's a section describing how perceptrons work. :)
| gdss wrote:
| Cybernetics needs a comeback. It was the most important and
| underexplored attempt of creating an unified attempt of
| interpreting reality having at its core ubiquitous concepts such
| as systems, information and complexity. Unfortunately we've been
| stuck with a reductionist paradigm for a long time, and most
| people don't seem to care much about the obvious presence of
| systems all around (and even inside) them.
| salty_biscuits wrote:
| Isn't the historical progression cybernetics turns into control
| theory (via Norbert Weiner) and control theory turns into
| reinforcement learning. So just had a few rebrandings and never
| went away.
| _glass wrote:
| for me, systems theory is a potent heir of cybernetics, and
| thriving. at least in my field the management sciences.
| especially with new incarnations incorporating new materialism,
| or the actor network theory.
| mashygpig wrote:
| You could argue that the resurgence of neural networks being
| the dominant paradigm in "AI"/ML is a partial comeback of
| cybernetics (dynamics of simple systems leading to complex
| behavior). I'd like to understand the history of cybernetics
| better, but my current impression is that much of cybernetics,
| or at least ideas in the spirit of cybernetics, just became
| rebranded after the original practitioners died.
|
| I agree with your general take though. The history of aviation
| safety is a good example of taking this systemic way of
| thinking to heart, but most other fields don't seem to take
| such a wholistic approach in their analysis. I.e. part of the
| reason planes are so safe nowadays is that the people in the
| field worked really hard to understand the systems from their
| basic mechanisms to the psychological and physiological effects
| on the pilots/crew (granted wanting to not kill people is a
| great incentive to figure this out). I'm sure there are other
| examples of intensive analysis throughout the system, but
| that's the only good example I can think about.
| ipc0nfg wrote:
| I agree, it's unfortunate how it ended. My first real contact
| with cybernetics while being younger was a book "Cybernetics
| and character" by Marian Mazur (printed in 1976). Later
| chapters bored me but the beginning of book had impact on me as
| showed me a bit different mode of thinking which I believe
| improved my understanding of complex systems.
|
| In book he tried to model different psychological behaviors,
| like conflicts, using cybernetics language and try to draw
| conclusion and what such simple models can tell us.
|
| Also in introduction Mazur argued that science should not have
| artificial bounds as "subjects" and closed walls - there are
| many problems that arise in many different fields, with many
| different point of views. That also changed me in a way that I
| started to actively engage with totally different fields of
| science. At all, cybernetics is about abstract ideas that are
| quite universal.
| nanna wrote:
| Couldn't agree more.
| lagrange77 wrote:
| This is the kind of book I'd rather have physically, preferably a
| copy from the time it was published.
| gglitch wrote:
| Beautiful design, illustrations, and typography.
| toolslive wrote:
| That's an understatement. It's utterly brilliant.
| gdss wrote:
| HELLL YAAA
| mr_luc wrote:
| I have a physical copy of this! My parents got it for me at a
| garage sale in the 80s when I was a little nipper.
|
| It has a great programming language "tower of babel"
| illustration.
|
| It wasn't until years later that I realized it was a Soviet
| science ecosystem book. Some of the content should have been a
| giveaway ...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-17 23:01 UTC) |