sci/15334386.txt

-----
--- 15334407
ctmu
--- 15334457
>>15334407
Looks interesting
--- 15334481
>>15334457
it is very
--- 15334931
>>15334386 (OP)
Does it have a future? How does it differ from Computer Science
--- 15334935
>>15334931
There's no money in doing cybernetics if that's what you're asking. Cybernetics is incompatible with capitalism.
--- 15334977
>>15334931
Computer science is about computers.
Cybernetics is about amphetamines and schizophrenia
--- 15335041
>>15334977
It's just a statement of fact. If people believe that all work must be profitable then unprofitable work like cybernetic research is not considered work. There is no money to be made in cybernetics because the theory itself leads to an obvious conclusion of utopian automation. This makes it clearly incompatible with profit motives because if most of the hard labor is done by robots then what use is money?
--- 15335073
>>15335041
Still useful. Plus superneurons and diseases cured and mindware practictioner field and profession emerges
--- 15335115
>>15334977
Ah so like astronomy vs astrology
--- 15335577
>>15335115
Do you think astonomy is only just Surpassing astrology in earthnarrativeterms of propelling civilisation?
Do astronomy advancement people get blessed by the gods andor whatever too?
--- 15335580
>>15335577
>astonomy
Astronomy*
--- 15335586
I thought cybernetics meant prosthetic limbs to be desu
--- 15337524
>>15334935
Nice picrel. What is cybernetics?
>>15334977
What is cybernetics? What is computation?
--- 15338581
>>15334386 (OP)
If cybernetics was taken seriously, we'd have had self-driving cars in the 1990s.
--- 15339225
don't even waste a second of your time trying to understand or learn cybernetics. it's literally nothing. just a bunch of nonsense babbling about adaptive systems and shit, it's an exercise in basic logic and english language if anything. it's not a science, nor it is remotely scientific and you don't actually do anything with it except for submiting papers where you talk about consequences.

whereas if you study the more esoteric math, it'll still have some sense and rigor, cybernitcs is literally nothing, less that philosophy and gender studies even.

>t. studied cybernetics.
I wish I didn't waste my time with it and studied mech engineering or applied math or something that actually has a basis in reality at least.
--- 15339229
>>15335586
that's the beauty of it, it is nothing and it can be anything you want it to be. it's literally a buzz word used by economists to appear smarter and more learned than they are in fact
--- 15339738
>>15339225
You're retarded at a fundamental level, the thing with cybernetics is that it's ultimately just a explanation and a perspective on how intelligent systems organise themselves and while this in and of itself is completely inert although a very good intellectual exercise by itself if you keep the theory pure, the utility of cybernetics only comes into existence at the intersection with another field, for example this can be seen in neuron behavior at every level a prime example would be energy homeostasis refer to https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fncom.2019.00049/full
--- 15339764
>>15334386 (OP)
3.14
--- 15339987
>>15339927
Yes ctmu is just a boring extrapolation of the universe in cybernetic terms
--- 15340296
>>15339738
its a bunch of nonsense. calling it a "way of thinking" gives that away. there's math, its application, mathematical modeling and that's about it.

you could model anything as anything, calling it cybernetics and wishing away the math by drawing fancy art doesn't make it real.

I've unfortuantely studied way too much of this babble to speak as an uninformed citizen.

I'm saying this as an advice and a warning to all prospecting young students, don't waste your time it, just do math if you're into such wizardry
--- 15340727
>>15340296
It's incredibly useful and relevant in the agricultural industry and in neuroscience both of which are my main hobbys and I find cybernetics being used in these fields hence my interest
--- 15341627
>>15340727
interesting then. name one equation that you learned with "cybernetics" that might be useful.
you cannot because such things don't exist, only fancy vague drawings.

agriculture is a discipline in itself, so is neuroscience. if you want to test hypothesis you gather data and do some statistical tests on it, or maybe model it as differential equations. or as some form of algebra.

math teaches all of that and cybernetics teaches none of that, only that systems are complex and adaptive
--- 15341641
>>15341627
It seems you've mistaken the application of mathematics for the only tool of use to an educated person 

One day you might see things differently but people like you are pointless to argue with
--- 15341646
>>15341641
idk how pointless I am to argue with. I asked you for material, logical, cartesian or whatever knowledge you extracted from "cybernetics". I have studied it as my main subject in university and I am telling you I just wasted a bunch of time learning a bunch of nice sounding philosophy and rethoric.

as part of the class we also dicked around with tableau and wolf/sheep population simulations but nothing too serious
--- 15342273
>>15337524
bumped for this
--- 15342292
>>15340296
I'm a person uninitiated to cybernetics. Is it all just a giant Fourier Transform?
--- 15342308
Does cybernetics have anything to say about the new wave of AI? I get that it isn't the most quantitative of discipline, but even something like heuristics for designing low-rank adaptations would already be of significant practical value (and probably theoretical value as well).
--- 15342922
>>15341627
>>15341627
>>15341641
It's not so much mathematical equations but just the concepts behind it in feedback i'll give an example out of some gay document i had to write
"In the context of REDACTED, the most optimal way to achieve sustainable intensification appears to be through the diligent monitoring and collection of data on all inputs and outputs within the agricultural system. This involves tracking various factors such as water usage, fertilizer application, crop yields, and livestock health, among others. By employing cybernetic principles, the farm is able to analyze this data and identify patterns or trends that may indicate areas for improvement or potential inefficiencies.
Once this data has been collected and analyzed, the farm can then quantify the effects of any alterations made to these inputs on the end result outputs, such as crop yield or livestock productivity. This process of continuous monitoring, analysis, and adjustment is reminiscent of a cybernetic feedback loop, wherein the system constantly self-regulates and adapts based on the information it receives."
As well as the study I posted early https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fncom.2019.00049/full which is about ATP/energy levels determining neuron behavior
--- 15343882
>>15342922
yeah. and in real speak terms you're going to gather numerical data on those exogenous variables, do a regression analysis or what have you and determine the link between it and the endogenous variable aka crop out or whatever you're interested in.

now you're doing statistics.

>>15342292
I didn't do anything of the sort while studying it, so idk. you may apply fourier transformations in a "cybernetic" way I guess
--- 15344691
>>15343882
But that's what cybernetics is isn't it? Just a a series of feedback loops and corrections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oad8Ro8j_fE&ab_channel=IndridCold [Embed]
--- 15344789
One time I farted and accidentally shit my pants on the bus. Now I use the feedback from the nerves in my anus to control the flow of gas and check for imminent stool.
--- 15344979
>>15334386 (OP)
Cybernetics is self organizing systems. The old cybernetics is actually just neural networks. No one has formally proved it yet but it's hidden.
--- 15345338
>>15344789
yeah bro you're doing advanced cybernetics
--- 15346084
>>15344789
Source?
--- 15346951
>>15334386 (OP)
No one has really given an adequate sense yet of what cybernetics is yet so I'll start. It came about during the 1940s when they shipped a bunch of academics to Mexico to help with the war effort. Norbert Wiener and Arturo Rosenbluth were interested in the prospect of their potentially being hidden areas of research and development because academics tend to get shoved into silos where they only focus on a limited area of study. So in Mexico, they ended up discussing what each other was doing and tried to understand each other’s subjects in that other persons own terms. They eventually found that quite a few disciplines had their own conceptions of control and communication, such that various disciplines used the ideas of control and communication in analogous ways yet operating over different domains of interpretation. Walter Pitts and Warren McCulloch noticed for example, that the all-or-nothing potential of neurons could be mapped onto Boolean values and created the first ever artificial neuron model. They also noted how the form of different biological systems could tell you about other parallel biological systems in the body.
A lot of people here seem to have "done" it but don't "get" what it is trying to do. You do cybernetics when you try to find functional analogies across different disciplines. You could call it applied math, applied physics, applied philosophy. That's kind of reductive and misses the overarching point of what the subject is trying to do. You’re looking for functional analogies between disciplines, which tell you something about both. The issue currently with cybernetics at the moment (which people in the field acknowledge), is that people are fonder of talking about it and its applications rather than actually doing anything with it.
--- 15347762
>>15337524
--- 15348264
>>15339225
>he didn't make it into RAND
--- 15352486
>>15344691
see:
>>15346951
and:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ6orMfmorg [Embed]
>>15344691
Paul's a pretty cool guy IMO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCQWtTcCaRY [Embed]
--- 15360828
bump
--- 15361236
>>15347762
This man raised one of the shittiest, most morally bereft emperors of Rome; is that not a awful review of his philosophy and behavior?
--- 15366657
>>15361236
Shame on him
--- 15367777
Thx bro, love niggas who post PDFs
--- 15368034
>>15346951
To me sounds as an attempt to formalize
some sort of metaphysics of engineering in general.
--- 15368038
>>15368034
Platonic engineering?
--- 15368042
>>15367777
Worthless college children piece of shit no self respecting smart white male uses that piece of shit phrase, kys immediately
--- 15368091
>>15334935
you're retarded
cybernetics engineers are some of the best paid people on the planet
countless processes in contemporary manufacturing and industry in general are cybernetic in nature
--- 15368099
>>15337524
cybernetics refers to self-regulating systems
at some level or other they are inherently computational, since they rely on feeding their outputs back into their own inputs
--- 15368461
>>15368034
>>15368038

It kind of is in a sense.

Wiener was very influenced by Leibniz's Monadology, which emphasises the role of perception and apperception as fundamental to our understanding of the world. A Platonist slant is permissible, although it might be better to characterise it as an Aristotelian take on forms?
In any case, one of the underlying ideas in cybernetics is that the form of one system can tell you about the form of another. Lettvin, Maturana, McCulloch and Pitts wrote a paper “What the frogs eye tells the frogs brain”, which (if I can remember correctly) said something along the lines of: The structure of the frogs eye can tell us something about the frogs brain and vice versa. This principle is generalised across different epistemic domains. 
For example, can the human body provide insights or principles for running a company or state effectively? Or, what could primatology or early childhood studies tell us about developing conversational multi-agent systems?
--- 15368563
Can I have a cybernetics reading list?
--- 15369026
Wtf is this thread where are my irl cyborg arms wtf are you talking about
--- 15369365
>>15368099
>cybernetics refers to self-regulating systems
Is it a mathematical science? An engineering science? Why only self-regulating systems? Is there a science that studies systems in general?
--- 15369664
>>15337524
Cybernetics is a meme technology that Soviet planners imagined would solve the pricing problem (it didn't)
--- 15369670
>>15339225
>it's literally nothing. just a bunch of nonsense babbling about adaptive systems and shit, it's an exercise in basic logic and english language if anything
Huh? I thought cybernetics was all about skull-guns and nanobots and brain implants and biomechanical enhancements?
>My vision is augmented
that kind of shit
--- 15369717
>>15361236
>It is what it is
~Marcus Aurelius, Meditations
--- 15369742
>>15368461
To me it sounds as if they are some sort of socialists, who try to simplify engineering, reducing them to some sort of frameworks... as it is called now by lefties, when they speak about AI chats, "democratization of science"

I bet those guys are the ones who construct frameworks for corporations and gov's. Would be something that glowies study.
--- 15369769
>>15368563
Snowcrash was a fun read.
>>15334386 (OP)
Seems as if Anon did not catch the start small part of that but uh usually it starts with mech suits un exoskellies does it not?
--- 15369776
>>15369769
>usually it starts with mech suits un exoskellies does it not?
It's actually about automating five-year-plans for shitty socialist economies.
--- 15369818
>>15369776
loses its magic that way does it not? you coulda suggested nanomachine medication.
--- 15370163
>>15369664
It seems that cybernetics was initially considered with suspicion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybernetics_in_the_Soviet_Union
--- 15370302
>>15334935
'I misunderstand everything I read' /lit/ retard
--- 15372146
>>15368461
>what could early childhood studies tell us about developing conversational multi-agent systems?
Imagine if an AI company had scans of elementary school homework for hundreds of kids across the whole age range to use as part of their multimodal LM training.
--- 15377768
bump
--- 15378912
>>15372146
Less what I was getting at. Think about the very early stages when infants learn to interact with their parents. How infants and young children first begin to use language. If you model those behaviours in the systems you design, then you’re more likely to replicate an AGI (or at least take a step in the right direction IMO).
>>15369742
Superficially speaking, you could argue that. The difference is that cybernetics bases itself on mathmatical and logical formalisms at its heart. You can't really put them in the same camp as modern leftist tendencies (who seem more poststructuralist in nature). You don't get the endless linguistic analysis of discourse and people pleasing tendencies in cybernetics, because it’s not concerned with that.
--- 15378986
>>15368563
It's a big area, anything your particularly looking for? Good introductions are from easiest to hardest: Cybernetics for the social sciences, by Bernard Scott; The human use of human beings, by Norbert Wiener, and Introduction to Cybernetics by Ross Ashby.

Stafford Beer's work on organisational theory is my cocaine. I suggest heart of enterprise, as that was what originally got me into cybernetics. But all of his works are good (they are meant for management people, so is more wordy and conceptual in its approach).

The hard stuff would by Wiener's cybernetics (I hope you like triple integrals), von Foester's Understanding Understanding, McCulloch's Embodiments of Mind (first formulation of an artificial neuron), and maybe Pask's an Approach to Cybernetics (I think, haven’t had a chance to read it yet).

There's other stuff out there, but I'm hesitant of prescribing it. You have to have a certain appreciation for interdisciplinarity with cybernetics and if you don't have that you won't see the point of it.

It might be worth your time listening to Stafford Beer's videos anon first before you decide if it's worth your time. Seriously, project cybersyn was fucking insane. Same thing with OGAS with Viktor Glushkov if you think about the potential implications, it may have had if successful (Soviet Union could still exist).
--- 15378993
>>15369365
Just think of it as transdisciplinary control and communication theory. It's a fuzzy area of research, and less of a science or discipline in its own right.
--- 15379276
>>15335586
I thought cybernetics was this too. In a way that combines different fields (computer science, engineering etc...) to replicate biology with artificial materials and machines. For example advance prosthetics or robotics + """AI""". But after seeing these: >>15339225 >>15370163 I'm back to being confused again. 

But honestly, I think this term will continue to fester in a petri dish until the AI hype is cooled down, then the mainstream media will hype businesses and investors with this "new technology", like they did with web 3.0, metaverse, crypto, AI. Also just like with /g/ when they got flooded when GPT hit mainstream, /sci/ could (hopefully not) see a huge wave of people if or when cybernetics hits mainstream conversation.
--- 15379741
>>15339229
>cybernetics
economist here, have never used the word cybernetics before outside science fiction
--- 15380334
>>15379276
You mean biotics, you dunce.
Hint: intelligent people can deconstruct the essential meaning of words via their etymology. "Cybernetics" derives from something like "the study of steering (e.g. a ship)".
I know do not have to explain the connection to systems.