The things the author complains about seem to be "parts of systems thinking they aren't aware of". The field is still developing.
I think it's worth considering that the theories you're familiar with are incredibly niche, have never gained any foothold in mainstream discussions of system dynamics, and it's not wrong for people not to be aware of them (or to choose not to mention them) in a post addressed at general audiences.
Further, you just missed the opportunity to explain these concepts to a broader HN audience and maybe make sure that the next time someone writes about it, they are aware of this work.
I don't think commenters should be expected to provide full overviews of topics just to inform others. Parent gave plenty of pointers beyond metacybernetics, all of which are certainly discoverable. If you are curious, read about it. It's not the responsibility of random strangers to educate you.
would https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Sturgis_McCulloch be what you mean?
and if not,can you give the right pointer?
Training a nonlinear system to behave in a way you want is the raison d’etre of optimal control theory.
But I wouldn’t say it’s the birthing place of neural networks, personally.
You missed the opportunity to ask a simple question - what is metacybernetics? - and decided everything on that list was just as niche.
There was some hard to follow explanations in it, but the author tries to connect the history and goals of cybernetics versus modern problems like being unable to get support from a company.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Society_for_Cyberneti...