The world has become increasingly cybernetic in every aspect of human lives, this is due to the way many creative field have focused on the topics of communication and behavior. From the way machines think, allowing for outputs which directly influence inputs artificial intelligence, to the way humans interact with machinery in the medical field in neural interfaces, to the art world which has become increasingly process based and a “behavioral trigger” (Ascott, The Cybernetic Stance, p.67). This meaning that the work does not establish ideas but rather poses questions and sparks a dialogue, one that may influence an audience to present their own ideas.
In his writing, Weaver presents to us the three levels of communication problems, all which focus on either the failure to accurately present information, or the misinterpretation of that information. I believe this thought process to be a misstep in the topic of cybernetics due to its failure to understand that cybernetics relies on the different outputs from multiple spectators, ultimately allowing for a continuation of dialogue and expansion of new ideas as Ascott put it. It is intercommunication and the allowing for an output to re-influence the input that can further cybernetics.