If you aren't familiar with Nick Land or accelerationism, read this, this, and especially this, and listen to this, this, this, this, this, and this. I will assume you have a working understanding for the purposes of this post.
Cyberneticians tend to focus on regulatory, negative feedback, while positive feedback is essentially pathologized. This is for good reason: negative feedback systems are stable, whereas positive ones tend to be self-destructive. But in principle, there's also good reason to think otherwise. Stability be damned, regulatory systems will always be outcompeted by exponentially intensifying systems.
Thermostats are the go-to example for explaining negative feedback. I'm not sure there's an equally standardized example for positive feedback, but my own suggestion would be an explosion. A reaction triggers more of the same reaction, which triggers even more of the same reaction, building up a huge burst of energy. The thing about explosions, though, is that they burn fuel. They burn it really fast, actually, and before you can blink it's all used up, leaving only a quietly fading puff of smoke.
Now, when a theory predicts that something will go to infinity in finite time, it isn't usually taken seriously. When you raise the temperature of a pot of water, it will eventually hit a critical point, and evaporate into steam. This is a "phase transition", a case where scaling something up suddenly causes it to take on an entirely different character. Scale anything far enough, and you're bound to hit a phase transition or two.
Land is perfectly aware of this criticism, and he's talked about it in this interview. The point, for him, is that capitalism is the process of undergoing phase transitions. This is more-or-less what is meant by "deterritorialization".
"In this germinal accelerationist matrix, there is no distinction to be made between the destruction of capitalism and its intensification. The auto-destruction of capitalism is what capitalism is. “Creative destruction” is the whole of it, beside only its retardations, partial compensations, or inhibitions. Capital revolutionizes itself more thoroughly than any extrinsic 'revolution' possibly could."
"Capitalism" to Land is defined by this process. Intelligence explosion is special in its adaptability. By the time it runs out of fuel, it will have invented ten alternative ways of sustaining itself. In this sense, I consider Land to be overly optimistic, as strange as that sounds. Žižek said the same thing, actually.
Essentially all observed exponential curves are actually three sigmoids in a trenchcoat. There is evidence technocapital has already hit the inflection point. Moore's Law has been dead for about a decade, and quantum computing is not coming to save it. People have been saying we're in "late-stage capitalism" for the past twelve and a half stages, meanwhile Land has been saying "Nothing human makes it out of the near future," for the past 30 years. Recent developments in so-called "artificial intelligence" feel much less like "convergence toward singularity" and more like "increasingly complicated ways of wasting energy" (see: CYBERGUNK). And we're running out of energy to waste.
(If Land really wants to find the inhuman outside, he should stop worrying about human society and just study quantum field theory...)