Your post implies that I discounted collaboration which I obviously did not. Look at the original post again, it deliberately says that competition is important

Your post implies that I discounted collaboration which I obviously did not. Look at the original post again, it deliberately says that competition is important as well as collaboration. Hence why your reply is categorically baseless. As for “winner takes all” why don’t you look up the definition of a “zero sum game”. A zero sum game usually applies to simplistic games like chess or an island with limited resources aka things that have a measurable gains and losses. Complex situations like the one described are rarely zero sum. When I say winner takes all its more of an “expression” symbolizing the intensity of competition. I think it’s quite obvious that the situation here is not some contest setup so that a single winner takes everything. There’s no need to make your self sound smart and use the words “zero sum game” redundantly. Only certain types of people use the words “zero sum game” colloquially for the purposes of sounding smart even though the majority of situations in nature aren’t actually artificial games setup to be zero sum. The word is also used negatively as if zero sum games can’t ever exist. Like it’s obviously wrong if your describing a zero sum game. It’s rare but zero sum games do exist so stating that something is a zero sum game doesn’t move the conversation forward. Like so what? Yeah I could be describing a zero sum game, it doesn’t make me wrong, what’s your point? Case in point, the credit for the First person or team who can get Linux running on the m1 IS a zero sum game and there already is a winner for that “game.”