> For most of history success meant control of scarce resources. (...) > That is changing. Increasingly the games that matter are not zero-sum. Increasingly you

> For most of history success meant control of scarce resources. (...) > That is changing. Increasingly the games that matter are not zero-sum. Increasingly you win not by fighting to get control of a scarce resource, but by having new ideas and building new things. I'm not an economist and my mental model of things is probably wrong, but how is business never a zero-sum game? Are users and their money not scarce resources that they'll either spend in your products (and thus funding your survival and your competitors' demise) or in your competitors' products (and thus funding their survival and your eventual demise)?