Even if we did, something non-awesome would STILL be able to “win” if it had enough resources and was well-optimized. At which point, why isn’t its “non-awesome” idea more important than your idea of “awesome”?
(Yes, this is the old Is-Ought thing; I’m still not convinced that it’s a fallacy. I think I might be a nihilist at heart.)
Even if we did, something non-awesome would STILL be able to “win” if it had enough resources and was well-optimized. At which point, why isn’t its “non-awesome” idea more important than your idea of “awesome”?
(Yes, this is the old Is-Ought thing; I’m still not convinced that it’s a fallacy. I think I might be a nihilist at heart.)
If you taboo “important” you might discover you don’t know what you’re talking about.