[dylan604]

quite the opposite. i'm tired of the concept "there are no losers" and everyone deserves a reward. life is harsh, and teaching that at younger ages is better than soft selling the concept of losing so that it's a harsh slap in the face later in life.

[pixl97]

Then SpaceX already won and just needs to stick with the Falcon9/Heavy putting the rest of the space industry out of business.

If you teach people life is harsh, then typically they won't try new things. If you tell people life is easy and risk free, they may do something that gets them killed...

If you balance out both you get people that try new things with appropriate safety and risk tolerance.

[nilamo]

Right but the comment you replied to is just pointing out that there can be multiple winners.

Coke and Pepsi both are winning, though your comments sound like you think one is a loser for not being top sales in beverage.

[dylan604]

If you ask the reps from Coke/Pepsi if they are losing to the other that has top sales, they will tell you "yes". If you ask someone dealing broadcast TV ratings if they are losing because they are the 2nd rated show, they'd also say yes.

I'm not really sure your point. Just because the 2nd placed entity is earning lots of cash means that they are winning? They may be successfully operating their business, but if someone is earning more then they are not winning. I'm really not sure of your definition of winning. Maybe you're using the Charlie Sheen version of winning?

[nilamo]

No, you're using winning in a much more tedious way than most people.

If winning and losing were a spectrum, all those things you listed are very clearly much closer to winning than they are to losing.