In any such competition of adversarial systems, the advantage surely goes to whoever has the most sophisticated conceptual model of the gestalt. This is to say – all of these systems and “systems of systems” have co-evolved as such intimately entangled artefacts, entities, technologies, institutional practices and pragmatic organisational constructs that they embody a unified field of information and energy-processing; a computational super-system. In this sense, all of the technical, technological and cybernetically-piloted sub-systems and their overarching ideological, economic and material incentives as adversarial polarities are so deeply embedded within a shared competitive space of inadvertently holistic co-creation that they all intimately shape each other. The winning hand in this kind of game may go to the team with the systems model that illustrates not only that all of these co-evolutionary streams logically contain each other, but that they are mirrored in and as a singular complex, high-dimensional artefact that logically contains itself. There is at least one conceptual architecture which represents the overarching system as an ontological skeleton-key. We do not only play the big game here, we actively reinvent it.
Of course, no one ever really wins wars and it is a partial function of a psychological (and cultural) blindspot regarding disbelief in this fact that endlessly leads us into such iredeemable catastrophes. Once you understand this, you know how to win.