think big is dead

big is the old old

even when thought locally.
bigger, stronger, louder, and longer might trigger lowlevel patterns but small is as underrated as analog descriptions of great size are overhyped. neither of them is more important than the other.
while it might still be desirable to maintain an illusion of an overview of reality,
rather than thinking of something in always the biggest possible Point of View, it makes sense to look at chaos and remember that all models derived from an approximation of "it/nature/dog/.." are never sufficient to thoroughly describe a more complex system and any focusing on the next big "solution" (hey, you're free to choose your own reality after all) will often lead to a system reacting in a bolder way than necessary.

contrary to dawkins, freedom exists, but it often requires almost machine-like precision to go about ones way knowing that exerting your freedom to leave your own path is seldom a good idea.

to repeat an older meme:

small is beautiful

interfering into systems to "improve them" is the beginners behaviour that at best resembles the dreams of the wizards apprentice.
the cake is a lie.
the cake factory is a bigger lie.
abstractions do not exist. also, closed systems don't either.