I like it. It makes sense and you provided examples which demonstrate it's validity. To what degree is it relative? It feels more like an evolutionary hypothesis, speaking in terms of somewhat long time periods as in 85-100 years up to extreme amounts of time to which evolution chooses and changes in it's cycle of progression or balance. I don't think the 80/20 rule is canceled out by this but perhaps even complimented by it. Since the time is shorter more variables and possibilities are hashed out. More ideas and concepts get tested and fail to ensure and even endure the long term time span. Then, it's only -1% that survives this crash course of progression. In the interim, 20% survives as recipes for evolutionary progress. The other 80% of the experiments are failures necessary to discovering something right, true and progressive. 99% of our efforts; evolutionary as individuals and society, are focused to achieve -1% progress-- Or the probability we wish to see manifested in our perceptions of reality.