Please note that there is an article/letter in Significance magazine, by Nicholas Longford, Imperial College London, August 2017, pp 46-47,
significancemagazine.com, where he expresses his view that the p-value, as used with regard to "significance," is inappropriate for making decisions. His disdain seems rather clear. The article is titled "p-values and decision-making." I'd say that the problem with the word "significance" is apparent from that article. Though the word "significance" is not included in the title, it features prominently as problematic in the article itself.
.....
In a comment above that, I noted that "significance" is a misnomer [or at least misleading], and in another comment above that, pointed out that with "big data," it is obvious why sticking with a level such as 0.05 is nonsensical.
It is interesting that the letter by N. Longford was published in a magazine called "Significance." I remember that when this magazine first came out, I thought that it was not a good choice for a name. Actually, I was rather aggravated.
Longford's letter/article comments on the need to consider the probabilities of both types of error, and the "consequences" of each. (He is considering decision-making, so consequences are important.) I think that everyone here has access to this article (my copy of Significance just arrived today), it is short, and you might want to read it.
Cheers - Jim