HI version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
80% Positive
Analyzed from 1749 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#facebook#social#more#meta#money#don#before#right#same#https

Discussion (61 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
Could you explain this bit ?
Kalshi: "Trade the Future."
Meta Arena: "They 'trust me.' Dumb f^^ks."
But then again, this is very on brand for Meta/Zuck, so I‘m not surprised.
Facebook has no content production experience though, and when they do dip their toes into that market its via AI slop (like their official AI accounts on instagram). I think this is because they don't value the human element of art at all.
They would be entirely reliant other content providers, which is a rough place to be in when you have to deal with actual studios and not just independent creators. Independent creators are easier for Facebook to exploit since they are usually small operations and dependent on facebook/instagram for market reach.
What, you want to get fired?
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/06/how-to-burst-the-ai-...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diem_(digital_currency)
I don’t know if I’ll call Kalshi and Polymarket “good ideas”.
...sometimes
He also copied Friendster.
A comment like this does not gratify curiosity, only indignation, and we're here for the former not the latter.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
as for the newsguidelines, I think it "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity" to think about what motivates tech ceos and talk about how they do things
Social networks didn't really exist before The Facebook. Understanding the potential market that could be created and turning down a $1B acquisition from Yahoo 20-years ago, at the time, seemed insane.
Also making the shift to mobile, when people thought that would be the death of FB is a remarkable story.
Identifying to acquire WhatsApp & Instagram, both laughed at when bought for the acquisition price at that time, now massive businesses for Meta (and their market cap value).
Meta AI glasses are surprisingly popular and growing. And more...
Note: I have no affiliation with Meta (not now or in the past)
---
EDIT: Many people I see underestimate what it takes to build a business. It is the classic “I could have built that in a weekend” critique. Maybe, but the product is only like 10% of the problem. 90% of the work (and hard part) is execution.
They have released some good open source technology, but as the OP said, Meta hasn't much going for it apart from addictive apps for showing ads
You never heard of MySpace?
My dude, no one in your reply thread is making that claim. We bristling at the claim that "Social networks didn't really exist before The Facebook". Unless you're saying FB's innovation is its business model and is what made it dominate, well, your original statement just didn't substantiate that.
IMO, the only thing I'd credit Zuck for is sticking (at least at the start) to his singular vision of what a social network should be; first it was just open for .edu emails, then when it was released more broadly their product roadmap stuck to fostering a social environment online.
And then he lost that vision. I'd say it was circa Cambridge Analytica when engagement---often ragebait because it gave them more and stronger of that sweet sweet monetizable ad signals---replaced fostering an online social environment. Others would say it's the algorithmic news feed. Either way, losing that vision started FB's demise.
IME, FB was best when it was a supplement and not a replacement for real life. FB had value to me because we could plan parties there and even keep in touch after, get that social buzz going for a little while longer. But it was _never_ the party.
But their recent efforts---Metaverse, all the AI crap---has all the hallmakrs of trying to replace real life. They now want to be the party but good luck with that. Judging by the blowback and lack of adoption consumers see what they're up to a mile away. Zuck has no idea how to stay relevant so now we have a platform more concerned with its market cap than having actual utility.
Seriously? Of course they did. An easy counter-example is MySpace, which launched several months before Facebook's very first appearance as a Hot Or Not mimic (which predates Zuck by 3 years), and had many millions more users for years (especially while FB was restricted to colleges).
Major competition and a lot of money was going into social media around then (and for a couple years prior), FB is just the eventual winner.
Social networks were all the rage. He executed the best of all and had the right strategy to build the user base.
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2003/11/19/facemash-creat...
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-mark-zuckerberg-hacked-i...
Not what I'd call great execution anyways.
Zuck has no insight. His sole ambition is to be rich and taken seriously.