5 ms·

>Facebook and Google do too many things. Google? Definitely. Meta? Not really. All Meta has is two social networks and one messaging service. They haven't real

>Facebook and Google do too many things. Google? Definitely. Meta? Not really. All Meta has is two social networks and one messaging service. They haven't really experienced huge success in anything else. They MAY hit big in VR/AR space, but that's yet to be determined.

WastingMyTime89 4y ago
> All Meta has is two social networks and one messaging service. And a payment service, an ad platform, a marketplace, a VR R&D company, I never used them but I guess they also have a line of business services centred on social network communication, I’m probably forgetting plenty of things.
bilekas 4y ago
Just did a check to see their subsidiaries and they actually have way more than I expected : https://inspirationfeed.com/what-companies-does-facebook-own/ https://inspirationfeed.com/what-companies-does-facebook-own...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
xphos 4y ago
They still would definitely met the standard of a monopsony if not a monopoly. Its scary that an enormous number of people start and stop the information searching at google or those two social networks. I think its an oversimplification to say that just breaking them will solve the issue but they definitely handle a governmental level of power in terms of social after effects, which is why nation states target them for fake news.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  Which market are they a monopsony (only one buyer) in?
eppp 4y ago
On one hand you say they are so important they need to be nationalized and on the other you dismiss them as almost a couple of trivial apps. Which one is it?
capableweb 4y ago
Facebook is approaching 100 acquisitions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Meta_Platforms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitio... Feels like a lot and not just three entities. Additionally, Facebook primarily does acquisitions as a form of hiring, according to Mark Zuckerberg himself. They buy the company so they can get the employees to come and work at Facebook.
- paintman252 4y ago
  Sure, they OWN a bunch of stuff, but (besides Facebook/Instagram/Whatsup) none of it is a massive success. It's not like Google which has 1)Search 2)YouTube 3)Maps 4)Android 5)Chrome 6)Gmail 7)Analytics just from top of my head
  - capableweb 4y ago
    Oculus VR, Giphy, Mapillary and more are also successful in their space. Just like Google's successes, the "successes" are actually built by others (almost all you list were acquisitions), but the difference (as mentioned before) is that Google sometimes acquire products for the product itself, while Facebook generally doesn't.
sgc 4y ago
Just social networking services? Modern social interactions revolve around them. Social networks are incredibly important and should be treated as such.
unity1001 4y ago
> All Meta has is two social networks and one messaging service. They literally dominate the social network landscape along with Twitter. They can literally set public agenda. That's too much power.

WastingMyTime89 4y ago

> All Meta has is two social networks and one messaging service. And a payment service, an ad platform, a marketplace, a VR R&D company, I never used them but I guess they also have a line of business services centred on social network communication, I’m probably forgetting plenty of things.

bilekas 4y ago

Just did a check to see their subsidiaries and they actually have way more than I expected : https://inspirationfeed.com/what-companies-does-facebook-own/ https://inspirationfeed.com/what-companies-does-facebook-own...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

xphos 4y ago

They still would definitely met the standard of a monopsony if not a monopoly. Its scary that an enormous number of people start and stop the information searching at google or those two social networks. I think its an oversimplification to say that just breaking them will solve the issue but they definitely handle a governmental level of power in terms of social after effects, which is why nation states target them for fake news.

lotsofpulp 4y ago
Which market are they a monopsony (only one buyer) in?

eppp 4y ago

On one hand you say they are so important they need to be nationalized and on the other you dismiss them as almost a couple of trivial apps. Which one is it?

capableweb 4y ago

Facebook is approaching 100 acquisitions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Meta_Platforms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitio... Feels like a lot and not just three entities. Additionally, Facebook primarily does acquisitions as a form of hiring, according to Mark Zuckerberg himself. They buy the company so they can get the employees to come and work at Facebook.

paintman252 4y ago
Sure, they OWN a bunch of stuff, but (besides Facebook/Instagram/Whatsup) none of it is a massive success. It's not like Google which has 1)Search 2)YouTube 3)Maps 4)Android 5)Chrome 6)Gmail 7)Analytics just from top of my head
- capableweb 4y ago
  Oculus VR, Giphy, Mapillary and more are also successful in their space. Just like Google's successes, the "successes" are actually built by others (almost all you list were acquisitions), but the difference (as mentioned before) is that Google sometimes acquire products for the product itself, while Facebook generally doesn't.

sgc 4y ago

Just social networking services? Modern social interactions revolve around them. Social networks are incredibly important and should be treated as such.

unity1001 4y ago

> All Meta has is two social networks and one messaging service. They literally dominate the social network landscape along with Twitter. They can literally set public agenda. That's too much power.