this post was submitted on 11 May 2026
634 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
84534 readers
3632 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Facebook thrived because it got access to cheap money through Carlyle Investments. They used that cheap money to buy up a bunch of their competitors (most famously, Instagram, but there's 108 different acquisitions in the Wikipedia list alone) and either insource them or close them out.
Very real possibility that a gaggle of Facebook refugees form a new company, get some decent Series A or B financing, start to take off on user numbers, and grow big enough to be worth adding to some bigger firm's M&A list.
But the idea that they're going to capture the 1B+ user Facebook market share? On what hardware? With what IT support? In partnership with which ISPs? Through which advertisement agencies? Come on, dude. Think about how these businesses function in practice. Setting aside how many "Facebook Clone" companies have flopped, there's a value-add to Facebook that comes directly from their deplorable business model. You can't make a "better Facebook" without sacrificing what makes the Facebook revenue play work. That's before asking how you're going to win a headbutt fight with a dinosaur.