Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#21

Post by senordevnyc »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #10
ggm wrote: post #3

I find the amorality of the billionaire class strange. He could be as good as somebody running a public enterprise, a research lab, a hospital. A state energy utility. Instead he's running a giant meme tank feeding racist shit to win clicks and running fake AI ads boosting scam investments. He's good at that. But is he actually any good at building things which enrich society without making him money?

He’s a sociopath. Why ignore that obvious fact? He buys a Hawaiian island and builds a secret bunker there for when the wasted mouths are eradicated. These robber billionaires aren’t normal people.

I'm sure they're all the same to you, but that's Ellison, not Zuckerberg.

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#22

Post by senordevnyc »

bdangubic wrote: post #6
ggm wrote: post #3

I find the amorality of the billionaire class strange. He could be as good as somebody running a public enterprise, a research lab, a hospital. A state energy utility. Instead he's running a giant meme tank feeding racist shit to win clicks and running fake AI ads boosting scam investments. He's good at that. But is he actually any good at building things which enrich society without making him money?

> He's good at that. But is he actually any good at building things which enrich society without making him money? Name one human for whom this answer would be true - just one please? (not defending Zuck, he is probably one of the most evil people in the history of the entire civilization)

he is probably one of the most evil people in the history of the entire civilization

This is legitimately hilarious. If only Hitler or Stalin knew that to really hit the top of the evil pyramid these days, you need to create a social network. Murdering millions just doesn't compare.

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#23

Post by notahacker »

muzani wrote: post #14

Most tech giants are one hit wonders. Microsoft is the exception, not the norm. The playbook now is get product-market fit -> own 99% market share -> build, buy, exterminate everything that could threaten this market share -> when the disruption comes, pivot to it. Zuck inspired the playbook. He's done it to perfection. He's been in the ring for 20 years. Yahoo dominated for about 5-7 years. By no means is he a bad C…

Think that's fair. He's generally been excellent at pissing off users in ways which grow his reach without them leaving and he's been willing to spend big on nascent competitors and actually managed not to destroy their platforms, but I do get the feeling (i) real activity on Facebook actually is tailing off now and (ii) he left a money on the table going for low value ads based on click patterns rather than building events and marketplace into genuinely useful services. But that wasn't his thing and the thing he did have made him enough money to give him bragging rights over an entire room of other billionaires.

Managed not to lose it all on his stillborn metaverse or trying to outcompete AI startups too.

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#24

Post by journal »

ggm wrote: post #3

I find the amorality of the billionaire class strange. He could be as good as somebody running a public enterprise, a research lab, a hospital. A state energy utility. Instead he's running a giant meme tank feeding racist shit to win clicks and running fake AI ads boosting scam investments. He's good at that. But is he actually any good at building things which enrich society without making him money?

He's like Tiger Woods of social media. Can you imagine him doing anything else?

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#25

Post by bruce511 »

bluecheese452 wrote: post #18
bruce511 wrote: post #15

Why do you care? I mean that seriously. Sometimes when one asks a question the asking may be more insightful to you than the answer. I mean, you'll get a bunch of answers here, reflecting a bunch of opinions. But why do you care about what they think? And what does it matter to you what Zuck is or not. It doesn't sound like you're asking about billionaires in general (or the number of them, or the harm they are doing…

Why do you care why he cares? Why post this long essay?

Psychologically it can be more important to understand why you asked a question than in getting an answer.

I wrote the reply so the asker could reflect on the motivation which in turn can lead to a more satisfying outcome than simple agreement.

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#26

Post by bruce511 »

bjourne wrote: post #17
bruce511 wrote: post #15

Why do you care? I mean that seriously. Sometimes when one asks a question the asking may be more insightful to you than the answer. I mean, you'll get a bunch of answers here, reflecting a bunch of opinions. But why do you care about what they think? And what does it matter to you what Zuck is or not. It doesn't sound like you're asking about billionaires in general (or the number of them, or the harm they are doing…

If it can be rationally argued that the success of the billionaire class is mostly down to luck, size and "quality" of their lineage's social network, exploiting legal loopholes, and immoral conduct, then it follows that we should demand much more of their wealth for the betterment of society. And I very much think that the argument is correct. The Epstein files and the lesser known but just as important Panama paper…

I don't think you need to question the moral source of wealth to justify taxing it.

Tax law certainly doesn't require justification. Neither does public sentiment.

Personally I'm in the camp that wealth could be taxed far more aggressivly. But the current party with political power believes the opposite. My only actual power here is to vote and encourage others to do the same.

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#27

Post by muzani »

notahacker wrote: post #23
muzani wrote: post #14

Most tech giants are one hit wonders. Microsoft is the exception, not the norm. The playbook now is get product-market fit -> own 99% market share -> build, buy, exterminate everything that could threaten this market share -> when the disruption comes, pivot to it. Zuck inspired the playbook. He's done it to perfection. He's been in the ring for 20 years. Yahoo dominated for about 5-7 years. By no means is he a bad C…

Think that's fair. He's generally been excellent at pissing off users in ways which grow his reach without them leaving and he's been willing to spend big on nascent competitors and actually managed not to destroy their platforms, but I do get the feeling (i) real activity on Facebook actually is tailing off now and (ii) he left a money on the table going for low value ads based on click patterns rather than building…

i) I'm sure everyone agrees with this, except maybe a few fans. The best thing he did was slowly wean the whole company off FACEBOOK, even if it's with the Meta smokescreen. Instagram is their core now.

ii) I would disagree on this. Meta is king of low value ads. Google is great at targeted ads, but sometimes you want something to reach as many eyes as possible, as cheaply as possible.

They've barely avoided many of the dark patterns like chumboxes and forced repetition of screens, just because they have enough people scrolling through it. Of course, there's other dark patterns here, but I give them a B+ for low value ads.

The marketplaces and events still provide massive value to the world, for free, as long as they lasted. In the end, it's nearly a trillion dollar company, which is a remarkable thing to build on low value ads.

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#28

Post by cutthegrass2 »

senordevnyc wrote: post #21
Dumblydorr wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s a sociopath. Why ignore that obvious fact? He buys a Hawaiian island and builds a secret bunker there for when the wasted mouths are eradicated. These robber billionaires aren’t normal people.

I'm sure they're all the same to you, but that's Ellison, not Zuckerberg.

Not a whole island, but a significant bit of one. https://www.wired.com/story/mark-zuckerberg-inside-hawaii-co...

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#29

Post by bluecheese452 »

bruce511 wrote: post #25
bluecheese452 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you care why he cares? Why post this long essay?

Psychologically it can be more important to understand why you asked a question than in getting an answer. I wrote the reply so the asker could reflect on the motivation which in turn can lead to a more satisfying outcome than simple agreement.

Maybe you should psychologically analyze why you feel the need to simp for billionaires.

Re: Ask HN: Is Zuckerberg just a „one-hit-wonder"?

#30

Post by senordevnyc »

cutthegrass2 wrote: post #28
senordevnyc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure they're all the same to you, but that's Ellison, not Zuckerberg.

Not a whole island, but a significant bit of one. https://www.wired.com/story/mark-zuckerberg-inside-hawaii-co...

1400 acres is 0.4% of Kauai.
Post reply on HN