11–20 of 167 posts
> TBD Lab’s researchers have come to view many Meta executives as interested only in improving the social media business That cannot have been a surprise to anyone joining.
Even if both "sides" really wanted to get along, working with someone making 100x (if not 1,000x) more than you is poised to be a weird interaction. It must also be massively demoralizing, particularly if you're an engineer who has been there for 10+ years and has pushed features which directly bring in revenue, etc... Btw, >But Mr. Wang, who is developing the model, pushed back. He argued that the goal should be to…
When I read that the dude was asked to take $2b from reality labs and spend it on AI, I was shocked… that they were still spending $2b on virtual reality nonsense in 2025. That said, from what I understand, X is working on using grok to improve the algorithm. Why can’t fb do the same and coexist?
Meta prints money as an ad company but clearly resents being one. VR was a ~$100B+ attempt to buy pivot, and it’s generated ~single-digit billions in revenue. The tech worked maybe, but the vibe sucked, and the problem was that people don’t want to live or work there. Also, Meta leadership personalities are toxic to a lot of people. Now they’re doing the same thing with AI e.g., throw money at it, overpay new talent,…
Do they? It seems to me that they're just aware that social media and the internet is trendy and they need to be out there ready to control the next big thing if they want to put ads on it. Facebook has been dying for years. Instagram makes them more ad revenue per user than FB but it's not the most popular app of its class.
Even if both "sides" really wanted to get along, working with someone making 100x (if not 1,000x) more than you is poised to be a weird interaction. It must also be massively demoralizing, particularly if you're an engineer who has been there for 10+ years and has pushed features which directly bring in revenue, etc... Btw, >But Mr. Wang, who is developing the model, pushed back. He argued that the goal should be to…
same is true in many startups
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meta prints money as an ad company but clearly resents being one. VR was a ~$100B+ attempt to buy pivot, and it’s generated ~single-digit billions in revenue. The tech worked maybe, but the vibe sucked, and the problem was that people don’t want to live or work there. Also, Meta leadership personalities are toxic to a lot of people. Now they’re doing the same thing with AI e.g., throw money at it, overpay new talent,…
>clearly resents being one. Do they? It seems to me that they're just aware that social media and the internet is trendy and they need to be out there ready to control the next big thing if they want to put ads on it. Facebook has been dying for years. Instagram makes them more ad revenue per user than FB but it's not the most popular app of its class.
> TBD Lab’s researchers have come to view many Meta executives as interested only in improving the social media business That cannot have been a surprise to anyone joining.
Meta doesn’t really have a social media business, they have an ad business that’s driven by a massive dumping operation in social media.
When I read that the dude was asked to take $2b from reality labs and spend it on AI, I was shocked… that they were still spending $2b on virtual reality nonsense in 2025. That said, from what I understand, X is working on using grok to improve the algorithm. Why can’t fb do the same and coexist?
>Why can’t fb do the same and coexist?
I'm sorry ,but what does this mean? Like are they prompting grok for suggestions on improvements? or having it write code? or something else?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meta doesn’t really have a social media business, they have an ad business that’s driven by a massive dumping operation in social media.
What is the difference between the two? What kind of social media business is there other than selling ads?
It would have the side effect of making the whole business less ghoulish and manipulative, since the operators wouldn't be incentivized to maximize eyeball hours.
It's impossible to imagine this because government regulation is so completely corrupted that a decades-long anticompetitive dumping scheme is allowed to occur without the slightest pushback.
All companies are structuring like this, and some are more equipped to do it than others
Basically the executive team realizes the corporate hierarchy is too rigid for the lowly engineers to surface any innovation or workflow adjustments above the AI anxiety riddled middle management and bandwagon chaser’s desperate plea for job security, and so the executive creates a team exempt from it operating in a new structure
Most agentic work impacts organizations that are outside of the tree of that software/product team, and there is no trust in getting the workflow altered unless a team from upon high overwrites the targeted organization
we are at that phase now, I expect this to accelerate as executives catch on through at least mid-summer 2026