This is a really interesting thing to think about. If we pick on Facebook as an example, most people look at FB and see that it has 2.3 billion customers, then

This is a really interesting thing to think about. If we pick on Facebook as an example, most people look at FB and see that it has 2.3 billion customers, then go on to assume it's an amazing and innovative company filled with great people who make the best product in the industry. An alternative point of view is that there are 2.3 billion customers out there for this type of product, and the financial systems and incentives present in our society resulted in Facebook owning all of those customers. FB actually is exemplary of the flaws present in the first mode of thinking. I don't doubt there are many brilliant people working there, but their product is crappy and even user hostile on many levels. Biggest absolutely doesn't translate to best all the time. More likely FB got to where it is because the rules of our society concentrate capital and control (which is exactly what we see going on when we look at data such as wealth disparity, shrinking # of new businesses etc. in the USA over time).