4 ms·
facebook did ~$70B in revenue with ~$24B in profit, which implies that it spent about ~$40B to keep itself running, for a year. The Big Dig cost ~20B over the
by Avshalom 7y ago
facebook did ~$70B in revenue with ~$24B in profit, which implies that it spent about ~$40B to keep itself running, for a year.
The Big Dig cost ~20B over the course of a decade.
The Apollo Program clocks in at ~25B
The Large Hadron Collider at a svelte 10B.
Software isn't cheap it's just that no one pays attention to the costs.
- feral 7y agoFacebook is an outlier monopoly, having successfully privatized a massive commons, so I'm not sure their ability to spend 40B a year proves much of anything. (If those figures are even the right lens.) As a counterpoint, Wikipedia's operating costs are ~40M a year, 1000 times less, and I know which one I'd rather keep!
- askafriend 7y ago> having successfully privatized a massive commons They created the commons. It didn't exist before and several companies tried to do what they did. They all failed. MySpace had a huge head start. Didn't matter. Everyone shit on the Instagram acquisition for $1B when it was first reported and years afterwards (in fact Zuck made the decision without even consulting the board and right before a risky IPO where the public was sure to take it as a negative signal). He saw the value and invested in it. Today Instagram is a $100B entity that does more revenue than YouTube. Credit where credit is due. That’s not to say there aren’t issues. There obviously are and they’re well documented.
- zeroonetwothree 7y agoHow many people use those projects? What a weird comparison
- Aeolun 7y agoProbably because the profits are in line with the cost.