Google isn't fundamentally in the entertainment business. They are in the search/ad business, which breaks the fundamental assumption here ("users need to be en

Google isn't fundamentally in the entertainment business. They are in the search/ad business, which breaks the fundamental assumption here ("users need to be entertained or they leave"). Moreover, Facebook has shown an ability to capture attention, in spite of an incumbent TikTok; their decision to acquire Instagram when they did was canny and their ability to continue to foster it was skillful. With respect to the "Apollo Program" metaphor — Google's X projects and other projects (like Waymo) are formidable, and may lead to serious breakthroughs and changes to society. The narrative that FB/Google are inefficient is questionable and is offered without coherent context; it would be helpful to compare them, say, to Genentech, Merck, Lockheed Martin and other large companies with serious R&D budgets, which have survived and are doing okay, despite not being as nimble as, say, the occasional dark horse like SpaceX (with respect to Lockheed Martin). Yes, Google and Facebook may not loom like the giants they were. But there is a good chance they will continue to thrive. Another example: Microsoft is doing fine, despite not being the giant it was in the 90s.