3 ms·

> It isn't that Facebook is wasting the vast majority of their infrastructure, though, it's that the application does a lot more for each user. I don't think

> It isn't that Facebook is wasting the vast majority of their infrastructure, though, it's that the application does a lot more for each user. I don't think we can be sure Facebook isn't wasting money on their infrastructure. They've shown themselves to be pretty wasteful in the past.[0][1] They're just rich enough to get away with it. Facebook's application may be doing a lot more to their users than a simpler app, but I doubt it's doing that much for users. [0] https://www.cio.com/article/3197554/why-is-facebooks-ios-app-so-bloated.html https://www.cio.com/article/3197554/why-is-facebooks-ios-app... [1] https://jaxenter.com/facebooks-completely-insane-dalvik-hack-105776.html https://jaxenter.com/facebooks-completely-insane-dalvik-hack...

dx034 6y ago
But if they can choose between saving 10% on infrastructure or adding 5% ad revenue (through more optimizations), the additional revenue is worth more. Just running Facebook, Instagram & Co as a platform would probably be much cheaper than $8 per user.
- ForHackernews 6y ago
  Absolutely. Profligacy is often the rational course in a capitalist system.
  - thrasos 6y ago
    so true
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
    In any system, there will be a tension between shrinking cost/benefit, and spending more to achieve better benefit-cost. This has nothing to do with capitalism. It's a fundamental aspect of systems where there is a non-fixed relationship between investment and return (i.e. almost all systems of any kind).
    - ForHackernews 6y ago
      The notion that "[financial] investment and [financial] return" are the only two factors worth considering in "all systems of any kind" is an artefact of capitalist thinking.
      - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
        That notion is something absent from both text and subtext of my comment. You are the one who inserted it. Investment and cost come in many forms other than the financial.
  - C1sc0cat 6y ago
    That's assuming you have the add inventory a some point reducing costs make sense

dx034 6y ago

But if they can choose between saving 10% on infrastructure or adding 5% ad revenue (through more optimizations), the additional revenue is worth more. Just running Facebook, Instagram & Co as a platform would probably be much cheaper than $8 per user.

ForHackernews 6y ago
Absolutely. Profligacy is often the rational course in a capitalist system.
- thrasos 6y ago
  so true
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
  In any system, there will be a tension between shrinking cost/benefit, and spending more to achieve better benefit-cost. This has nothing to do with capitalism. It's a fundamental aspect of systems where there is a non-fixed relationship between investment and return (i.e. almost all systems of any kind).
  - ForHackernews 6y ago
    The notion that "[financial] investment and [financial] return" are the only two factors worth considering in "all systems of any kind" is an artefact of capitalist thinking.
    - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
      That notion is something absent from both text and subtext of my comment. You are the one who inserted it. Investment and cost come in many forms other than the financial.
- C1sc0cat 6y ago
  That's assuming you have the add inventory a some point reducing costs make sense