4 ms·
But the product provides real value to real people today, why disrupt this? Also weren't these companies free to not accept an acquisition?
by efwfwef 6y ago
But the product provides real value to real people today, why disrupt this? Also weren't these companies free to not accept an acquisition?
- jzoch 6y agoAndrew Carnegie provided far more real, unquestionable value to people too. It ended up being worth it. The same can be said for Leland Stanford or most other monopolies. They didn't become monopolies by not providing value.
- will_pseudonym 6y ago> Andrew Carnegie provided far more real, unquestionable value to people too. It ended up being worth it. The same can be said for Leland Stanford or most other monopolies. They didn't become monopolies by not providing value. Absolutely. The same could also be said of the closest parallel of Facebook in history, the Bell System. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System
- hef19898 6y agoBecause move fast and brake things? Disruption good? No, seriously, modern tech companies are an anti-trust challenge that was not truely forseen in existing anti-trust laws. That governments are now trying to find answers is a good thing.