8 ms·

Meta is undergoing a standard phase transition. It was innovation fuelled previously, but now it is value fuelled (milk the existing machine, take care of regul

Meta is undergoing a standard phase transition. It was innovation fuelled previously, but now it is value fuelled (milk the existing machine, take care of regulators, be part of the establishment). Intel and IBM are similar examples. So Zuckerberg, to prevent this, has the right strategy - the pirates inside the organisation strategy. Jobs did this with the Mac project. The question mark really is whether the Metaverse can deliver to take over from the Social Media platforms it has. Even if you accept the promise of Metaverse, according to Carmack the execution has been poor. Normally you just buy your way out with promising startups when execution is poor but the regulators will be heavy with Meta nowadays. Meta has star power with AI/ML. But on Metaverse there isn't much consumer data to process (yet). So its innovation vector can't be realised. This effectively means the stars of AI/ML won't help Meta into the future. If they leave, it could be a good thing (if we are taking the value-fuelled hypothesis as their future). Meta I think will switch to a MBA-led approach to maximise existing value, shed its research aspirations, and switch to hiring the best mechanical/devices/hardware talent it can to improve execution on Metaverse. Under this appraisal of Meta, broad and wide layoffs, letting the superstars go is the right thing for the company. Unlocked from Meta, those engineers will forge the next great wave of tech companies. The future will be made over the next few months as those start-up fevered ideas will actually get a footing. So I am most hopeful despite the bitter pill of current economic realities. In the short term there is real pain, particularly those relying on visas or the generous healthcare provisions from the company.

XiZhao 4y ago
This is a great take on Meta -- in some ways there's an element of macro justice or a return to form in tech and innovation with this shift.
MikeTheRocker 4y ago
I don't disagree with anything you've said here, but I can't help but feel this reads like a monologue from a supervillain who feels righteous in burning the world down because they believe something greater will rise from the ashes.
jillesvangurp 4y ago
Exactly. There is no nice or correct way to do this. Lots of companies seem to go through this and come out fine on the other end as well. I worked at Nokia through their transition from being the largest smart phone manufacturer in the world to shortly before they sold off what remained of their phone unit to MS, who shut it down completely less than two years later. Basically, that probably affected many tens of thousands of people. I heard all the cliches and was on the receiving end of them. Two points here: 1) this is not personal even if it deeply effects you. 2) if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. The last point here doesn't mean you are the problem, or the cause of the problem. But simply that your presence is no longer part of any solution to whatever the problem is. Whether you agree with that or not is beside the point. The fact is that, once companies get to this stage, there is only one way forward: let go of a lot of people. IMHO, Facebook is being to cautious here. They need to cut much more deeply than this and re-focus on their core products and modernize those. Facebook has been dead in the water for years. Whatsapp has an aging user group as well. Instagram seems past its glory. Messenger seems like a failed product at this point. Time to take it out the back and kill that. Revitalizing Facebook and Instagram will require some drastic changes. It's not going to magically start turning around without that. It's either continued gradual decline or finding some way to become relevant again.
aierou 4y ago
Does AI/ML not unlock value for the Metaverse? Also, the layoffs are set to prioritize recruiting, management, and business personnel. That seems to go against the idea that they are switching to an MBA-led approach.
jayd16 4y ago
>Normally you just buy your way out with promising startups when execution is poor So here's the thing. Who is doing better at this than Meta? Who could they buy? Regulation is a secondary issue. At this point, the Quests are pretty good gaming machines. Its the software that's lacking. MMAAAN has traditionally struggled with content creation. It took a long time for the streaming studios to get any decent shows. Apple, Google, Netflix and Amazon don't really have a good game portfolio to this day. They could possibly buy or spin up a bunch of game studios to crank out content but on the hardware side I think they actually are best in class here.
jossclimb 4y ago
> The future will be made over the next few months as those start-up fevered ideas will actually get a footing. The trouble here though, is very few VC's have an appetite to fund now, especially seed / series A. They are too busy dealing with the overpriced and soon to fail cohort from 2020/2021 I spoke with a VC just last week from one if the top five, they are yet to fund anyone new this year.

XiZhao 4y ago

This is a great take on Meta -- in some ways there's an element of macro justice or a return to form in tech and innovation with this shift.

MikeTheRocker 4y ago

I don't disagree with anything you've said here, but I can't help but feel this reads like a monologue from a supervillain who feels righteous in burning the world down because they believe something greater will rise from the ashes.

jillesvangurp 4y ago

Exactly. There is no nice or correct way to do this. Lots of companies seem to go through this and come out fine on the other end as well. I worked at Nokia through their transition from being the largest smart phone manufacturer in the world to shortly before they sold off what remained of their phone unit to MS, who shut it down completely less than two years later. Basically, that probably affected many tens of thousands of people. I heard all the cliches and was on the receiving end of them. Two points here: 1) this is not personal even if it deeply effects you. 2) if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. The last point here doesn't mean you are the problem, or the cause of the problem. But simply that your presence is no longer part of any solution to whatever the problem is. Whether you agree with that or not is beside the point. The fact is that, once companies get to this stage, there is only one way forward: let go of a lot of people. IMHO, Facebook is being to cautious here. They need to cut much more deeply than this and re-focus on their core products and modernize those. Facebook has been dead in the water for years. Whatsapp has an aging user group as well. Instagram seems past its glory. Messenger seems like a failed product at this point. Time to take it out the back and kill that. Revitalizing Facebook and Instagram will require some drastic changes. It's not going to magically start turning around without that. It's either continued gradual decline or finding some way to become relevant again.

aierou 4y ago

Does AI/ML not unlock value for the Metaverse? Also, the layoffs are set to prioritize recruiting, management, and business personnel. That seems to go against the idea that they are switching to an MBA-led approach.

jayd16 4y ago

>Normally you just buy your way out with promising startups when execution is poor So here's the thing. Who is doing better at this than Meta? Who could they buy? Regulation is a secondary issue. At this point, the Quests are pretty good gaming machines. Its the software that's lacking. MMAAAN has traditionally struggled with content creation. It took a long time for the streaming studios to get any decent shows. Apple, Google, Netflix and Amazon don't really have a good game portfolio to this day. They could possibly buy or spin up a bunch of game studios to crank out content but on the hardware side I think they actually are best in class here.

jossclimb 4y ago

> The future will be made over the next few months as those start-up fevered ideas will actually get a footing. The trouble here though, is very few VC's have an appetite to fund now, especially seed / series A. They are too busy dealing with the overpriced and soon to fail cohort from 2020/2021 I spoke with a VC just last week from one if the top five, they are yet to fund anyone new this year.