2 ms·

Obtuse straw-man hypotheticals do not make for convincing argument. To the contrary, the fact that you can't find anyone to pay you $50 to call them gullible sh

Obtuse straw-man hypotheticals do not make for convincing argument. To the contrary, the fact that you can't find anyone to pay you $50 to call them gullible shows that "service" isn't worth $5M. Unless, of course, you consider politicians... If you're not involved in the transaction, you're not in a position to decide "whether we're improving the world or not". Millions daily spend ~$50 for an extravagant meal, far beyond nutritional needs, and having nothing but excrement to show for it. Would you discount those goods/services as "not improving the world" and not worth millions of dollars?

yen223 14y ago
Codemage's comment neatly explains Facebook's current predicament though. All of us suck at valuation it seems.
- ctdonath 14y ago
  Clarification: we suck at predicting what something's value to others will be.
thinkingisfun 14y ago
"$50 for an extravagant meal, far beyond nutritional needs" "Would you discount those goods/services as "not improving the world" and not worth millions of dollars?" Yes. Considering how people actually starve because of speculation with food, and considering global warming, I wouldn't even blink when saying that makes the world worse. So I'm all for stepping on that toe and see where it leads. Kinda like making wearing fur uncool -- why not? Where is the problem?