I really wonder how Zuckerberg will be looked back on. It's seemed obvious that he's an incredible CEO given the growth we saw with Facebook, but maybe he was just in the right place at the right time and had a cash cow that was difficult to mess up? Because when I look at the Metaverse and I look at this AI stuff... I dunno. Feels like throwing spaghetti at the wall.
He got on top because he has no ethics as evidenced by his actions from the start.
He stayed on top by having the foresight to buy up anyone he could that even smelled like a competitor and had the luxury of still being under the radar at that time.
I’m not sure either one makes him a great CEO but it did make him rich.
I think he’ll be looked back as one hit wonder, lacking any ethics to grow his company. He pumped a whole bunch of money in VR that didn’t seem to go anywhere and now AI seems like a fine direction to go in, copying the herd, with dangerous disregard to ethics.
>I think he’ll be looked back as one hit wonder, lacking any ethics to grow his company.
I can't take this seriously - it reeks of hindsight bias. Zuckerberg's "one hit" was thefacebook.com. After facebook.com went public he, seemingly immediately, decided to buy Instagram and go all in on mobile. At the time, people thought he had way too much power due to the stock structure and many people thought his bet on mobile would come crashing down. We can see, in hindsight, that it was a prescient move - one that many others missed, or were late to. (e.g. Google and Microsoft).
I don't think there is a single founder/CEO in the 21st century that is performing better than Zuckerberg. I understand he's not a likable guy, and neither are are his products. The only facebook product I use is arguably React - I've deactivated my facebook long ago, and I no longer have instagram. I don't even have Whatsapp. But if you look at the metrics they aren't deniable. Facebook figured out how to print money in social media while every other social media company struggles to have a quarter of the profitability. A lot of people point to "he just bought Instagram", without seriously interrogating the fact that many apps have been bought and squandered.
"I don't think there is a single founder/CEO in the 21st century that is performing better than Zuckerberg. I understand he's not a likable guy, and neither are are his products."
You make interesting points so let's take a more nuanced view of things:
I'll agree Zuck is amazing at spotting large macro trends in technology and capitalizing on them (VR he was a little early at, but I still buy it could be big).
However, he wasn't able to do that with AI, the big companies and startups weren't selling. So the question is, can he build a team? I'm skeptical, he put Alexandr Wang, someone who never built a foundational model in charge of all their AI efforts? It could be a great move, but might also be a swing and a miss.
Credits:
1. thefacebook
2. transition from desktop to mobile
3. building the machine that facebook became
4. buying out or building feature parity with competitors that took FB from its IPO market share of $104 billion to today's market cap of $1.89 trillion.
Has he innovated successfully since the o.g. thefacebook? Not really. Metaverse fell flat on its face. Hardware efforts over two decades have gained no meaningful traction. AI is a mess.
Zuck didn’t get the people he wanted despite literally offering billions. He then attached MSL to his other failed GenAI org which was already an astounding failure of leadership from the now triple headed team (wang, nat and zuck) which resulted in people fighting for budget, scope and prestige.
Meanwhile you have 1000x comp inequality among ICs and in some cases people getting 10x higher offers than others just because they happened to finish interviews a week later.
These people couldn’t organize a piss up in a brewery, good luck with AGI.
Yeah I mean I know these are experienced AI experts, but they could be faking or coasting. We better give a twentysomething Sr. Software Engineer veto power over these hires just to be sure./s
I follow him on LinkedIn: he works on the things that will come in 10 years, not on the products that Meta ships in 1-2 years. LeCunn is going to be there for some time.
I think no matter what Mark does to shake things up. ~Facebook~ Meta will always be out-innovated by a startup and forced to keep acquiring and gobbling up anything that becomes remotely successful.
I really wonder how Zuckerberg will be looked back on. It's seemed obvious that he's an incredible CEO given the growth we saw with Facebook, but maybe he was just in the right place at the right time and had a cash cow that was difficult to mess up? Because when I look at the Metaverse and I look at this AI stuff... I dunno. Feels like throwing spaghetti at the wall.
Everything he's done was either copied or bought. The guy has never had an original idea in his life.
He got on top because he has no ethics as evidenced by his actions from the start.
He stayed on top by having the foresight to buy up anyone he could that even smelled like a competitor and had the luxury of still being under the radar at that time.
I’m not sure either one makes him a great CEO but it did make him rich.
I think he’ll be looked back as one hit wonder, lacking any ethics to grow his company. He pumped a whole bunch of money in VR that didn’t seem to go anywhere and now AI seems like a fine direction to go in, copying the herd, with dangerous disregard to ethics.
>I think he’ll be looked back as one hit wonder, lacking any ethics to grow his company.
I can't take this seriously - it reeks of hindsight bias. Zuckerberg's "one hit" was thefacebook.com. After facebook.com went public he, seemingly immediately, decided to buy Instagram and go all in on mobile. At the time, people thought he had way too much power due to the stock structure and many people thought his bet on mobile would come crashing down. We can see, in hindsight, that it was a prescient move - one that many others missed, or were late to. (e.g. Google and Microsoft).
I don't think there is a single founder/CEO in the 21st century that is performing better than Zuckerberg. I understand he's not a likable guy, and neither are are his products. The only facebook product I use is arguably React - I've deactivated my facebook long ago, and I no longer have instagram. I don't even have Whatsapp. But if you look at the metrics they aren't deniable. Facebook figured out how to print money in social media while every other social media company struggles to have a quarter of the profitability. A lot of people point to "he just bought Instagram", without seriously interrogating the fact that many apps have been bought and squandered.
"I don't think there is a single founder/CEO in the 21st century that is performing better than Zuckerberg. I understand he's not a likable guy, and neither are are his products."
Spot on.
You make interesting points so let's take a more nuanced view of things:
I'll agree Zuck is amazing at spotting large macro trends in technology and capitalizing on them (VR he was a little early at, but I still buy it could be big).
However, he wasn't able to do that with AI, the big companies and startups weren't selling. So the question is, can he build a team? I'm skeptical, he put Alexandr Wang, someone who never built a foundational model in charge of all their AI efforts? It could be a great move, but might also be a swing and a miss.
> I don't think there is a single founder/CEO in the 21st century that is performing better than Zuckerberg.
This is true but similar to saying Adolf Hitler was one of the greatest Commanders in Chief
Agree with you about ethics but it was a master stroke for him to buy both Instagram and WhatsApp.
He was just buying users of popular products in lieu of attracting new ones to his own.
Meta has subsequently ruined IG and seems busy working up new ways to ruin WhatsApp.
Credits: 1. thefacebook 2. transition from desktop to mobile 3. building the machine that facebook became 4. buying out or building feature parity with competitors that took FB from its IPO market share of $104 billion to today's market cap of $1.89 trillion.
Has he innovated successfully since the o.g. thefacebook? Not really. Metaverse fell flat on its face. Hardware efforts over two decades have gained no meaningful traction. AI is a mess.
[dead]
https://archive.is/lTWs7
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/19/technology/mark-zuckerber...
MSL can already be written off as a failure.
Zuck didn’t get the people he wanted despite literally offering billions. He then attached MSL to his other failed GenAI org which was already an astounding failure of leadership from the now triple headed team (wang, nat and zuck) which resulted in people fighting for budget, scope and prestige.
Meanwhile you have 1000x comp inequality among ICs and in some cases people getting 10x higher offers than others just because they happened to finish interviews a week later.
These people couldn’t organize a piss up in a brewery, good luck with AGI.
ok, but I want to know if these superstars still had to leetcode interviews.
Yeah I mean I know these are experienced AI experts, but they could be faking or coasting. We better give a twentysomething Sr. Software Engineer veto power over these hires just to be sure./s
$72 billion per year to create yet another chatbot. Imagine if this were spent on useful research or housing.
EOL for LeCunn.
I follow him on LinkedIn: he works on the things that will come in 10 years, not on the products that Meta ships in 1-2 years. LeCunn is going to be there for some time.
[flagged]
I think no matter what Mark does to shake things up. ~Facebook~ Meta will always be out-innovated by a startup and forced to keep acquiring and gobbling up anything that becomes remotely successful.
> I think no matter what Mark does to shake things up. ~Facebook~ Meta will always be out-innovated by a startup
This happens to all companies that end up with - pardon my French - a shithole culture.
They "trust me"...Dumb f*ks