Comment by Bubble_Pop_22 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Bubble_Pop_22 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This is how things should be.

Meta is using all the huge FCF generated in the 2010s to propel the company to next leap.

There should be mechanisms at the Govt. level to force CEOs to bet the company at least once per decade.

I applaud Zuck, somebody has to push the envelope forward, and Meta is trying to unlock the future of work and home entertainment for 25B/yr with their Reality Labs.

In a world where every CEO looks at governments mandated climate/COVID paranoia to leech off contracts and subsidies or outright transforms public companies into cults/political organizations , somebody has to think about how to elevate the quality of life of people, in a pragmatic and practical manner with new widgets, new platforms and new ways to work.

I don't know if Reality Labs will ever be a success but the goal seems to be producing a leap as big as Windows 95.

We could use some of that amongst this era where everything is about politics .

Why do you think it's a good idea to "bet the company"? If Meta was to collapse, that would be extremely disruptive to everyone who currently uses their products.

Many companies are able to pull off big bets without "betting the company". Apple does it all the time and usually succeeds. Google does it all the time and usually fails. The one time Google did "bet the company" (Google+) it was a disaster that made all their existing users' experiences worse.

> If Meta was to collapse, that would be extremely disruptive to everyone who currently uses their products.

You have to be willing to risk what you have in order to achieve the next leap and an even bigger vision. It's true for everybody ranging from individuals to countries.

Why does every company need to look towards an "even bigger vision"? What happened to just running a company well without causing instability.

Meta could have purchased or cloned the concept of "Second Life" so that people can do VR with regular computer/TV screens. That's a much more approachable first step. When that catches on, THEN focus on physical 3D headsets. Screen VR is "good enough" and easy for users to try. Learn to walk before run.

I have to say there is a wow factor the first time you use a Meta headset that just wouldn’t happen on screen vr, which could be what they saw as a major blocker to adoption.

That might be true, but first, how many are going to actually try the headsets? Second, the 3D factor "gets old hat" over time, many say. It's like riding a roller coaster 50 times. The 51st becomes routine. (I've done it as a teen.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com