this post was submitted on 09 May 2026
524 points (94.9% liked)

Technology

84668 readers
4407 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Increasingly, Meta has been using debt to fuel its spending, amassing $59 billion in long-term debt on its balance sheet by the end of 2025, double the prior year’s total. And that doesn’t count the “aggressive” accounting it has used to keep the cost of a $27 billion Louisiana data center off its books. “The spending growth looks increasingly unsustainable,” The Wall Street Journal’s “Heard on the Street” columnist Asa Fitch wrote this week.

Now, as the company careens from one staggeringly expensive misadventure to another, its cash-cow core business is starting to wear out. Last quarter, the number of daily active users across its properties declined for the first time to 3.56 billion from 3.58 billion.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 39 points 6 days ago (4 children)

First they'll collapse slowly, then all at once. The debt is catching up to them, they'll start laying off even more people, and they'll try to increase revenue by running more ads, and charging more for the ads, etc.

If you think they, or any of them, including our own government, are "too big to fail", well, it's happened before.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 26 points 6 days ago (5 children)

I don't understand why businesses don't predict this downward spiral. I recall a city with crap bus infrastructure saying ridership was down so they had to increase fares. So then a while later, oh ridership is lower again, let's increase fares. Duh, its down because the routes suck and you've increased the barrier to choosing to use it. SMH

[–] Burninator05@lemmy.world 18 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I believe what you've described is intentional with any service that someone is looking to cut. Step one: this service sucks and doesn't deserve as much funding as it has. Step two: cut funding. Step three: see step one.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

"Starve the beast"

Republican playbook.

[–] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

Smaller businesses or privately owned businesses with a smart owner do.

Large publicly traded companies are sustained by a perception that an investment in or loan to that company will pay off in a higher dollar amount in the future, so if the perception becomes the company is shrinking then the investments and loans slow down which makes the perception worse, you get that feedback loop which turns into the death spiral.

So the bigwigs at the top of these companies have to be professional liars and gamblers to change the perception and make it look like everything isn't just fine, they're doing great! The line must go up.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

There is a certain type of people that absolutely hate public transit, because its the evilbad socialism.

So they do everything in their power to sabotage it and make it as awful as possible, with the ultimate goal of selling it off to one of their pals and privatize.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Businesses are only as smart as the dumb humans who run them

[–] DeathByDenim@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Oh, hey, they are doing that in my city right now. It's a classic!

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

Cant wait for businesses to have websites again.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

First they’ll collapse slowly, then all at once.

People have been predicting in imminent collapse of various tech firms for what feels like decades

[–] Dogiedog64@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

Nothing is too big to fail. Some things are simply too big to fail gracefully or quietly.

Meta-nay-Facebook is one of those things.

[–] canniest_tod@lemmy.world 23 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Is "dying" the right word? They're struggling, but I won't be surprised if this administration or the next bails Meta out, since fb and insta are essentially public services for a lot of people, as much as I hate that. The smart thing for the fed government to do is to nationalize Meta's platforms.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 34 points 6 days ago (2 children)

They're not public services. They're hostile psy-ops around the world, helping destabilise other governments.

It's high time other countries just outright blocked that cesspool, and Twitter while they're at it.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Right, so "public services", as the filthy rich would sarcastically put it. Facebook is one of the major set of chains that bind, and direct us, none of them want to lose that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Yliaster@lemmy.world 25 points 6 days ago (4 children)

3.58 to 3.56 billion isn't really significant because in the long term these sort of mega corporations can easily recover that many users.

But I like they're getting covered in debt, though idk how far it is from collapse as these numbers don't make much sense to me.

[–] CumbrianCucumber@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Honestly, I think it's massively significant. For a start off, that's 20 million people, the population of Chile, in one quarter. That's a lot of people regardless of how you slice it.

But more to the point, Meta services - Facebook especially - have reached a point of cultural impact where anyone who doesn't have them can't be talked into getting them anyway. Plus, they're useful messaging services too, because everyone else uses them. Their popularity has become self-fulfilling. The idea of Meta losing more users than it's gaining at all has been frankly unthinkable until recently.

[–] Yliaster@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

It's a lot of people but big tech can easily get back those numbers.

Let's see how the tendency unrolls over the long-term.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] realitista@lemmus.org 18 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I would love it if this were true, but as a member of the mag seven, they get a huge majority of the investible income of the world by default. Passive investing is 55% of the overall investing that happens now, and that means sending money to zuck more or less regardless of what he does or doesn't do. It's very hard to fuck that up. Not impossible, but they will be handed a lot of money for a long time. They will have to really fuck up badly to really die.

[–] auzy1@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago

Problem is, it's been overrun by rage bait for clicks and vocal extremists.

It's weird watching people think their opinion is popular because a handful of people are shouting it everywhere on Facebook.

It's no longer fun, and there is no way to force only posts by people you know. So all the racist garbage gets lots of engagement and is also added to your feed

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

FB is hitting the issue the "growth at any cost" business philosophy hits, they've run out of subscribers. Like any system or organism(s) they hit the resource wall, in this case people. There really aren't more people to sign up, they've pretty much squeezed what they can from advertisers. Now they are left with hairbrained schemes to push out into unrelated areas at the cost of accumulating debt. Buying up other businesses has a very mixed track record.

Wall St hates stable, steady, companies. They want endless growth when it ultimately isn't possible. Without expansion the only way to grow profits is to cut costs. Shareholders and boards demand more. You lay off people, you cut benefits, you make the service poorer quality, cram in more junk ads, more scammers and fraud due to a lack of human monitoring, no customer service for aggrieved users, profits go up for a moment from the cuts but people start to leave so you cut more. The MBAs take the reigns, disconnected from the founders and no loyalty to the business. Execs get their bonuses for each cut and layoff and flee the sinking ship. Hedge funds profit off of the falling stock as they short it. Ads become click bait, toe fungus and ear wax ads. Down it goes...

Oh it also owns WhatsApp, one of the best messaging platforms for scammers. FB's reels feature is mostly AI generated scammy crap. I've noticed a dramatic upsurge in blatantly fraudulent accounts on FB recently. I report them all but I doubt anything is done. I have never received any feedback.

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Too bad Zuckerberg will walk off stinking rich with his Hawaii bunker.

[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Let Pele take him.

[–] Sualtam@lemmus.org 1 points 4 days ago

Yesterday I read an article by an economist why airlines fail to be a sustainable business model and social media ticks the same boxes.

load more comments
view more: next ›