this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2025
165 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

69211 readers
5039 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
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
165
Zuckerberg feared monopoly scrutiny and mulled Instagram split, files show (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Meta’s chief executive Mark Zuckerberg considered spinning off Instagram in 2018 in anticipation of a potential antitrust suit, documents unveiled at a trial in Washington showed on Tuesday.

​​“While most companies resist break-ups, the corporate history is that most companies actually perform better after they’ve been split up,” he wrote in an email at the time. He said there was a “there is a non-trivial chance” his company would be forced to spin Instagram and WhatsApp out anyway.

Zuckerberg made another key concession during the US trial on Tuesday, saying he bought Instagram because it had a “better” camera than the one Facebook was trying to build for its flagship app at the time. In the email, he said Instagram was a “rapidly growing, threatening, network”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Actually, he is correct. The Ma Bell breakup in the 80s is a good example of this. The newer, smaller companies grew much faster than the original.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

It actually makes sense. I've seen big and small companies. Small companies are focused, flexible and people usually have a connection with the company.

At bigger companies, everything goes slow. And nobody gives a shot about anything. They do what they need to do in order to get paid, but not a step more. Everything is slow because at least 2 layers of management need to sign off on decisions.