And if FB went away tomorrow the companies would find another way. It's not like they weren't successful before FB came around. FB is only "critical" for as long as it exists in it's current form... which makes it not at all critical to begin with.

Right. This entire argument is semantics on the word 'critical'. FB is a "should probably be using" for publishers or ecommerce companies, but FB is not a critical component.

Reading this thread makes me think that some want FB to be a critical component simply because it makes a good premise for the argument of shutting FB down.

Odd. Reading this thread makes me think that some want FB not to be a critical component because it makes a good premise for the argument of letting them do whatever they want.

...I think Facebook has won

You agree in principle that nobody needs Facebook while acknowledging that somebody needs Facebook?

As a business you need a way to engage with potential or existing customers. Yesterday that "way" was to pay newspapers, the Yellow Pages, etc to place ads. Then it moved to banner ads on various websites and today they use Facebook and Google (and other publishers/communities where people gather).

If both Facebook and Google were to disappear business would just use whatever replaces them. The companies aren't essential. The service they provide is. The good news is that service can be provided by basically any business. It's just a problem concentration/monopoly that they're the current focus.

The world does not need Facebook. If Facebook went away, people would use another service to find and communicate with businesses. Businesses would use another service to be found and be communicated with.

But today, people need Facebook because businesses (and other people) use Facebook and businesses need Facebook because people use Facebook. Facebook is completely replaceable for society, but that doesn't make it less critical for many individuals.