[1] Although perhaps somewhat earth-shattering just because hundreds of millions of people use those features.

[2] http://venturebeat.com/2010/07/07/facebook-like-buttons/

It is especially humorous to see someone who worked on Facebook Beacon deride coupon startups and social games:

I do not doubt that services like social games and coupons bring delight to people’s lives, and I mean no disrespect to the hard work that has made them possible. But in the face of threats to humanity’s future on the one hand and the extraordinary potential of mankind on the other, at some point we must ask: are we capable of more?

And that happens ALL THE TIME. Sure, this was one of the most unified and effective examples, but you can't deny that Facebook is a hub not only for socializing, but for political and social awareness. It's been a great force in drawing back the blinds from a whole lot of mystery in the world. I'd argue we're much better off for all the openness and discussion that Facebook has provided.

On another note; screw Timeline.

The Like button may or may not be a terror of tracking, but it lets people share knowledge faster and further than ever before. It lets you read that thing you never would have if you hadn't friended someone you don't really know that well two years ago. That article that sparked an idea that had lain dormant for months, maybe years, and finally came together.

You may not think Pages and the Like button have a “great capacity to change the world” (his definition of greatness in this article), but I hope you can see how he may think that is the case. Indeed, how many people may think so.

I do not doubt that services like social games and coupons bring delight to people’s lives, and I mean no disrespect to the hard work that has made them possible. But in the face of threats to humanity’s future on the one hand and the extraordinary potential of mankind on the other, at some point we must ask: are we capable of more?

Hypocritical much?

I also agree with what he's saying in general, so maybe I'm a bit biased.

What he is saying is that he wishes his startup didn't have such a hard time retaining tech talent from going and doing their own start-up. It's amazing how we see the same evil bitching from these founders deceptively repackaged as something more noble.

Take the who and the why out of the equation here and you're left with a pretty sobering point - there are bigger problems to solve than figuring out how to make people pay for nonsense in flash games on Facebook (no disrespect to Zynga'ers).

I actually disagree. Imagine someone saying "you suck as a human if you are working on _______". This piece is basically a softer version of that statement. Immediately, it makes you ask: who the heck are you to be saying this and what have you done?

Does anyone disagree that there are bigger problems to be solved than are currently being tackled by many startups? Not that most startups can tackle the daunting task of solving some of these problems themselves (at least, not without some serious IP and capital), but it's useful for a bit of perspective. Are we really solving some fundamental problem in the world by perfecting daily deals? No - it's silly to argue otherwise.

But the 100th engineer at Facebook had a greater positive impact on the world

If you had to pick a primary point being conveyed by the column, would you pick A) there are many important problems that startups could be working on or B) the 100th Facebook engineer made a more meaningful impact on the world than some popular startup founders? I chose option A.

Regardless, you seem content to argue with me because I choose to acknowledge his point. I don't care who he is, what he's worked on, or what other credentials he has - I agree with his core message, that we should choose to work on bigger ideas that change the world, not meaningless ones.

As an aside, I do think it can be necessary to go with smaller ideas in order to cash out and pursue greater ones. Case in point: Elon Musk; while PayPal wasn't necessarily a small thing, it pales in comparison to his current endeavors, which I believe will have a long-lasting impact on the world.

   Yet I fear that our industry is squandering its opportunity and its talent. In
   companies large and small, great minds are devoting their lives to endeavors that,
   even if wildly successful, fail to do great things.

The reality is unless you're curing cancer, building a space station or cold fusion reactor, chances are you aren't doing anything all that significant in the long term history of mankind.

Mr. Rosenstein can come down off his high horse now.

So I re-read it, and my takeaway was "Hey googlers, come work for us, you'll have a bigger impact".

I was reminded of the awful quote I heard recently: "The best minds of my generation are being wasted trying to figure out how to get people to click on ads".

http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/why-this-tech-...

Good call.