Of course I've nothing against charities. I think I might have a problem with it if I invested with the expectation of a direct ROI. The parent to my comment seems to contend (evidently? am I being trolled?) that it's ok to be five years into a business without not only not having a notion of how you might profit, but not even having a clear source for a plausibly profitable source of revenue.
On second thought spending money without the notion of a return is not even a charity, it's consumption.
He has, however, mentioned that he doesn't like the fact that companies take buyout offers within a year or two of starting up because that decision to sell prohibits them might limit them from being big, great, companies.
Big companies that can walk into a room and just push people around because of their sheer size. Companies that can introduce and try out both traditional and non-traditional advertising methods, companies that can sign lucrative exclusivity contracts, companies that can get 250 million in the bank at insane valuations, companies that can establish connective tools with other major websites.
Considering their competitive advantage and global reach of Facebook, I'm more willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for the time being.
PS. People that disagree are trolls. Classy.
From http://www.paulgraham.com/good.html
Another thing we tell founders is not to worry too much about the business model, at least at first. Not because making money is unimportant, but because it's so much easier than building something great.
A couple weeks ago I realized that if you put those two ideas together, you get something surprising. Make something people want. Don't worry too much about making money. What you've got is a description of a charity.