&gt; Facebook hasn&#x27;t destroyed the web - it&#x27;s still there and functioning fine. Hyperlinks still work.<p>Completely agree.<p>And let&#x27;s choose something else similar, for the sake of argument.<p>Google dominates web search at 64% of searches: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.comscore.com&#x2F;Insights&#x2F;Market-Rankings&#x2F;comScore-Releases-November-2015-US-Desktop-Search-Engine-Rankings" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.comscore.com&#x2F;Insights&#x2F;Market-Rankings&#x2F;comScore-R...</a><p>Post anyone could write: &quot;That&#x27;s so unfair, because Google owns more than half of all searches. They get to decide what you find on the web!&quot;<p>In fact, the argument of the bias bubble is the one that Duck Duck Go uses, and I don&#x27;t disagree with it. Google&#x27;s results <i>are</i> biased.<p>However, does the fact that Google can and does hide some (or even many) relevant pages on the web from you make them responsible for &quot;closing the web&quot;?<p>Of course not! Without Google, instead of random but relevant websites and blogs providing answers when you search, you&#x27;d probably go to a centralized sites for information or data, which could be biased and ignorant.<p>Without Google, think of all of the internet companies that never would have grown because they would never have been found.<p>Back to Facebook. Sure, many on Facebook just share photos, comments, have discussions, etc. But, there are a lot of links shared and pages you can like to get more links in your feed. As a Facebook user, I see much more new content and read information I would have been unaware of if I&#x27;d only been reading HN or a news website. I also share the best stories from HN, exposing a number of my friends to articles they would not have otherwise read.<p>In my opinion, Facebook hasn&#x27;t closed the web. In fact, it seems that the web would have been more closed if Facebook and Google had never existed.