If a company's answer to 100K of its users having insolvable problems is "it's scale, deal with it", maybe that company has no business being so large. And yes, that applies to Google and all the others as well.
I don't know if you can really say that for a social network or a search engine. They naturally grew due to their network effects.
A weird analogy would be saying "US should have no business growing to 300M if it has XM people under poverty level". Sure it should strive to do better, but doesn't mean that number can reach to 0. Sorry i couldn't think of anything else close to a billion users with systemic problems that's not a bigcorp so had to use government.
But I do know people who have designed systems to make it more difficult for those 0.01% of people to contact a human or get anything done about it because that increases their profits.
Okay, maybe you're fine that some amount of people are just collateral and the system is not going to be adjusted to minimize that because there are other priorities (eg. meta's share price).
But when people need to spread their wings and fly off in to a fantasy world in order to pretend that isn't happening, then it's probably not going to end well for them / be conducive to their mental health in the long run.
Shit happens, indeed. The question is what recourse there is when shit happens. Usually, one would contact the company and figure things out with a support rep, if the company is any good. In facebook's case, that's virtually impossible. And that is pretty much by design.
I don't know if anyone ever designed a fool proof system with 0 bad cases, but feel free to prove me wrong.