Namely he thinks he co-founded Facebook, and filed lawsuits about it. Back in 2009 they were settled, and he has been a public critic of Zuckerberg since.
See https://www.adweek.com/digital/facebook-announces-settlement... for verification that there was a lawsuit that got settled. And see the end of the article for the fact that he still maintains that he was the original founder of Facebook.
His opinions on Zuckerberg's personality are heavily flavored by that personal conflict.
Second, Facebook does not have a monopoly. Unfortunately for them, social networks are not that sticky. And they can only continue buying every up and coming social network for so long before they miss the critical one. (Perhaps Tik Tok will turn out to have been the one...)
And finally Facebook is not a Ponzi scheme. I think that they are overvalued. But not Ponzi.
I never claimed he copied code line by line, and that issue was never litigated. I never even sued Mark. So I definitely didn't "los[e] that one in court."
Anti-trust scholars and Congress agree that Facebook has a monopoly and has engaged in monopolistic behavior. See https://judiciary.house.gov/online-platforms-and-market-powe.... It's an open question as to whether the FTC will sue on these grounds.
You don't provide any justification at all for your assertion regarding a lack of Ponzi-type behavior, so I'll just note that I disagree.