Energy is an Achille's heel of current major tech companies
Major tech companies and some critical parts of the Internet are powered by coal and other fossil fuels . This is still the most economical way of providing 24h/7d access to viewing cat videos on YouTube, stalking your friends on Facebook, or using your Office 360 apps.
In contrast, if we can tolerate intermittent access, it becomes possible to use significantly less energy. As I am writing this, Low-Tech Magazine is being served with 1.15W from its battery. I can also browse my local database on SSB for 15-25W on my Macbook Air 2011.
A corollary of all this, is that as production of fossil fuels stagnates and other sectors of society start competing with the tech sector and the Internet for access to energy, SSB and other decentralized approaches are going to become more and more competitive. We may even reach the point where access to major services will become sufficiently disturbed, or that energy costs will make their business models less profitable, that local applications based on protocols like SSB will provide better quality of service, cheaper.
So there is no need to fight the big firms, we only need to keep building alternatives and wait for the sun, both figuratively and literally.
 In its environmental report, Google mentions buying the equivalent amount of renewable energy. This is therefore an accounting trick for greenwashing. As long as we can access Google services instantly, anytime of the day, there is probably going to be a fossil fuel plant somewhere powering the services.