_xzu

Or maybe Facebook is still doing fine since there is no good enough alternative. It seems like Facebook is getting worse all the time but since everybody's there and it's familiar people still uses it. Indicators are they are losing young people, who tend to adapt faster and have not yet build habit of use and more and more people are using other services for particular activities.

Still there is nothing which could totally replace Facebook so old users are staying and baiting new users. It still has unique offer for large user base and very useful features so even if it's getting worse it can stand. People might be clicking their feed more but that's because they are so bored with content that they try if they can find something more interesting behind the links. Or they are scrolling down since trying to find something interesting, something different which is hard since algorithms just push same boring content all over again. But statistics look good.

What's the magic of Facebook? If you could answer that and build the service people will flock out from Facebook.

United States seems to be following Italy's way. As US is much bigger transition takes more time and tolerances for inequalities are higher but trend is obvious.

In case of doubt check if these are growing: Regional inequality, Wealth inequality, Bureaucracy, Tax system complexity, Corruption, Importance of social networks in business, Education inequality, Youth unemployment, Living with parents longer

You could continue the list forever...

Does someone really think that insider information is not widely used in betting? Every bettor I know, professional or casual, tries to get as much insider tips as possible. Difference is that usually pros have better connections and statistics.

More probably this is routing issue. Connection between Deutsche Telekom and Youtube servers is more busy than connections between DT -> Swiss server -> Youtube.

Finnish might be a rather good option since there are very few inconsistencies. But then you have to deal with words like päättämättömyydellänsäkään.

Italian is another rather straightforward example but there are a little bit more variety especially for c and g. And for some reason h as a first letter is usually dropped off.

In the long term they will lead you to something like Finnish food market ( which is kinda duopoly ). Long supply chains without any reasonable way to check origins of ingredients. Multinationals have also much more resources and incentives to hide and mask health and environmental effects of the food.

But worst thing is that to maximize profits taste is "optimized". And optimization doesn't mean good taste but rather "doesn't taste anything so that it won't annoy you even if you eat same thing every day".

Traditionally good journalism includes credibility checks and at least gives some kind of possibility to see uncertain facts in bigger context.

Just reporting ( alarming / scandalous ) claims have been usually called tabloid journalism.

Why would a growing company want to attract as many new customers as possible? This seems to be a fast lane to default. Growing company wants as many profitable customers which can be served as possible. Or should growing companies try to offer everything for all?

But that's just the case. Also back end frameworks give general good enough solutions for problems but they are never optimized for particular use case. If you stay in general framework solution your competitive advantage is often easier to copy so you must make difference with customized / tailored solution. Earlier you start smaller the change is. If you hang yourself to general solution too long switch might be even impossible to make since costs and risk grow too high. And then you are in death spiral when more flexible start-ups begin to eat your share.

Why? As said in the message he doesn't want to be responsible for handling big successes. So this seems to be very healthy attitude.

Hopefully he will open source his next big thing so community might be able to keep it alive.

Absolutely great! Sharing your work with peers and getting inspiration from others' work is hard core of hacker culture, so it's nice to see HN to adjust the focus on that way.

I'm little bit worried that Show HN might turn to Spam HN. I think it should be limited so that one url can be posted only once and there should be some kind of update function. Updates would give the post some fixed amount of weight to rise it so that heavily downvoted ones wouldn't rise to front page anymore.

There are lot's of good advice already but I'd like to add few more. You need to make a mind shift from dev/manager role to strategic senior manager. My recommendation is to read: Good to Great ( http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/76865.Good_to_Great ) On War ( https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/117031.On_War_Indexed_Ed... ( I'm not sure which English translation is the best )

and try to see how practical tips both give for decision making. Art of War is also good, but I'd prefer Clausewitz since it's much more straightforward.

And read this masterpiece http://www.ikea.com/ms/en_US/pdf/reports-downloads/the-testa...

How I see the situation as an European and Finnish US is as a country and a democracy very mediocre or below median level. It's good place if you have top 95% percentile income but otherwise there are lot's of better places to live in.

In my view one part of the success of US is collective belief in American Dream. If you work hard and try you will get Rich. And this leads to kind of prove of infinite monkey theorem: when lot's of people try to achieve something eventually someone will. Of course this will benefit only small partition of people but others are still satisfied since they have a dream, hope for glory even rationally costs are higher than most probable profits ( see Income inequality in the United States, Socio-economic mobility in the United States, Poverty in the United States ).

I'm very happy that monkeys will keep trying and eventually produce great things to me to consume. This doesn't have anything to do with the democracy in the US though.

Why classification by "race" or "ethnicity" isn't considered as racism?