imjk

It may be counter intuitive, but in some ways the opposite may be true. Viruses that are more deadly, are much less likely to cause massive pandemics like we experienced with Covid. When a virus is so virulent that it kills its host quickly and consistently, it dies off faster as the host doesn't have as much time to pass the virus to another host.

Call me cynical, but I think the likes of Kanye, the Kardashians, Trump, even Elon, etc. are much more calculated than they are deranged. They know how to work the media and manipulate the public better than anyone else. We're living in a world now where journalists are paid by click counts more than quality of content. In the same vein, Kanye and the likes know that the more absurdist and unconventional their actions, the more publicity they get.

I'm going to assume OP was being sarcastic.

This is literally the policy aim of the Fed right now. Unemployment is at historical lows with inflation running rampant. The ostensible aim of interest rate hikes is slowing inflation, but the byproduct is a cooling in the broader markets and economy, which in turn, affects the labor market.

This is a bad take. Oracle today is worth $216B. Over the last 15 years Oracle, under the leadership of Ellison, has grown 5x in value, returning significant shareholder value. I personally very much dislike Oracle and its products, but I have to respect Larry Ellison for his performance as an executive.

"All staff members preparing to depart to the station had to undergo a PCR test in Belgium two hours before leaving for South Africa, take a PCR test five days after their arrival in Cape Town, where they also had to quarantine for ten days. Another test was required when leaving Cape Town for Antarctica and another PCR test had to be undergone five days after arrival."

This is the first I’ve heard of this. Where have you heard this?

Summarized succinctly in this tweet from MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle: https://twitter.com/sruhle/status/1184628336066289664?s=21

I read his biography over a decade ago in one night and it has stayed with me probably more than any other book I've read. It's such a gripping read. His talent and intellect were so clear that it makes his story all the more tragic.

Just one small anecdote from the book. By the time he was like 13 or 14 he was playing in the biggest underground card games on the East Coast. We're talking sketchy backrooms of bars hanging with some of the shadiest people betting tens of thousands of dollars. Not only was he super young, he had a small underdeveloped frame that made him look even younger.

So how was he able to get by in such an environment taking the money of shady characters much older and bigger than him? He was backed by the mob! Yup, his talent was so apparent at even such a young age, that the mafia took an interest in him and backed him both financially and physically from harm.

I really suggest any one interested to read the book: https://www.amazon.com/dp/074347659X/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_v...

Also similar (and a personal favorite): https://awards.visitcenter.org/awards2016/editors_choice/ind...

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sweet-photo-series-reveals-wh...

Photographer Melissa Kaseman did a series entitled "Preschool Pocket Treasures," documenting what she found stuffed in her sons pockets.

While you're not wrong, I don't think all (maybe any?) of these are examples of specifically targeted markets taken over by the companies you mentioned. Apple probably didn't target the flashlight market and decide to take market share from Maglite. I think you've just identified products that have naturally been supplanted by new technologies, many of them falling to the adoption of smartphones. A more appropriate example may be Amazon moving into the groceries market. But even that, one could perhaps argue that their broad market is general retail, with competitors like Walmart and Costco, in which case it wasn't really that far of an extension at all from their natural market. I guess Amazon and Apple moving into the realm of Hollywood and film studios may be a better example. I'd like to see a broader success like Apple taking market share from Automobile manufacturers, etc.

Judging by the quality of his writing, I’m going assume he felt it like a calling, stronger than any other.

I think you’re mostly right, but there’s more nuance to it. I think traditional dating sites like match.com started to plateau around then, in part due to lack of innovation, but also due to the rising popularity of social networking eating into the market. Then in the later 2000s you start to get more innovative sites in the space like OkCupid, as well as, more niche-catered sites, and as a result people started moving back into more explicitly dating oriented sites. Finally, post 2010 you start to see the proliferation of mobile-oriented dating apps (and mobile social apps in general) which is why you see things really take off then.

Sure, you have to work to target your own audience and build the trust with them yourself, but it's a tradeoff that benefits you in the long run. Your not beholden to the whims "the platform" as many media companies learned the hard way by putting so much of their focus on Facebooks platform in the past decade.

As a counterpoint, do you think Slack has a growth rate of zero?

It's funny you're saying this about Benchmark. Didn't they have a bitter lawsuit with some founders they invested in? https://venturebeat.com/2005/01/25/epinions-founders-sue-ben...

This is the most non-story story I’ve ever read. Instagram has nearly a billion users. So there’s a segment of those users that seems to like a certain aesthetic. Great. There are millions of other users who have other aesthetic preferences.

There's not much in the way of details in this article. Some other news sources are suggesting the company is being investigated for how they're billing insurance companies specifically: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/26/the-fbi-just-raided-ubiomes-...