The company is still valued as if it has a whole lot of "real value"--even after tonight's precipitous decline, it is valued at $17B to be exact. Based on its slowing growth in the 30% range, it no longer deserves a unicorn multiple on its revenue. I think the company provides a useful service and will succeed in the long term, but there are two pieces to investing--company prospects and price. I would only buy under $75 which we may see in a coming bear market.
Well, I found several jobs using linkedin, so for me, it works. You have to be a bit harsh on accepting links with people you don't know, but I can't complain...
And there's the odd funny joke too -- once I got a job offer for building a supermarket on the south coast. You know, I'm a 'software architect' after all, got to know how to build supermarkets...
(well I did participate in projects that looked a lot like oil refineries, to be fair ;-))
This is probably a leftover opinion from just a few years ago using AWS. At that time, the pricing model increased shockingly fast with AWS. I know a few startups that were caught off-guard.
AWS is far more competitive now and relatively inline with offerings from Digital Ocean and Linode.
Although there's a strong "email sucks" sentiment in the world, I believe the truth is that email is a complex system that has actually already evolved quite well. Gmail is quite an adept tool.
The inherent issue is volume - which isn't per-se the fault of the medium. Filtering and categorization has been the primary answer there - and those things (including this post) have helped evolve those issues.
Taking money gives you all sorts of unpleasant responsibilities to deal with. That's not something everyone wants, especially not if you've got a day job you're not planning on leaving.
