I think that's on purpose. So friends have to show you the app first... It kinda creates a "lock-in" effect, like "I already bothered to learn this with my friends, why change now?"

>turns out nobody wants to struggle using a selfie app

Tons of people use the app. The interface is central to its virality. Snap's growth wasn't a problem until Facebook did everything they could to clone it. Snaps failing because everyone is starting to realize that if you aren't GOOG or FB, you aren't worth spending $$$ on. Just the other day I saw an "OfferUp" ad on Snap that looked like a 90s banner ad. I can't tell if Snap went full self serve or if they are struggling to find people to buy on their platform. And who would after advertisers have been spoiled by FB's demographic data and GOOG's intent data?

Edit: I feel like I spend a lot of time defending snapchat when I hardly use the app.

It's not based on cluelessness, people are aware that there are ways to circumvent the screenshot notification. The vast majority of people don't install third-party apps to save their friends' snaps, so content you share on Snapchat is still drastically less likely to be on someone's phone forever than if you were to send it some other way.

I was never about security. They use FOMO to create a daily habit. When you post, people see it and react quickly, which further strengthens the addiction.

I think Google was expecting Youtube to no longer exist as an entity in its own right, but just be a part of Google+ after they integrated all of their properties into a massive Facebook killer social media app, but that was a colossal failure.

Now, I think they want to use the infrastructure to build something that competes against Netflix and Amazon, but to do that they have to destroy the existing economic incentives for content creators and drive off as many content derivative users as they can (anyone incorporating or using licensed content, even as covered by fair use), and basically rebuild Youtube from the inside out.

turns out restrictions can breed creativity :)

No.

They cannot--coordinating enforcement is impossible for nation state actors, at least not yet.

Possibly because it's not actually as anonymous as some people believe.

The government can't just "shut down" whatever it wants in a society like the US with (relatively) strong rule of law.

Some governments have banned it, many haven't. It's likely that Bitcoin (and cryptocurrencies in general) aren't, and never were, the existential threat to governments as a whole that anarcho-capitalists wanted it it to be.

States and law enforcement are more likely to be concerned with what Bitcoin is used for, than the mere fact that it is used.

I don't really know, I just kinda got blindsided.. i saw 1 or 2 people playing with drones and i was like "this is a specific group of people like the model aircraft folk" and then the next day it was everywhere.

Now I can totally understand that it's an important evolution in tech and will probably solve the last mile problem (at least some of it) in the near future.