10 years ago, when you saw an those as an investment opportunity, and thought, "Who would be stupid enough to use this thing?" You and most other people (myself included) had a high enough opinion of humanity that we thought that number would be low.

The people who got rich asked themselves the same question but had a lower opinion of humanity.

I think large cultural appeal and integration e.g. everyone and their dog having iPhone might be a good indication of value. I’d actually see Facebook as the most likely of the FAANG to not exist in 10 years, unless they find and purchase the next Instagram.

Edit: I’m saying apple is a better long term bet than Facebook because it has a much better cross generational appeal.

Both of those things were not only known about by hacker newsers but spoken about a lot (a lot!) They were sometimes dismissed for very petulant reasons, "fb is just a php site" etc.

I think an amusing piece of investment advice to consider is to do the opposite of whatever the sentiment about a paticular asset is on hacker news.

How did they talk about Snap in 2018? Twitter in 2017?

Generally, people on hacker news do not really know anything other than what a server is etc. Hacker Newsers are also made up of the sort people that fall victim to Authority Bias most frequently. If you want to spot good investments you have to think for yourself. You have to make the decision. If you are prepared to do that you already have an unfair advantage. But, if you are wrong, you are wrong.

To answer your question more directly... Have a reliable stream of information (reuters deals) as your core...then it is up to you.