Is it possible we could stick to relatively new content here? I read through all of the Netscape-related JWZ stuff more than 10 years ago. I suspect that anyone who has an interest in the rise and fall of Netscape has done the same.
And then there is this one and some other that's from 2007.
I think that's pretty much a good ratio. I'm sorry that you've read this particular article already but sticking just to a new content wouldn't completely solve that anyway (unless Hacker News is your only source).
Personally, I've found the log both fascinating and illuminating. And for the record, I honestly didn't even know I should "have an interest in the rise and fall of Netscape". Maybe a critical flaw on my part, but there you go.
I haven't found this article 5 years ago because I didn't know I was supposed to be looking for it.
You can never fill Hacker News in a way that would please everyone and where all the articles would be fresh and worth reading. As long as there's a decent quality threshold and a sensible new/old ratio, it's all right.
I haven't seen anywhere near the same set of stories in "modern" companies like Facebook, Google, or Twitter. We do get the occasional nugget like how Instagram started or how Flickr came about as not being the original idea.
John Ramey w/ iSocket is one that has been good about talking about his current process. But a lot of times, stories of "start up experiences" aren't much more than "lolz, i was up all week hackin' on some ruby, can you rate my site?".
Fact is, writings like JWZs should be brought up now and then. I wonder who the equivalents from the last couple of years would be.
No, it's not unique to hackerdom, I know.