3 ms·
> they can lay off a ton of staff, and license their logistics software to a lot of companies. I have a feeling this isn't as easy as you think. There are some
by djsumdog 9y ago
> they can lay off a ton of staff, and license their logistics software to a lot of companies.
I have a feeling this isn't as easy as you think. There are some great talks on Uber's microservice architecture and it's pretty insane. They could create new services, but I have a feeling their existing infrastructure is very custom. They've got over 1,000 microservices and it's actually difficult to get an exact number.
- gaius 9y agoUber's microservice architecture and it's pretty insane Symptomatic of too many engineers and too little leadership
- bunderbunder 9y ago"Too many engineers" is the impression I tend to come away with whenever I attend a tech talk by someone from the more fiscally beleaguered of the tech darlings. The talk is invariably about some really impressive bit of software that appears to have required equally heaping measures of smarts and money to build, and also appears to be a $10 solution to a 10¢ problem.
- ethbro 9y agoNever underestimate the ability of someone with an IQ of 135 to make every problem difficult.
- endorphone 9y agoYet technology has never been a problem or a limiting factor of Uber. Uber deserves plenty of criticism, yet it seems rich to blame technology when they grew from nothing to enormous with few if any hiccups. It worked. But yeah, extraordinarily few internal projects can be turned into an external project without enormous rework. It's only the myth of middle managers who perceive software as a growing asset who think otherwise.
- sidlls 9y agoThat explains most of the engineering culture in the Valley, really. Even the "leadership" is on board with it, because they have their own resume driven development to pursue.