4 ms·
I didn't read it as suggesting it was "shady business". I read it as an insinuation that the company didn't know what it was doing from the top down, so they d
by blunte 7y ago
I didn't read it as suggesting it was "shady business". I read it as an insinuation that the company didn't know what it was doing from the top down, so they didn't hire smartly or manage well; they just threw numbers of people at the problem (and got predictably bad results).
With good management, a team of 50 should be able to provide what Zoom provides.
- ziyao_w 7y agoYeah, moments after replying I realized there is a more charitable read :-) Of course, with this read comes the age old question of "I can build Google/FB with 20 good men, what are they doing?"
- fxtentacle 7y agoThe answer might be that truly good people are not willing to work for FAANG, so they have to make do with 100 so-so instead.
- thaumasiotes 7y ago> Of course, with this read comes the age old question of "I can build Google/FB with 20 good men, what are they doing?" Well, this would explain Google's pattern of constantly churning out new products on the theory that hey, maybe someone somewhere wants it. If you need 20 people to run your actual operations but you've hired 20,000 people, what are the other 20,000 people supposed to do?