maybe part of the whole conversations is survivorship bias? id be interested to see data on the past positions and companies people on both sides of the argumen

maybe part of the whole conversations is survivorship bias? id be interested to see data on the past positions and companies people on both sides of the argument have worked on. ie: if you have seen how teams of hundreds are justified, it makes sense. likewise, if you have only worked on small teams, its hard to understand what 100s of engineers would do. its been a few years but i knew of multiple alexa-100 sites that were all running on just two 4 core servers(this is back when alexa was a useful measure of size, mind you). managed essentially by the hosting company. so "scale" is not always directly linked to traffic, i would think complexity dictates the need for more engineers rather then size.