3 ms·
I hate to take this side, but I do wonder how it took 7500 people to run twitter. Scott Galloway made this point yesterday in his Prof G podcast. It’s not like
by ianai 4y ago
I hate to take this side, but I do wonder how it took 7500 people to run twitter. Scott Galloway made this point yesterday in his Prof G podcast. It’s not like they had to pipe data ultimately efficiently like a Netflix, for example. It’s more like a message routing service. Seems do-able with 200 people.
- dagmx 4y agoEasy, you’re only considering engineers for the core technical product. Now consider sales, content moderation, HR, lawyers. Now multiply that by multiple countries that need servicing.
- socialismisok 4y agoAdd data center management, scaling, developer tools, reporting, advertiser portals, stats aggregation, ad bidding, etc. 7500 people is 750 teams of ten. It's really a rather moderate engineering organization for a problem of their scale.
- Onewildgamer 4y agoI agree, I'm assuming their engineering teams are the biggest in size like my company which is of a very comparable size with legal, hr, ops and business counterparts. But coming to Twitter engineering teams, what are they doing actually? their primary technical product is tweet timelines and trends, their mobile apps are kind of okay, the user experience hasn't changed much except getting slower and slower. If all they do is rewrites, they are simply wasting the talent. There could be SRE, Security, Datacenter admins running 24x7 but other than that, I see no useful idea out of them in a long long while. See instagram, snapchat and others for example, they've explored the unknown and brought us some quite good and plenty bad social media. Twitter at least should've been masters in content moderation by now, but they're far from it. For an outsider they seem to have lost their way and are being a couch potato munching on the junk food.