this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
235 points (87.3% liked)

Technology

59374 readers
3846 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 195 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (21 children)

There are good reasons to dislike Telegram, but having "just" 30 engineers is not one of them. Software development is not a chair factory, more people does not equal more or better quality work as much as 9 women won't give birth to a baby in a month.

Edit:

Galperin told TechCrunch. “‘Thirty engineers’ means that there is no one to fight legal requests, there is no infrastructure for dealing with abuse and content moderation issues.”

I don't think fighting legal requests and content moderation is an engineer's job. However, the article can't seem to get it straight whether it's 30 engineers, or 30 staff overall. In the latter case, the context changes dramatically and I don't have the knowledge to tell if 30 staff is enough to deal with legal issues. I would imagine that Telegram would need a small army of lawyers and content moderators for that. Again, not engineers, though.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (4 children)

30 engineers is startup-sized. 30 engineers to deal with the needs of a sensitive software being used by millions worldwide, and is a huge target for cyberattacks? That's way below the threshold needed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This sounds like the devs are personally, sword and shield in hand, defending the application from attacks, instead of just writing software which adheres to modern security practices, listening to the Security Officer and occasionally doing an audit.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They're not just writing the software, they're responsible for the infrastructure it's running on. And keeping that running and secure IS a full time job.

Right now, you sound exactly like one of those C level execs who looks at IT and asks "We haven't had an issue in years, what do we need to pay them for?"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Even if you have a full-time role for continuously auditing the infrastructure (which I would say is the responsibility of either a security officer or a devops engineer), you still didn't show how that needs a 15-person team, and an otherwise-untouched infrastructure should just keep on working (barring sabotage), unless someone really messed something up.

If CI builds or deployments keep randomly failing at your place, that's not an inescapable reality, that's just a symptom of bad software development practices.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)