• dandi8@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    192
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    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.

    • Rinox@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      I can understand if someone like Google or Microsoft employs lawyers directly, as they have the resources and scale to do so. But someone like Telegram should really not do that. They should use an external legal office when needed. Even keep them on retainer, but definitely not open a legal office inside the company.

    • AwesomeLowlander@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      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.

      • dandi8@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        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.

        • AwesomeLowlander@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          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?”

          • dandi8@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 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.

      • dandi8@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Interesting! Out of curiosity, what is the source? Is there a breakdown per role?