171–180 of 311 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Will Snap exist in 5 years?
Yes. If anyone wants to bet against them existing, I'll take the bet.
Can I get someone's opinion on Snap? Is it worth paying attention to? My understanding is that it's a package manager that installs applications in their own isolated Linux sandbox, meaning you can install/distribute them on any distribution.. right? Does that mean software like node.js or nginx/apache will be available via Snap?
I think you're confusing the company formerly known as Snapchat, now called 'Snap Inc.' with the 'Snappy' package manager (hosted out of 'snapcraft.io') which makes linuxy packages called 'snaps'. The two are unrelated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. There are also stories (last 24 hours). These are often video clips. 2. Like Whatsapp, server has to store the message until the receiver is online again (until they open the app). 3. Whatever systems they use for advertising, tracking, profiling, and analytics is probably a significant chunk of their backend.
> 2. Like Whatsapp, server has to store the message until the receiver is online again (until they open the app). The server actually has to store it for a maximum of 30 days [0]. Snaps get deleted after 30 days (even if they're unopened). They're deleted immediately once the Snapchat servers get confirmation they've been viewed. [0]: https://www.snap.com/en-US/news/post/how-snaps-are-stored-an...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, that company is run by these same 'random persons' that are commenting here.
That doesn't mean anything, though. "Some people who do X also do Y" does not imply that "people who do Y are qualified to comment on X." For example: Elon Musk is a Twitter user. I too am a Twitter user. So's Kylie Jenner, Donald Trump, and random spambots. Using the same service does not mean they're equally qualified to speak with authority about the same things.
Needing this amount of resources implies that Snap is expecting huge growth. This sounds like a really bad move on their part and they should have committed to building out their own infrastructure on 'bare metal' over the next 5 years instead. If you read their S-1, they list a dependence on Google cloud as one of their big risk factors. Yet they then go ahead and make this commitment instead of working towards elim…
I love Hacker News, where a random person can tell a company their $2 billion plan on infrastructure is "a really bad move" with authority
Needing this amount of resources implies that Snap is expecting huge growth. This sounds like a really bad move on their part and they should have committed to building out their own infrastructure on 'bare metal' over the next 5 years instead. If you read their S-1, they list a dependence on Google cloud as one of their big risk factors. Yet they then go ahead and make this commitment instead of working towards elim…
Just to be clear, how many billion dollar infrastructures have you built up? What about played a significant role in, witnessing the various trade-offs that have been made? Taken part of, in any shape or form?
Of course, if you have experience that's all well and good. But I would expect someone with experience to lead with it, not omit it, precisely because they know how important it is with all the trade-offs involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Also them starting the project along with the knowledge they have internally scaling containers helps. FWIW, Most of this are advertising gimmicks though and Google has a pretty different internal infrastructure for orchestrating containers that has hardly much to do with K8s.
Google Kubernetes Engine still runs Kubernetes. I never looked at the Borg or Omega source code and had never been worked on a Google team. It is my understanding that there are some key insights developed from Borg and Omega that became part of the core concepts of Kubernetes that gives it an edge over other open-source orchestration systems. These include grouping containers into pods and using label selectors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook reported $27 billion in revenue in 2016. Snap reported $400 million. You're talking two orders of magnitude lower than Facebook and almost three lower than Google. Snap simply does not have the resources to pour into custom data centers, even if they can raise $2 billion for infra over 5 years. Unless they have serious talent already, they're not going to match Google's massive 15 year investments by a long…
Is the comparison to Google's investments a good benchmark? Sometimes it's better to make something custom than to buy from a big corporation doing a more general thing at 100x your scale.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, agreed. Snap only has 1900 employees.
That seems like a lot of people, especially when they buy infrastructure from Google.