FWIW, I don't believe Node was chosen specifically for its concurrency – it was just the language chosen for the entire stack by the company's founding engineers, and lives on in just this one service.
FWIW, I don't believe Node was chosen specifically for its concurrency – it was just the language chosen for the entire stack by the company's founding engineers, and lives on in just this one service.
In a parallel universe, a barely-competent engineer would have designed something more far more obvious, simpler, performant - all while using less hours, and not borderline-fraudulently wasting substantial amounts of your VC's money.
If the company 10x's again, it won't be because of poor engineering, it'll be because of marketing and VC's who don't know how you're wasting their money. If the company 0.1x's, it'll likely be because of a security breach because of appalling design.
Is that overly negative or just the right amount?
https://monzo.com/blog/2016/09/19/building-a-modern-bank-bac...
I'd be very interested in reading about that.
In general, I think it'd be great if more companies communicated their engineering practices and war stories externally – I'd love to read such posts myself! Unfortunately, it takes quite a bit of time to write a post (for engineers who are already stretched thin), and it seems that being honest about shortcomings at an early-stage company is an invitation for people to be personally disrespectful. It is what it is, but I imagine that's one reason we see such posts from only a small handful of startups, and the subject matter is often cherrypicked and sugarcoated.
So anyway, thanks for engaging with our post all the same – and maybe we'll be back with a post on architecture reviews in 5 years when all the kinks are ironed out :)