You dont want to open source rhe code because it makes Twitter vulnerable? How lame. Security through obscurity is a futile endeavor, and open sourcing the algo doesn't mean we need the whole codebase. You're being a corporate suck-up. And it's duct tape; not ducktape, you lame duck.
@Not I'm sorry life has been so hard on you, hopefully everything you're going through will pass, and you'll find a light at the end of the tunnel to guide you in the process of getting your head out of your ass, you inconsiderate butthurt dimwit. Get well xoxo
I replied because of the last part of their message (the "lame" part, where fabricated a fact and presented it as the truthâ„¢) . You assumed I don't agree with his points, which is correct. I don't think open-sourcing the ranking algorithm would do anything but hurt the company, and I'm quite sure it's never been on the table, and it won't be anytime soon. I think that anyone who says otherwise either doesn't have enough information, doesn't have the ability to process it, or doesn't want to.
They said the author is a corporate suck-up after reading this article that points out how not revealing how things work internally is paramount in some situations (ask SpaceX/Tesla to open-source some of their secret sauce, it would do the world way more good that Twitter's echo ranking algorithm). There's nothing that would indicate corporate suck-up-ness in this article, so that was uncalled for, while there was evidence beyond reasonable doubt (the lame comment) that the GP is an idiot, so I called it.
Edit: The author specifically addressed, quite well, the issue of whole codebase. Likely 'the algo' is distributed across many repos. Not so simple just to publish something which is a combination of logic from all across a huge system of multiple parts. And should a corp publish their entire repo? I don't think so.
You dont want to open source rhe code because it makes Twitter vulnerable? How lame. Security through obscurity is a futile endeavor, and open sourcing the algo doesn't mean we need the whole codebase. You're being a corporate suck-up. And it's duct tape; not ducktape, you lame duck.
@Not I'm sorry life has been so hard on you, hopefully everything you're going through will pass, and you'll find a light at the end of the tunnel to guide you in the process of getting your head out of your ass, you inconsiderate butthurt dimwit. Get well xoxo
Better ignore "insults" if they hurt you, instead of fully focusing on them.
His point is valid and his "insults" does not invalid it.
I replied because of the last part of their message (the "lame" part, where fabricated a fact and presented it as the truthâ„¢) . You assumed I don't agree with his points, which is correct. I don't think open-sourcing the ranking algorithm would do anything but hurt the company, and I'm quite sure it's never been on the table, and it won't be anytime soon. I think that anyone who says otherwise either doesn't have enough information, doesn't have the ability to process it, or doesn't want to.
They said the author is a corporate suck-up after reading this article that points out how not revealing how things work internally is paramount in some situations (ask SpaceX/Tesla to open-source some of their secret sauce, it would do the world way more good that Twitter's echo ranking algorithm). There's nothing that would indicate corporate suck-up-ness in this article, so that was uncalled for, while there was evidence beyond reasonable doubt (the lame comment) that the GP is an idiot, so I called it.
It was originally duck tape. You don't seem like a very nice person
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duct_tape
Edit: The author specifically addressed, quite well, the issue of whole codebase. Likely 'the algo' is distributed across many repos. Not so simple just to publish something which is a combination of logic from all across a huge system of multiple parts. And should a corp publish their entire repo? I don't think so.