The tweeter seems to be head of a software firm. He has a client for whom he’s building an MVP. That is the ‘minimum viable product’ – a rudimentary, first version of a piece of software that has just enough features to actually solve the client’s business needs.
For these MVPs, nice-to-have features and certain ‘quality’ measures (such as response times or the number of users it supports concurrently (i.e., at the same time)) are often of secondary concern.
The client wanted the MVP to handle 100 users concurrently (say, 100 people watch a video simultaneously, or 100 people use the web shop at the same time). The tweeter then tries to reason, with shitass math, that that means that the client expects 8.6 million users per day (100 for every second of the day).
The tweeter seems to be head of a software firm. He has a client for whom he’s building an MVP. That is the ‘minimum viable product’ – a rudimentary, first version of a piece of software that has just enough features to actually solve the client’s business needs.
For these MVPs, nice-to-have features and certain ‘quality’ measures (such as response times or the number of users it supports concurrently (i.e., at the same time)) are often of secondary concern.
The client wanted the MVP to handle 100 users concurrently (say, 100 people watch a video simultaneously, or 100 people use the web shop at the same time). The tweeter then tries to reason, with shitass math, that that means that the client expects 8.6 million users per day (100 for every second of the day).
The tweeter therefore is a dumbass.
Thank you, I actually learned something from your reply.