[steelframe]

For me that sort of thing actually dilutes the prestige. If I'm interviewing someone, and they have "I was an author on this amazing paper!" on their resume, then if I open the paper and find 1k+ authors on it, at that point it's complete noise to me. I have absolutely no signal on their relative contributions vs. those of anyone else in the author list. At that point it's not really a publication, for all intents and purposes. You may as well have just listed the project as a bullet point. Of course I'll dig deeper during the interview to get more details -- if you have something else in your resume that gets you the interview in the first place.

In short, I won't give your name on that notable paper equal weight with someone else's name in another notable paper that has, say, 3 or 4 authors.

[pepinator]

That's how it works in most scientific fields. If you want more granularity, you check the order of the authors. Sometimes, they explaine in the paper who did what.