6 ms·

I finally joined linkedin about a week ago, and it just feels...scammy. It's interesting to me (or frightening) that some of the smartest people I know have th

by blhack 13y ago

I finally joined linkedin about a week ago, and it just feels...scammy. It's interesting to me (or frightening) that some of the smartest people I know have the fewest endorsements. People I know doing [1]actual real work on things like "microcontrollers" have...3-4 endorsements with them, but people who I know have only maybe installed Linux, have 20 or so endorsements for "linux". There are people I know who are post-graduate level experts on certain fields, and those fields are either not listed at all, or they have maybe 1 or 2 endorsements for it. Stupid. I'll keep just linking people to my github, and showing them projects I've built. [1]: Actual real work as in: writing libraries that other people use. Contributing to the community in ways that effect the entire community.

dgallagher 13y ago
Speculating: Perhaps people who have lesser skills make up for it by networking, asking others to endorse them to fluff up their profile? Those with valuable skill sets might have little need for that, and can promote themselves more optimally. Example: "So-and-So endorses me for Programming" vs. "github.com/myrepo/"
thetrb 13y ago
The number of endorsements is really just a matter of the number of connections and a persons activity on Linkedin (e.g. if a person endorses many others, then it's likely they will also be endorsed by them).
wtetzner 13y ago
The endorsements on LinkedIn are useless. LinkedIn suggests things like "Endorse [So and So] for [some thing]," and people just click the "endorse" button. People that know nothing about technology have endorsed me for skills I don't have.
- iffyuva 13y ago
  That endorsements looks more or less like a poll. People with whom I have barely worked also endorsed me! Very creepy!
  - jen_h 13y ago
    Same here - people that I haven't worked with but know socially have endorsed me for totally unrelated programming skills that were last used in the late 90s. LinkedIn suggests something, and people click Next-Next-Next. The whole endorsements thing is a joke. Also not a big fan of LinkedIn's asking me to connect to the spouses of exes I haven't talked to, emailed, stalked, nor seen for 15 years and several email accounts. Massively creepy.
- btrautsc 13y ago
  Agreed. Endorsements are largely a popularity contest. Sure, it is great that your connect [name] endorsed you for [skill]... That is helpful to know in some ways, but it is no way definitive on your ability. We're working on a system we think is slight better, based on getting credit for what you read, and hopefully one day what you know.
  - nhebb 13y ago
    > Endorsements are largely a popularity contest. That's the way I've been looking at the entire web these days - and not just social media. The Google page ranking algorithm really boils down to a (potentially high stakes) popularity contest.
    - yen223 13y ago
      Not just the web though - our entire political system is one great big popularity contest.
      - nhebb 13y ago
        Ha ha, I get your point. There are SEO tea leaf readers who think Google+ plays an increasing role in search rankings. It's probably just speculation coupled with coincidence, but as I was reading some articles on this last week, I was reminded of the Googler that wrote about why he was not going to his high school reunion. It wasn't just sad - it made me angry that adults condoned the activity. I was struck by the irony that this Googler had escaped the high school social pressure cooker, only to go on to work for a company that has engineered the world's biggest popularity contest.
- ry0ohki 13y ago
  The best part is you can make up new things to endorse them in! I've endorsed people for "Lunch" and "Alcoholism" as a joke.
Silhouette 13y ago
I'll keep just linking people to my github, and showing them projects I've built. [1]: Actual real work as in: writing libraries that other people use. Contributing to the community in ways that effect the entire community. I worry a little about the GitHub approach as well. On the one hand, it's great that some people have effectively got portfolios now. It's verifiable evidence that they have some clue what they're doing. On the other hand, I'm concerned about a bias developing against people who don't put loads of work on GitHub for whatever reason, which is not verifiable evidence that they don't know what they're doing. They might be world class experts who could easily demonstrate their skill and expertise in person, but that's no good if employers all start using cost-cutting auto-screening software that never shortlists such candidates for interview because they didn't share their ingenious but proprietary code/ideas with the general public. In short, any scheme that relies on historical demonstrations, whether it's claims on a CV or code on a GitHub account, is always going to be vulnerable to false negatives.
- blowski 13y ago
  Any scheme at all is always going to be vulnerable to false negatives. There are companies that have multiple-stage recruitment, with skill tests, psychometric tests, multi-person interviews, background checking - and still end up with a few duds. But if you can use a bunch of proxies (like StackOverflow, GitHub, and LinkedIn), and know the value of each of those proxies, then you can more efficiently match a person with a role. Sure, there'll be lots of mistakes, but it's hard to see a better alternative.
harryf 13y ago
LinkedIn works best for "networkers" - people who regularly meet a lot of other people as part of their day job; those doing business development, sales, evangelizing products etc. These are not the people that do "real work" - the roles where you're not meeting people all the time.

by blhack 13y ago

dgallagher 13y ago

Speculating: Perhaps people who have lesser skills make up for it by networking, asking others to endorse them to fluff up their profile? Those with valuable skill sets might have little need for that, and can promote themselves more optimally. Example: "So-and-So endorses me for Programming" vs. "github.com/myrepo/"

thetrb 13y ago

The number of endorsements is really just a matter of the number of connections and a persons activity on Linkedin (e.g. if a person endorses many others, then it's likely they will also be endorsed by them).

wtetzner 13y ago

The endorsements on LinkedIn are useless. LinkedIn suggests things like "Endorse [So and So] for [some thing]," and people just click the "endorse" button. People that know nothing about technology have endorsed me for skills I don't have.

iffyuva 13y ago
That endorsements looks more or less like a poll. People with whom I have barely worked also endorsed me! Very creepy!
- jen_h 13y ago
  Same here - people that I haven't worked with but know socially have endorsed me for totally unrelated programming skills that were last used in the late 90s. LinkedIn suggests something, and people click Next-Next-Next. The whole endorsements thing is a joke. Also not a big fan of LinkedIn's asking me to connect to the spouses of exes I haven't talked to, emailed, stalked, nor seen for 15 years and several email accounts. Massively creepy.
btrautsc 13y ago
Agreed. Endorsements are largely a popularity contest. Sure, it is great that your connect [name] endorsed you for [skill]... That is helpful to know in some ways, but it is no way definitive on your ability. We're working on a system we think is slight better, based on getting credit for what you read, and hopefully one day what you know.
- nhebb 13y ago
  > Endorsements are largely a popularity contest. That's the way I've been looking at the entire web these days - and not just social media. The Google page ranking algorithm really boils down to a (potentially high stakes) popularity contest.
  - yen223 13y ago
    Not just the web though - our entire political system is one great big popularity contest.
    - nhebb 13y ago
      Ha ha, I get your point. There are SEO tea leaf readers who think Google+ plays an increasing role in search rankings. It's probably just speculation coupled with coincidence, but as I was reading some articles on this last week, I was reminded of the Googler that wrote about why he was not going to his high school reunion. It wasn't just sad - it made me angry that adults condoned the activity. I was struck by the irony that this Googler had escaped the high school social pressure cooker, only to go on to work for a company that has engineered the world's biggest popularity contest.
ry0ohki 13y ago
The best part is you can make up new things to endorse them in! I've endorsed people for "Lunch" and "Alcoholism" as a joke.

Silhouette 13y ago

I'll keep just linking people to my github, and showing them projects I've built. [1]: Actual real work as in: writing libraries that other people use. Contributing to the community in ways that effect the entire community. I worry a little about the GitHub approach as well. On the one hand, it's great that some people have effectively got portfolios now. It's verifiable evidence that they have some clue what they're doing. On the other hand, I'm concerned about a bias developing against people who don't put loads of work on GitHub for whatever reason, which is not verifiable evidence that they don't know what they're doing. They might be world class experts who could easily demonstrate their skill and expertise in person, but that's no good if employers all start using cost-cutting auto-screening software that never shortlists such candidates for interview because they didn't share their ingenious but proprietary code/ideas with the general public. In short, any scheme that relies on historical demonstrations, whether it's claims on a CV or code on a GitHub account, is always going to be vulnerable to false negatives.

blowski 13y ago
Any scheme at all is always going to be vulnerable to false negatives. There are companies that have multiple-stage recruitment, with skill tests, psychometric tests, multi-person interviews, background checking - and still end up with a few duds. But if you can use a bunch of proxies (like StackOverflow, GitHub, and LinkedIn), and know the value of each of those proxies, then you can more efficiently match a person with a role. Sure, there'll be lots of mistakes, but it's hard to see a better alternative.

harryf 13y ago

LinkedIn works best for "networkers" - people who regularly meet a lot of other people as part of their day job; those doing business development, sales, evangelizing products etc. These are not the people that do "real work" - the roles where you're not meeting people all the time.