I left an incomplete section in the post body, then went shopping.
So here it is:
---
Some observations when looking at the matches pair up right now:
- individuals looking for jobs have extremely general postings
- companies looking to hire have extremely specific postings
- generally, match scores are very low (<50%) because of this mismatch
- individuals don't typically mention domain knowledge in any specific way
- individuals don't typically mention prior work history beyond time-in-industry (this makes sense on a public forum)
- individuals typically list technologies used
I don't have any conclusions to make right now, no advice for job posters or job seekers. It'll take two or three more of these before I've seen enough to start gelling the domain problems in my head.
I'm sure you mean well but as someone who has considered posting on who wants to be hired in the past.... this is creepy AF and feels like a giant invasion of privacy. If you did it privately, or authenticated people in some way, sure, but as is it feels like you're putting people on blast.
Also this sounds way more like an advertisement for "abacus.ai" than a side project announcement.
Your post also starts a list of "things" ("Some observations when looking at the matches pair up right now:") with no list.
Actually, nothing about this really feels good faith, or real.
usui 3 hours ago [-]
The users in question are posting on a public forum under a username of their choosing, and it's still an invasion of privacy to read those posts and play pretend matchmaker?
probably_wrong 2 hours ago [-]
For starters, it breaks two rule of the thread: "Agencies, recruiters, job boards, and so on, are off topic here" and "please only email these addresses to discuss work opportunities".
Not that you don't get spammed anyway, but still.
LadyCailin 3 hours ago [-]
I go out in public sometimes, but don’t want someone following me around live-streaming everything I do to twitch.
Yes, it can be done in full view in public, and still be an invasion of privacy. why do you think they’re called glassholes and pervert glasses?
usui 2 hours ago [-]
I think it's naive to be bothered by the scenario you describe just because it's visible to you and yet it's still being done everywhere you go whether you like it or not. Similarly, just because this Show HN is visible to the user it becomes a privacy issue, whereas hundreds of web scrapers are doing the same to HN every day and you don't know about it.
We are living in the Wild West of privacy. If you don't like it, you can share your grievance with the people running the public space or disengage entirely. It's still going to happen.
shikshake 16 minutes ago [-]
A third option is to air your grievances on that same public space and find people who feel similarly and care enough to raise their voice, and hopefully spread awareness and affect change. Which is also totally valid and what these users are doing.
mixmastamyk 1 hours ago [-]
Doesn’t matter how many times it happens, it is still rude and creepy.
OsrsNeedsf2P 51 minutes ago [-]
> I'm sure you mean well but as someone who has considered posting on who wants to be hired in the past.
Ever since I posted once 6+ months ago, I've been getting random emails from people who found my "posting" on a bunch of different listing websites. I feel bad for them, some of them are even tailoring the resume. The position is no longer available..
schmookeeg 3 hours ago [-]
I don't see the blast. The endless non-job-related spam from "who wants to be hired?" posts is real, though, and actually creepy IMO. Looking at you today, pivotpaper.us
all2 25 minutes ago [-]
> I'm sure you mean well but as someone who has considered posting on who wants to be hired in the past.... this is creepy AF and feels like a giant invasion of privacy. If you did it privately, or authenticated people in some way, sure, but as is it feels like you're putting people on blast.
It's public information on a public forum. I'm not sure what the big deal is. There are lots of tools that do essentially what I've done here for various purposes.
> Also this sounds way more like an advertisement for "abacus.ai" than a side project announcement.
I have an account with them. I figured it was fair to say "I used this tool for vibe coding the idea". I suppose I could have left that out.
> Your post also starts a list of "things" ("Some observations when looking at the matches pair up right now:") with no list.
Yup. I got distracted before I finished writing the post. I'll enumerate those things in another comment here in a minute. Life prevails.
> Actually, nothing about this really feels good faith, or real.
I'm not sure what you mean. I made a thing, I shared it. I dunno what else you want from me.
• Disable illegal university recruiter pipelines that label all other candidates as “external” which gives them entirely different recruiters and is also illegally shown to the interviewer drastically lowering the chance of the candidate moving forward making it far easier for university and Ivy League grads to get hired over anyone else with the same or better credentials
singleshot_ 1 hours ago [-]
Is it illegal for an interviewer to know what university you attended? I better change my resume.
3 hours ago [-]
rgbrgb 4 hours ago [-]
this is cool! incidentally we do a similar motion internally for members on https://www.hedgy.works
how did you think about evaluating quality when designing your ranker / fit scoring?
all2 15 minutes ago [-]
"quality" here is such an abstract thing.
There's a few metrics: seniority, salary range, enumerated skills (as requirements or as a person's skill set), and domain specific knowledge.
These are far from perfect, and I think in the future I will probably tweak how matches are scored, because how job postings are written and how 'Who Wants to Be Hired?" posts are at odds.
The former is one-to-many, where the job posting enumerates very specific requirements in order to filter that 'many' down to as few eligible candidates as possible.
The latter is one-to-many, where the 'I'm for hire' posting seeks to match as many of the 'many's as possible. This means down playing domain experience or specific technologies in order to appeal to as many possible viewers as possible.
Trying to pair 'precise and specific' with 'as general as humanly possible' is ... hard. Here we use 'tags' extracted from postings to match the domains and skills together. It isn't perfect. From what I've seen in this first run there aren't any matches that make it over 50% -- where 50% is a heuristic for the metrics mentioned above. This just means there's room for improvement.
The other side is the old game of 'tailor your resume to the job', which isn't in the spirit of 'Who Wants to Be Hired?' posts. You could very easily game this by just dumping a bunch of keywords into your post.
2 hours ago [-]
HNDevsSuck2 2 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
syngrog66 3 hours ago [-]
are you paying the original post authors for republishing their content?
all2 14 minutes ago [-]
I'm confused. How do you figure this is a thing that needs to be done?
I guess this boils down to the Copyright of posts on HN, and what is considered to be fair use.
No, I'm not paying anyone. The compute is on my own dime and I'm not making any money off of this.
Rendered at 00:53:12 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
So here it is:
---
Some observations when looking at the matches pair up right now:
- individuals looking for jobs have extremely general postings
- companies looking to hire have extremely specific postings
- generally, match scores are very low (<50%) because of this mismatch
- individuals don't typically mention domain knowledge in any specific way
- individuals don't typically mention prior work history beyond time-in-industry (this makes sense on a public forum)
- individuals typically list technologies used
I don't have any conclusions to make right now, no advice for job posters or job seekers. It'll take two or three more of these before I've seen enough to start gelling the domain problems in my head.
I'm sure you mean well but as someone who has considered posting on who wants to be hired in the past.... this is creepy AF and feels like a giant invasion of privacy. If you did it privately, or authenticated people in some way, sure, but as is it feels like you're putting people on blast.
Also this sounds way more like an advertisement for "abacus.ai" than a side project announcement.
Your post also starts a list of "things" ("Some observations when looking at the matches pair up right now:") with no list.
Actually, nothing about this really feels good faith, or real.
Not that you don't get spammed anyway, but still.
Yes, it can be done in full view in public, and still be an invasion of privacy. why do you think they’re called glassholes and pervert glasses?
We are living in the Wild West of privacy. If you don't like it, you can share your grievance with the people running the public space or disengage entirely. It's still going to happen.
Ever since I posted once 6+ months ago, I've been getting random emails from people who found my "posting" on a bunch of different listing websites. I feel bad for them, some of them are even tailoring the resume. The position is no longer available..
It's public information on a public forum. I'm not sure what the big deal is. There are lots of tools that do essentially what I've done here for various purposes.
> Also this sounds way more like an advertisement for "abacus.ai" than a side project announcement.
I have an account with them. I figured it was fair to say "I used this tool for vibe coding the idea". I suppose I could have left that out.
> Your post also starts a list of "things" ("Some observations when looking at the matches pair up right now:") with no list.
Yup. I got distracted before I finished writing the post. I'll enumerate those things in another comment here in a minute. Life prevails.
> Actually, nothing about this really feels good faith, or real.
I'm not sure what you mean. I made a thing, I shared it. I dunno what else you want from me.
• Disable illegal university recruiter pipelines that label all other candidates as “external” which gives them entirely different recruiters and is also illegally shown to the interviewer drastically lowering the chance of the candidate moving forward making it far easier for university and Ivy League grads to get hired over anyone else with the same or better credentials
how did you think about evaluating quality when designing your ranker / fit scoring?
There's a few metrics: seniority, salary range, enumerated skills (as requirements or as a person's skill set), and domain specific knowledge.
These are far from perfect, and I think in the future I will probably tweak how matches are scored, because how job postings are written and how 'Who Wants to Be Hired?" posts are at odds.
The former is one-to-many, where the job posting enumerates very specific requirements in order to filter that 'many' down to as few eligible candidates as possible.
The latter is one-to-many, where the 'I'm for hire' posting seeks to match as many of the 'many's as possible. This means down playing domain experience or specific technologies in order to appeal to as many possible viewers as possible.
Trying to pair 'precise and specific' with 'as general as humanly possible' is ... hard. Here we use 'tags' extracted from postings to match the domains and skills together. It isn't perfect. From what I've seen in this first run there aren't any matches that make it over 50% -- where 50% is a heuristic for the metrics mentioned above. This just means there's room for improvement.
The other side is the old game of 'tailor your resume to the job', which isn't in the spirit of 'Who Wants to Be Hired?' posts. You could very easily game this by just dumping a bunch of keywords into your post.
I guess this boils down to the Copyright of posts on HN, and what is considered to be fair use.
No, I'm not paying anyone. The compute is on my own dime and I'm not making any money off of this.