I love when I receive an endorsement for something like "XML".
Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
91–100 of 156 posts
Re: Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
#92I'd always assumed the primary goal of LinkedIn endorsements is the same as every other email I get from LinkedIn, to keep user engagement with the site - and based on the number of colleagues I see accepting them, I'd say it's been pretty successful at achieving that goal for LinkedIn.
Re: Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, LinkedIn endorsements have to be accepted by the endorsee before appearing on their profile. This has always been the case, I know because I haven't accepted endorsements for `Cascading Stylesheets`, but for `CSS`.
Endorsements for skills you HAVEN'T listed must be accepted, but if you have a skill listed, anybody can endorse it for you. I think that's what OP meant - he had Python on there because maybe he knew a bit about it, and a bunch of randos just clicked the + next to it.
You have the ability to hide specific endorsements - for instance, if someone endorses me for a skill that they don't actually know that I know, LinkedIn provides the ability to hide that person's endorsement.
Re: Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
#94I'd always assumed the primary goal of LinkedIn endorsements is the same as every other email I get from LinkedIn, to keep user engagement with the site - and based on the number of colleagues I see accepting them, I'd say it's been pretty successful at achieving that goal for LinkedIn.
LinkedIn makes loads of money from their recruiting products. They likely care as much or more that you have a good profile that recruiters can search as that you spend time on the site.
Re: Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's another, even worse example: > It turns out that people’s interview language of choice matched their most endorsed language on LinkedIn just under 50% of the time, so, you know, just slightly worse than flipping a coin. A coin has 2 sides. How many programming languages are there, again?
language of choice == linkedin endorsed lang -> {TRUE,FALSE} Yet if there was no relationship between the two entities and there were N languages, one would expect the random probability of TRUE to be N/N^2 = 1/N. Although, the writer doesn't seem to allege that he's comparing to random or anything like that.
Yeah, that's exactly how I meant it. But I agree it's confusing. Will remove the comparison right now.
Re: Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
#96Your analysis is extremely flawed. I really appreciate your sharing the data with us and I like your service. But, this is a poorly done and a far from subtle plug of your business at the cost of LinkedIn. 1) Technical ability vs # of endorsements Jesus. Hiding stats that you don't like through aggregations? And please read up on Simspons Paradox, which is clearly the case here just by looking at your plot. Try a bas…
Author here. I appreciate the notes and am happy to revisit and make corrections when needed. To respond to your points:
1. As a sanity check, I did do a t-test of technical ability vs. # of endorsements before publishing. There is no statistically significant relationship between the 2. (P 2. What do you mean by "language matters here" (re the histogram)?
Re: Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's another, even worse example: > It turns out that people’s interview language of choice matched their most endorsed language on LinkedIn just under 50% of the time, so, you know, just slightly worse than flipping a coin. A coin has 2 sides. How many programming languages are there, again?
And what's the distribution over the languages, in terms of 'preferred interview programming language'?
People overwhelmingly chose one language to interview in, so there wasn't much fo a distribution.
Unless you mean which languages are most popular?
Re: Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
#98Your analysis is extremely flawed. I really appreciate your sharing the data with us and I like your service. But, this is a poorly done and a far from subtle plug of your business at the cost of LinkedIn. 1) Technical ability vs # of endorsements Jesus. Hiding stats that you don't like through aggregations? And please read up on Simspons Paradox, which is clearly the case here just by looking at your plot. Try a bas…
Author here. I appreciate the notes and am happy to revisit and make corrections when needed. To respond to your points: 1. As a sanity check, I did do a t-test of technical ability vs. # of endorsements before publishing. There is no statistically significant relationship between the 2. (P 2. What do you mean by "language matters here" (re the histogram)?
Do you mean that you fit a simple linear model, of the form below?
ability = b0 + b1*endorsements + error
And when you say t-test, are you saying you did a t-test for the parameter b1?
Usually when people refer to a t-test, without more information, they are saying they tested the difference of means between two groups. (or one mean against a number).
See, for example, the Wikipedia article on t-tests: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student's_t-test
Re: Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Author here. I appreciate the notes and am happy to revisit and make corrections when needed. To respond to your points: 1. As a sanity check, I did do a t-test of technical ability vs. # of endorsements before publishing. There is no statistically significant relationship between the 2. (P 2. What do you mean by "language matters here" (re the histogram)?
Do you mean that you fit a simple linear model, of the form below? ability = b0 + b1*endorsements + error And when you say t-test, are you saying you did a t-test for the parameter b1? Usually when people refer to a t-test, without more information, they are saying they tested the difference of means between two groups. (or one mean against a number). See, for example, the Wikipedia article on t-tests: https://en.m.w…
> Do you mean that you fit a simple linear model, of the form below?
That would be the form of the best-fit line in the scatterplot. (and it would make sense to assume that the t-test refers to b1 != 0, as there is only one group)
Re: Data on the uselessness of LinkedIn endorsements
#100I've been considering just deleting my LI account. It essentially has just been a sink for terrible recruiter mail; in 12 years of having an account I don't think I've once received any sort of actionable message through it. I've also turned off the endorsements because I was just getting driveby endorsements for things like J2EE. Is there a job-search downside to deleting your account, provided you have a decent Goo…
I am personally astonished that LinkedIn is still a thing. For me, it was the most obviously useless of all the social networks and it was the first one I deleted, upwards of 7 years ago now. The other social networks eventually followed but LinkedIn just gave me zero value from day one. It was nothing but recruiter spam. Do people actually get work and jobs out of LinkedIn? Or is is just a way to keep up with what o…
> Do people actually get work and jobs out of LinkedIn? Or is is just a way to keep up with what old coworkers are doing? I frankly do not get it.
Yes. Multiple times.