Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles • Hacker News Board

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#291

Post by GoToRO » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 10:07 AM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #269

GoToRO wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This information is very important." Years != Experience ...but thanks for confirming the shallowness of the recruiting processes we've all experienced.

So you seriously don't believe that the difference between spending ~1 month or ~12 months or ~24 months at a company (all are possibilities, when a date range reads "2012-2013") isn't important information for a recruiter? This isn't strictly about experience; it's also about whether someone a company is going to invest time in is going to stick around for a while, or is going to hop around a lot. But regardless, ye…

It's not about believing, it's about knowing. You have to couple that time interval with the company they worked for.

At one company it took them 2 weeks to set-up my email, 3 months to decide on which project to work on and in about 6 months I was delivering something. So 6 months "experience" actually meant zero. I was ready to deliver from day 1 but...

At another company I had all the accounts created by the end of day 1, already working on bugs the second day. Some projects took 1 month in total. 6 months could mean 6 projects. The amount of skills accumulated in that time was way over the skills accumulated at the first company.

As you can see the time interval is useless. I think it's fairer if the recruiter simply rolls a dice.

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#292

Post by GoToRO » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 10:10 AM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #271

GoToRO wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This information is very important." Years != Experience ...but thanks for confirming the shallowness of the recruiting processes we've all experienced.

You’ve drawn the incorrect logic statement. !Years == !Experience It’s very hard for a SWE to have immediate impact, especially a junior one. Up to the first six months are a write-off. The next period includes their first launch and review with potentially a months long performance improvement plan. With exceptional exceptions, longevity and impact go hand in hand and a lack of longevity at the very least poses ques…

What you said is very true, at large companies only. There are way more companies that are smaller and move much faster. When they hire someone, it's very clear to them what they will be doing, who will present the project to them and so on. You could be writing code on day 1.

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#293

Post by schwartzworld » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 10:16 AM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #271

GoToRO wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This information is very important." Years != Experience ...but thanks for confirming the shallowness of the recruiting processes we've all experienced.

You’ve drawn the incorrect logic statement. !Years == !Experience It’s very hard for a SWE to have immediate impact, especially a junior one. Up to the first six months are a write-off. The next period includes their first launch and review with potentially a months long performance improvement plan. With exceptional exceptions, longevity and impact go hand in hand and a lack of longevity at the very least poses ques…

6 months is a write-off? By the time I was 6 months into my first software gig I had 5 months and 2 weeks of being a contributor. It was made clear to me that I was as entitled to voice wrong opinions as anyone else, and also entitled to own as much responsibility as I wanted. I found a niche that nobody else wanted to own and learned way more than I would have being spoon-fed the way you describe.

Then again, I guess there's junior and JUNIOR! Maybe a recent boot camp grad would have been less able to jump in.

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#294

Post by johnisgood » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 10:23 AM UTC

ska wrote: post #130

camdenlock wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Unfortunately”. What a ridiculous culture we’ve built if this sentiment is widely accepted. Just bizarre.

Nothing bizarre about it; Diverse viewpoints tend to strengthen a community, so considering it unfortunate that HN doesn't benefit from a broader demographic distribution is pretty defensible.

Sorry, I have to: we need more female construction workers for diversity. Most occupational deaths are male. We need to balance that scale. Do not we?! Sigh...

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#295

Post by etripe » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 10:30 AM UTC

eps wrote: post #260

drusepth wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're definitely overused in a lot of designs. They can be useful to portray some information at a glance in some data-heavy designs, but I don't find them helpful here -- I find them distracting. Comparison CV with/without faces: https://i.imgur.com/u6FVLqr.png

Distracting for sure. It's also useless to the vast majority of readers, but since it is useful to some, a better option would be to have "X connections" (or "X colleagues") note that expands into a list on click. Color it gray, right-align and you now have a secondary info for those who need it, but out of the way for those who don't.

One could even go with a series of dots (or other visualisation), preferably in a neutral colour, that can be expanded to include faces, so you still get some visual indication of team/network size.

As is, it definitely just is visual clutter.

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#296

Post by krageon » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 10:32 AM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #271

GoToRO wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This information is very important." Years != Experience ...but thanks for confirming the shallowness of the recruiting processes we've all experienced.

You’ve drawn the incorrect logic statement. !Years == !Experience It’s very hard for a SWE to have immediate impact, especially a junior one. Up to the first six months are a write-off. The next period includes their first launch and review with potentially a months long performance improvement plan. With exceptional exceptions, longevity and impact go hand in hand and a lack of longevity at the very least poses ques…

My first two jobs had me undeniably junior but I still had a measurable sizeable impact on the businesses where I worked within the first two months. Seems an overgeneralisation to say the first six months are a complete loss by definition.

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#297

Post by krageon » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 10:36 AM UTC

zimpenfish wrote: post #286

systemvoltage wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back in 1960's, my dad worked as a draftsman. His work was impeccable. But once in a while, he got told, pretty harshly that this is a piece of shit. And he had to work 15 hours to fix a mistake. No, I am not talking about a typo which can be marked with a white marker. Hard-to-objectively-evaluate things like "Dimensions are just not as readable as they can be. You could arrange them this way, look. It's better." He…

> Find out why they're passionately criticizing it. Sometimes this is just "because they're an arsehole" and the criticism is garbage. > people who are really good at stuff are drowned in the noise Or people who could be really good at stuff get disheartened by the harsh criticism and we as a society lose out.

You could just as easily say that people who respond well to unilateral and energetic feedback are not motivated and society loses out without harsh criticism. It's hard to quantify these things and that means every position is at least a little reasonable.

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#298

Post by yitchelle » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 10:50 AM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #271

GoToRO wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This information is very important." Years != Experience ...but thanks for confirming the shallowness of the recruiting processes we've all experienced.

You’ve drawn the incorrect logic statement. !Years == !Experience It’s very hard for a SWE to have immediate impact, especially a junior one. Up to the first six months are a write-off. The next period includes their first launch and review with potentially a months long performance improvement plan. With exceptional exceptions, longevity and impact go hand in hand and a lack of longevity at the very least poses ques…

The length of time is largely dependent on industry as well. In Automotive, 3 to 3.5 years for 1 Project cycle would be a minimum to step out of the Junior status.

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#299

Post by reallydontask » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 11:04 AM UTC

GoToRO wrote: post #291

kelnos wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you seriously don't believe that the difference between spending ~1 month or ~12 months or ~24 months at a company (all are possibilities, when a date range reads "2012-2013") isn't important information for a recruiter? This isn't strictly about experience; it's also about whether someone a company is going to invest time in is going to stick around for a while, or is going to hop around a lot. But regardless, ye…

It's not about believing, it's about knowing. You have to couple that time interval with the company they worked for. At one company it took them 2 weeks to set-up my email, 3 months to decide on which project to work on and in about 6 months I was delivering something. So 6 months "experience" actually meant zero. I was ready to deliver from day 1 but... At another company I had all the accounts created by the end o…

it seems you've presented a single data point, yourself, and decided that this universally applies, which seems unreasonable.

I think most people's experiences of onboarding in new companies are somewhere in between, thus the tenure length provides another data point.

Furthermore, some hiring managers look for people that stick around for various reasons, e.g. hiring in that company is difficult due to bureaucracy, so knowing that somebody was at a company for two years vs 1 month is an important data point.

Re: Show HN: I made an alternative platform for professional profiles

#300

Post by gorgoiler » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 11:21 AM UTC

schwartzworld wrote: post #293

gorgoiler wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ve drawn the incorrect logic statement. !Years == !Experience It’s very hard for a SWE to have immediate impact, especially a junior one. Up to the first six months are a write-off. The next period includes their first launch and review with potentially a months long performance improvement plan. With exceptional exceptions, longevity and impact go hand in hand and a lack of longevity at the very least poses ques…

6 months is a write-off? By the time I was 6 months into my first software gig I had 5 months and 2 weeks of being a contributor. It was made clear to me that I was as entitled to voice wrong opinions as anyone else, and also entitled to own as much responsibility as I wanted. I found a niche that nobody else wanted to own and learned way more than I would have being spoon-fed the way you describe. Then again, I gues…

It’s more abstract than spoon feeding. Perhaps you imagined some kind of 6 month training program?

You can be very productive in your first few days, weeks and months but in terms of experience, the topic at hand, internally and externally that time doesn’t have any value on a resume.

This is on the assumption that you are looking for ‘experience’ as in experienced team developers who can focus on this particular business's goals. If you’re looking for people “experienced at writing code in [some language]“ then, yes, any time spent writing code in the job is experience.

If you work somewhere with a large code base and a fluid enough engineering team it does indeed take many months before one can see the bigger picture, and expectations of developers are set accordingly.

This is especially so with infrastructure / dev tools / internal tools where new projects are often driven by individuals. You have to use the infra itself — a lot — before you will have the insight into what can be improved.