Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Manfred Awesomic CV: Open source machine and human compatible CV standard

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–36 of 36 posts

Re: Manfred Awesomic CV: Open source machine and human compatible CV standard

#31

Post by david_bonilla »

corrius wrote: post #19

This will only benefit recruiting firms in order to automate processes such as the one behind this project, I don't see how this would be beneficial for anyone else.

Let me give you a couple of use cases where a standard CV would be beneficial to workers.

1. You want to apply to one position but you only have your data on LinkedIn. If you wanna export it, you only have PDF as an option. You can't adapt or update it. 2. Even if you can adapt or update it, if the company or service where you want to apply doesn't support a standard format, you will have to re-enter the data, one by one.

Finally, all this friction discourages some candidates to apply to some positions.

Re: Manfred Awesomic CV: Open source machine and human compatible CV standard

#32

Post by jka »

iamdamian wrote: post #8

In my mind, "Use a standard, machine-readable CV to represent your skills and life's work" is practically saying, "Commodify yourself!"

Would you like to connect on LinkedIn?

I think that the success criteria in situations like this should be whether the project results in effective matches between employers and employees, and avoids as much ineffective matching / wastage-of-time as possible.

Re: Manfred Awesomic CV: Open source machine and human compatible CV standard

#33

Post by kkfx »

david_bonilla wrote: post #30
kkfx wrote: post #5

Honestly I'm deeply against "standard CV", the only who benefit form them are giants who trade humans as livestock. If I choose to propose myself for a position I want another human on the other side reading who I declare to be and my motivations, digging as needed because choosing someone for a job MUST BE a serious human business. For similar reasons I'm deeply against those who mass-send CVs to anyone: when one ne…

You see a "standard CV" as an oppression tool. I see it as a tool to give control over their data, back to the users. Now you have to upload the same data to LinkedIn, Angels.co, Hired, and hundreds of other services. With an open standard, you could update your data just once. We are not robots, we are humans who work to live, and we shouldn't have to build our CV every time we look for that work.

I was never, ever on those platforms, after the Uni I have just use word of mouth and acquaintances.

I consider matching platform useful in the modern time because remote work is a thing and cross-country job seeking is common, but for me such platforms MUST NOT be public and must be very limited in terms of data they grab/display because is not a matter of oppression or "build my own CV" but a matter of how we seek workers.

The actual system is antechamber of the Chinese one in western sauce, that need a social score, witch can be in various forms, including "number of stars/upvote and positive comments", and the social score is harmful for the society because no one can really control "the honesty" of the score and many can trade it. You probably know well the river of cyclic polemics about Amazon reviews/buyer feedback, same for TripAdvisor etc: in theory the social score is good, in practice the seller give something to the buyer in exchange of a good review (corruption, cronyism), the platform manipulate reviews for it's own interests, the State give bad scoring to political opponent etc, see China for a practical example.

The society of interpersonal relation have "a bit of risk/incertitude", but can't be manipulated much because of scale and kind of parties involved. The social score still exists, but only at small personal scale, like the personal scoring systems you might have on emails, nntp news, ... anyone have it's own and share it to friends/relatives, it's a limited and distributed one that encourage honestly and can't do big damage on scale when honesty lack.

Also you might have read about other river of polemics from CVs crafted to pass the "initial ML pre-selection" with even people who try to make a business selling crafted CVs to stories like https://idiallo.com/blog/when-a-machine-fired-me again the solution is simple avoid conditions that can give such outcomes.

Just try a small game: how much people and enterprises in mean have earned in the '60s than now? For my knowledge now VERY few earn far more, but in the mean 99% earn far less. That's means a thing: the system is broken. There is no free market capable of self-regulation, there is no leviathan PUBLIC State that regulate (classic liberalism and socialism) but just a corrupted clepto-corporatocracy. Do you really like actual system? Beware: "coming back" does not means dropping good things born thereafter, does not means travel back in time, means just take the good, correct the bad and keep going. It's name is not time travel but evolution.

Re: Manfred Awesomic CV: Open source machine and human compatible CV standard

#34

Post by corrius »

david_bonilla wrote: post #31
corrius wrote: post #19

This will only benefit recruiting firms in order to automate processes such as the one behind this project, I don't see how this would be beneficial for anyone else.

Let me give you a couple of use cases where a standard CV would be beneficial to workers. 1. You want to apply to one position but you only have your data on LinkedIn. If you wanna export it, you only have PDF as an option. You can't adapt or update it. 2. Even if you can adapt or update it, if the company or service where you want to apply doesn't support a standard format, you will have to re-enter the data, one by…

1.- If you are really interested in the job you spend a few minutes preparing the CV and applying for it. 2.- If the company doesn't support a standard format is probably the company's problem not yours.

"Finally, all this friction discourages some candidates to apply to some positions." Doesn't this just validate that the benefit is for recruiting firms rather than applicants?

Re: Manfred Awesomic CV: Open source machine and human compatible CV standard

#35

Post by chris_st »

eropple wrote: post #23
chris_st wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, in today's job market, the first (seemingly only, sometimes) gate is what keywords are in your online resume/CV for the software to find, and hand to a human recruiter. And, in my experience, the human may not know much more than the grep-equivalent, since if they had those technical skills, they'd probably be doing that, not recruiting. So, yeah, making it machine readable will help. This does not rea…

Respectfully: I think this is the case if you yourself have commodity skills and don't know how to network. For folks who find themselves in this spot, the advice I've always given folks I mentor is to learn to do the networking thing and maybe pick up some stuff that's a little bit outside the norm but can be leveraged for multiplier effects in the job. (They exist! And they're usually pretty fun.) Speaking for myse…

Good points, thanks!

Re: Manfred Awesomic CV: Open source machine and human compatible CV standard

#36

Post by david_bonilla »

corrius wrote: post #34
david_bonilla wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me give you a couple of use cases where a standard CV would be beneficial to workers. 1. You want to apply to one position but you only have your data on LinkedIn. If you wanna export it, you only have PDF as an option. You can't adapt or update it. 2. Even if you can adapt or update it, if the company or service where you want to apply doesn't support a standard format, you will have to re-enter the data, one by…

1.- If you are really interested in the job you spend a few minutes preparing the CV and applying for it. 2.- If the company doesn't support a standard format is probably the company's problem not yours. "Finally, all this friction discourages some candidates to apply to some positions." Doesn't this just validate that the benefit is for recruiting firms rather than applicants?

"a few minutes preparing the CV"

I think you are confusing a CV with a Resume, or you are focusing on the IT niche.

For example, an academic CV needs HOURS of work to elaborate.

Post reply on HN