Ask HN: Why did LinkedIn become what it is today? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: Why did LinkedIn become what it is today?

#81

Post by XCSme » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:58 PM UTC

epicureanideal wrote: post #67

andrewjf wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Companies have promoting ERGs in the hope of diversity and in the name of "bringing your authentic self to work", and these groups have become a hotbed of activism. …and it’s absolutely vile. Leave me alone at work. Work is not your place to advocate for whatever agenda you happen to have. Whether I agree or not isn’t relevant to the mission of the company, and it’s not the company’s job to support your cause.

> "bringing your authentic self to work" Except only certain views are allowed to be expressed. And of course, dating among coworkers is heavily discouraged and risks your career, but isn't that part of your "authentic self" too?

Curious questions, but don't many good relationships started at the work place? How many of those actually majorly affected the company?

Re: Ask HN: Why did LinkedIn become what it is today?

#82

Post by XCSme » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 10:02 PM UTC

omoikane wrote: post #42

riffraff wrote: post #25

Maybe it's your circle? My LinkedIn feed is mostly self-promotion and various achievement notices, with the occasional deviation, i.e. what it always was.

I am not sure anyone has an accurate idea of what's going on, including people running LinkedIn. Everyone just sees their own slice of the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

Thanks for sharing, interesting parable that applies more and more due to the polarization from algorithms.

Re: Ask HN: Why did LinkedIn become what it is today?

#83

Post by randycupertino » Wed, Jan 10, 2024, 12:53 AM UTC

jmye wrote: post #56

randycupertino wrote: post #47

Intentional move by Linkedin. They wanted to make it more social to make it more "sticky" and boost engagement stats. So making it feel more like social media that people routinely visit vs a static career page you only look at when you're job hunting. Hence the feed and the algorithm and the self-promotional and random topic posts. I have a dude in my feed who routinely posts about his son and things they do on week…

Why are you still following him? Obviously LI has an incentive to add engagement, and users want interaction, but LI provides tools to help you get rid of the garbage. I am amazed by how many people adamantly refuse to use those tools.

afaik I've never followed or unfollowed anyone. I just let it load and do it's thing. I guess I could unfollow him but I don't care that much to actively customize it.

Re: Ask HN: Why did LinkedIn become what it is today?

#84

Post by rantallion » Thu, Jan 11, 2024, 1:06 PM UTC

erikerikson wrote: post #38

rantallion wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looks like they tripled-down on features to change it. Always seeking DAU. The irony is that all the extra nonsense keeps a lot of us away even more. I think even the next time I want to change jobs, there are platforms I'll use before I go back to LinkedIn. I guess it's like any social media platform. Once you invite too many people, you dilute the original purpose and community, and just end up with memes and cat…

> there are platforms I'll use Citation needed. Seriously though, what alternatives should we consider?

Not sure what geographies it covers as I've only used it for UK-based roles, but I love the experience on cord.co.

It's what I believe recruiting should be. Potential applicants upload their bio and skills, say what they're interested in (in terms of salary range, WFH vs WFO, etc). Potential recruiters list jobs, with somewhat decent transparency (at least for the UK, where salary is rarely listed). Then one party or the other initiates a conversation.

The best applications I've been through all started via cord, and the interactions all felt genuine and were all with internal recruiters rather than agencies.

Re: Ask HN: Why did LinkedIn become what it is today?

#85

Post by erikerikson » Thu, Jan 11, 2024, 3:24 PM UTC

rantallion wrote: post #84

erikerikson wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there are platforms I'll use Citation needed. Seriously though, what alternatives should we consider?

Not sure what geographies it covers as I've only used it for UK-based roles, but I love the experience on cord.co. It's what I believe recruiting should be. Potential applicants upload their bio and skills, say what they're interested in (in terms of salary range, WFH vs WFO, etc). Potential recruiters list jobs, with somewhat decent transparency (at least for the UK, where salary is rarely listed). Then one party or…

Thanks for sharing, that is a pretty cool tool. Seems like it'd lead to more meaningful discussions. It'd be nice if there were more roles available but it seems like it might have a higher bar of entry in support of higher expected quality.