Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions • Hacker News Board

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#451

Post by civilized » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 2:34 PM UTC

tdfx wrote: post #444

civilized wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post that started this chain said there were significant benefits to vaccine after infection. That post was correct. Since then, tdfx and others have been launching a barrage of red herrings to somehow undermine and misdirect away from this correct point, rather than simply acknowledging it and moving on to whatever they actually want to say. If you don't want to be required to take the vaccine, we can have that…

> Since then, tdfx and others have been launching a barrage of red herrings to somehow undermine and misdirect away from this correct point The original point is an interesting example of being correct, but also misleading in that it paints getting the vaccine after natural infection as the best course of action. It has benefits, but probably not as many immune benefits as having a second asymptomatic infection after…

> The original point is an interesting example of being correct, but also misleading in that it paints getting the vaccine after natural infection as the best course of action. It has benefits, but probably not as many immune benefits as having a second asymptomatic infection after the original one.

It makes no sense to compare getting the vaccine to getting a second asymptomatic infection. It is impossible to control the level of symptoms you get from a natural infection.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#452

Post by Breza » Tue, Apr 12, 2022, 2:18 PM UTC

mabbo wrote: post #45

When I went looking for a fully remote position last year, I was worried that exactly this might happen. Then I heard that Shopify had literally shut down and sold their offices. It's not actually possible for the company to go back to the office because they don't exist. So that's where I work now.

My wife's employer shut down their office and my employer did the same. It really helps build trust that they're not about to make us go back to an office.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#453

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Apr 12, 2022, 3:10 PM UTC

pvarangot wrote: post #276

hammock wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP experience makes me think some kind of added process like Letter of Agreement or Letter of Intent from the initial outreach that says “assuming you pass all the rounds, we will hire you to a remote position at a salary to be determined but between the range of x-y, etc.” could be helpful. It’s not a contract but a precursor and some lighter level of commitment. Common in enterprise sales scenarios but not in mid l…

If the hiring manager or the people on the hiring committee change their mind about remote work, you are not getting hired anyway not matter what the intent was when you started interviewing.

[deleted]

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#454

Post by jupp0r » Thu, Apr 14, 2022, 1:32 AM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #428

jupp0r wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is getting one offer different from getting multiple? At least for me, prep is the main part and the interviews themselves are a smaller commitment compared to that. This is greatly helped by the pandemic causing on-site interviews mostly being replaced by online video conferencing ones.

For most professionals, landing a decent job offer is a multi-month process.

Totally, but is landing two offers twice as hard as one? No way. Once you’re ready for interviewing at a top company, you are also ready to interview at 3 other ones - with marginal overhead compared to the months of prep.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#455

Post by xenonite » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 6:38 PM UTC

civilized wrote: post #451

tdfx wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since then, tdfx and others have been launching a barrage of red herrings to somehow undermine and misdirect away from this correct point The original point is an interesting example of being correct, but also misleading in that it paints getting the vaccine after natural infection as the best course of action. It has benefits, but probably not as many immune benefits as having a second asymptomatic infection after…

> The original point is an interesting example of being correct, but also misleading in that it paints getting the vaccine after natural infection as the best course of action. It has benefits, but probably not as many immune benefits as having a second asymptomatic infection after the original one. It makes no sense to compare getting the vaccine to getting a second asymptomatic infection. It is impossible to contro…

Similarly, vaccination does not seem to control the symptoms after vaccination. Some people react asymptomatic, some are several weeks bedridden, and some get even stronger reactions. Some get many antibodies after vaccination, some only few, vanishing rapidly. It’s a much more fine-grained analysis that is necessary, in my opinion.