Programmer search engine(joelonsoftware.com)
joelonsoftware.com
Programmer search engine
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2009/12/02.html
17 comments
You're right. I wonder if this was part of the plan for stack overflow from the beginning. This is an ingenious way to monetize its existing user base while creating incentives for stack overflow users to keep creating valuable content for free.
Speaking of, I wonder how many millions an open HN job board could make? The people I'd like to hire are stackoverflow, github, and HN users.
PG can we please do this? We're looking to hire 15+ people right now and we are running out of good people in Toronto.
If you're willing to work with telecommuters, I'm still looking for a job, with no luck, in the Cincinnati area...
Unfortunately, not yet. What type of work do you do though, I may know some people looking for someone with your skills. See my above comment for my email.
I am in Toronto. What exactly are you looking for ?
Tons of positions. Developers, DBAs, UX designers, design leads, sales, support, marketing managers, community leaders. Send me an email to [email protected] or [email protected]. I'll send you all the details, answer your questions, and make sure the CV gets sent around the dev team. If we end up hiring you (or anyone else out there in TO looking for work) I'll split the referral bounty (0 to $5k, depending on the position) 50-50 :)
It's possible, but people should note he already had a job board at jobs.joelonsoftware.com.
Joel Spolsky thinks we should all hire people who regularly use his software.
I think you have this characterized a bit wrong - he thinks that people that use his website would make for good job candidates.
I think you have this characterized a bit wrong - he thinks that people that use his website would make for good job candidates.
Take that one step further and I might agree. People who have a high rank on "his website" might would make for good job candidates. Not all programmers may be good at communication or teaching, or any of the behaviors stack overflow, server fault promote. But I agree with the site's founders that they are positive skills to posses. It's not exactly hubris thinking that people active in a programming community might make for good job candidates.
Yeah, I don't think even he wants to hire anyone managerial enough to love FogBugz for its own sake, much less anyone dull enough to use CityDesk.
The tone of your post seems condescending - I really hope that the high number of upvotes is not simply a reflection of how popular is it to dislike Joel.
I think his post is straight forward - this is a neat way to do specific searches for programmers. Programmers who use SO might or might not be cool, but they are now searchable.
I think his post is straight forward - this is a neat way to do specific searches for programmers. Programmers who use SO might or might not be cool, but they are now searchable.
If my tone is condescending, that's because it is. Don't you know how XKCD Explained works? ;)
I find it supremely unsurprising that Joel has decided to sell the user info he collects at the website he helped create. He is exactly that kind of person, who wouldn't see anything wrong with that. After all, it's his website and the privacy policy is clear, right? (sigh)
But honestly, I don't dislike Joel. I just am irritated by his disproportionate popularity. The man's writing is solid, but his technical and managerial insights are at best mediocre. This is in sharp contrast to someone like Paul Graham, who not only has the writing capabilities but also the background of technical and social achievement to back it up.
I find it supremely unsurprising that Joel has decided to sell the user info he collects at the website he helped create. He is exactly that kind of person, who wouldn't see anything wrong with that. After all, it's his website and the privacy policy is clear, right? (sigh)
But honestly, I don't dislike Joel. I just am irritated by his disproportionate popularity. The man's writing is solid, but his technical and managerial insights are at best mediocre. This is in sharp contrast to someone like Paul Graham, who not only has the writing capabilities but also the background of technical and social achievement to back it up.
That isn't anywhere close to what Stack Overflow is doing.
This isn't selling user details from Stack Overflow (for which all the data is available for download, by the way: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/stack-overflow-creativ...).
It's a separate service, the users of which have to pay to get listed. I'd say that indicates a pretty strong willingness to be contacted by employers.
This isn't selling user details from Stack Overflow (for which all the data is available for download, by the way: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/stack-overflow-creativ...).
It's a separate service, the users of which have to pay to get listed. I'd say that indicates a pretty strong willingness to be contacted by employers.
That's the story ... explained much the original article.
It's only a very, very roughly a programmer-search engine. It's much more an extension of the stackoverflow community.
It's only a very, very roughly a programmer-search engine. It's much more an extension of the stackoverflow community.
This is interesting Joel is just now discovering this.
As the co-founding CTO of Hotjobs.com, we provided this functionality on the very first version of Hotjobs in 1996, and subsequently ended up purchasing Resumix to provide a very in depth technical solution to allow employers this exact functionality you're describing.
Of course, we had tens of millions of resumes in every possible industry imaginable all searchable through a very robust search interface that did all sorts of fancy lexical analysis and data extraction from random resume formats.
Over the last 13 years, thousands upon thousands of people have been hired through the exact mechanism you're describing.
As the co-founding CTO of Hotjobs.com, we provided this functionality on the very first version of Hotjobs in 1996, and subsequently ended up purchasing Resumix to provide a very in depth technical solution to allow employers this exact functionality you're describing.
Of course, we had tens of millions of resumes in every possible industry imaginable all searchable through a very robust search interface that did all sorts of fancy lexical analysis and data extraction from random resume formats.
Over the last 13 years, thousands upon thousands of people have been hired through the exact mechanism you're describing.
Not to take anything away from hotjobs, but I would argue that the real value Stack overflow careers offers is the fact that an employer can not only see your CV, but at least somewhat determine your level of expertise through your stack overflow account/reputation.
I imagine Joel believes this has more value then just the data extracted from a resume.
I imagine Joel believes this has more value then just the data extracted from a resume.
> I would argue that the real value Stack overflow careers offers is the fact that an employer can not only see your CV
What stops people from linking to their stackoverflow accounts? Many people already link their CV to their github accounts.
What stops people from linking to their stackoverflow accounts? Many people already link their CV to their github accounts.
nothing at all, but sadly, I know some employers(HR people, etc) probably don't even go through that much trouble in the screening process. If you are paying for stackoverflow to list you you know the employers on the other end are discerning enough to actually care about your stackoverflow rep. This is the same value provided by GitHub's job profile.
[deleted]
I think Joel's post's only point was to talk again about the Careers option on StackOverflow, not necessarily that it was new. Well, it was presented as a new thing to show his product under a good light.
I would prefer a programmer search engine based on Github, where people write code, to StackOverflow, where people talk about code.
I think it should be a combination of both GitHub and StackOverflow. GitHub is great to see if the person can code, and a very crucial part of hiring. StackOverflow is great to see if a person can communicate, which I think is as important as having the ability to code.
I've come across many programmers that can code well, but had horrible communications skills. It's always difficult to interact with these programmers. I spend more time extracting the meaning of what they're saying rather than getting work done.
I've come across many programmers that can code well, but had horrible communications skills. It's always difficult to interact with these programmers. I spend more time extracting the meaning of what they're saying rather than getting work done.
StackOverflow primarily exposes their addictive game-playing, not their communication skills. The rep/badge bullshit encourages inane responses, and the wiki aspects cover the tracks.
It seems to be more about the detailed and correct answer voted up the most that you find from searching something on Google, for that it works really well, not being part of the community there I don't care about that other 10 half assed replies for badges/points
They have a very visible group of users that post a no-assed answer as fast as possible and start doing the same google searches the asker did to pad out their answer. Their bullshit answer will be at the top initially, so they'll have the means to cannibalize the knowledgeable users who follow.
"StackOverflow is great to see if a person can communicate ..."
... on StackOverflow.
Meanwhile, the great bulk of programmer communication is happening on blogs, mailing lists, and IRC.
You're very right that written and verbal communication is important, but you have to look in the right places for it.
... on StackOverflow.
Meanwhile, the great bulk of programmer communication is happening on blogs, mailing lists, and IRC.
You're very right that written and verbal communication is important, but you have to look in the right places for it.
The reality is that many people cannot communicate anywhere, so if they are writing good stuff on Stack Overflow, they are probably going to have some ability to explain to their team how their code works. (But it also means that they are the type of person who is happy to waste an hour replying in detail to some dumb person on the Internet.)
GitHub showcases communication skills via project documentation (the documentation for bottle[1] is great), commit comments (kangax[2] often has concise, prescient suggestions for changes), and the like.
[1] - http://github.com/defnull/bottle/ [2] - http://github.com/kangax
[1] - http://github.com/defnull/bottle/ [2] - http://github.com/kangax
What happened to people who can write successful products but not yet been open sourced?
This happened to John Carmack, Jamie Zawinski. They are probably too busy in making stuffs work then writing answers on Stack Overflow or committing code to GitHub.
This happened to John Carmack, Jamie Zawinski. They are probably too busy in making stuffs work then writing answers on Stack Overflow or committing code to GitHub.
Some people do both. Why gamble on someone who won't show any of his work when you can just pick someone who does?
Some people are plenty mentally stimulated at work and don't feel the need to work on their own projects in their spare time. And sometimes your professional accomplishments are significant enough that a side project is not likely to make you a much more attractive candidate. The people who "do both" often don't fall in these categories.
Also a lot of companies don't want their employees to write code for anyone else and will actually see open source contributions as a major red flag.
Also a lot of companies don't want their employees to write code for anyone else and will actually see open source contributions as a major red flag.
Also a lot of companies don't want their employees to write code for anyone else and will actually see open source contributions as a major red flag.
FUD. I work for a very large corporation, and open source was definitely not a negative when hiring me. Many very important parts of our business are based on open-source technologies. (And many aren't, FWIW.)
FUD. I work for a very large corporation, and open source was definitely not a negative when hiring me. Many very important parts of our business are based on open-source technologies. (And many aren't, FWIW.)
Good point.
But if the code has copyrighted issues, then how can I show publicly? I usually have a copy of repository for my past projects and I don't mind to show it to people who interview me.
Also I think if I need to put code on GitHub, it has to be some software for more generic tasks.
But if the code has copyrighted issues, then how can I show publicly? I usually have a copy of repository for my past projects and I don't mind to show it to people who interview me.
Also I think if I need to put code on GitHub, it has to be some software for more generic tasks.
Phase 1 is already here: http://github.com/blog/553-looking-for-a-job-let-github-help
I said it before and I'll say it again -- charging people looking for jobs is ridiculous. I don't know who the kid in Houston looking for an OCaml internship is, but how the heck does he have $100 to spend on this?
Considering the job you have has a massive impact on your personal happiness it makes a lot of sense to improve your odds of finding the right company to work for. The cost of careers.stackoverflow is nothing compared to the cost of actually taking an interview (easily 8+ hours). If because of stackoverflow you can get by with one interview less it's easily worth it.
Besides, if you have 3 great offers on the table I'm sure you'll be able able to negotiate a $100/year raise to recoup the careers.stackoverflow investment.
Besides, if you have 3 great offers on the table I'm sure you'll be able able to negotiate a $100/year raise to recoup the careers.stackoverflow investment.
I believe students get SO careers memberships for free. They only charge non-students. I think they mostly want active job searchers, but $100 does sound a bit high if I just want my resume out there.
No matter how many times you say it doesn't make it right. Charging to look for average crappy jobs? Sure, that's ridiculous. Charging to essentially filter the jobs down to a subset with a high likelihood of being above average and excellent jobs? Well worth $100.
I can get a crappy job off Dice anytime and spending money to do it would be a waste. Spending $100 to have a chance at a great job where I'm actually happy? That's an investment likely to have pretty good returns.
I can get a crappy job off Dice anytime and spending money to do it would be a waste. Spending $100 to have a chance at a great job where I'm actually happy? That's an investment likely to have pretty good returns.
$100? If nothing else, an entrance fee cuts down the numbers of resumé spammers.
To spend $100 in order to find a better job, I think is worth it. $100 isn't a lot of money, especially when you consider it an investment into your future.
A couple* facts to bear in mind:
(1) The $99 fee is paid up-front, not when (if!) hired. (2) There is a limited-time price reduction (to $29) for 2009. (3) They advertise a 90-day, no-questions-asked money back guarantee.
http://careers.stackoverflow.com/faq#pricing
* "Our chief weapon is surprise... surprise and fear..."
(1) The $99 fee is paid up-front, not when (if!) hired. (2) There is a limited-time price reduction (to $29) for 2009. (3) They advertise a 90-day, no-questions-asked money back guarantee.
http://careers.stackoverflow.com/faq#pricing
* "Our chief weapon is surprise... surprise and fear..."
Technical recruiters make ridiculous amounts of money for moving people between companies. If this is successful it will be very lucrative for FogCreek.
But that's because traditional recruiters usually take a % of the person's salary.
Stackoverflow only charges a subscription fee for searching the database so they probably won't make as much.
Stackoverflow only charges a subscription fee for searching the database so they probably won't make as much.
If you are a hiring manager, you can test-drive our search interface any time and get an idea of how many matches you'll find. No surprises here. But if you'd like to view candidate details and make contact, you'll need a subscription:
* 1 week subscription is $500
* 1 month subscription is $1,000
* 6 month subscription is $3,000
* 1 year subscription is $5,000Perhaps it will be so lucrative because employers will get sick of paying percentages of salaries in recruiter's fees and so many of them will sign up for this more-modest subscription fee?
Roughly how many points does a recruiter get?
30 - 40% in my experience in the UK. It's pretty sickening.
That's the default. If you're crafty there are ways to force it down over the course of the arrangement.
That's the default. If you're crafty there are ways to force it down over the course of the arrangement.
I've heard 10% at my current company.
20% is standard. Companies with high standards will often pay more. (One company offered 50% for a very high-level position).
The percentages are out of control. 20-25% makes it really hard to even consider using recruiters. I only form relationships with some of them to get an agreement that they won't recruit from my firm.
So these are people who are unemployed or risking getting fired by looking for a job in public?
Isn't it better to find people who already have a job they like and try to convince them that they would be even happier in your company?
Isn't it better to find people who already have a job they like and try to convince them that they would be even happier in your company?
I'm not sure I understand your first sentence.
Is being unemployed a bad thing? Well, yes it generally is for the unemployed person but it doesn't mean that they're a bad hire. Sure, one could say that if they were really good, they would be busy with multiple projects at the same time, or have people waiting for them as soon as their current job ends for a reason or another. But it sounds a little bit condescending to me to imply that being unemployed means you shouldn't be hired.
As for "people risking getting fired", besides the fact that I doubt that it happens that often (and when it does, one could easily argue that it's a sign that it wasn't a good place to be in the first place), I don't see that as a bad thing for somebody hiring.
Is being unemployed a bad thing? Well, yes it generally is for the unemployed person but it doesn't mean that they're a bad hire. Sure, one could say that if they were really good, they would be busy with multiple projects at the same time, or have people waiting for them as soon as their current job ends for a reason or another. But it sounds a little bit condescending to me to imply that being unemployed means you shouldn't be hired.
As for "people risking getting fired", besides the fact that I doubt that it happens that often (and when it does, one could easily argue that it's a sign that it wasn't a good place to be in the first place), I don't see that as a bad thing for somebody hiring.
Good points but ...
It just often isn't appropriate to have a single, world viewable resume. Job search is a delicate dance. Personnel departments and higher management may want to filter job seekers out an arbitrary criteria ("we want a backend/frontend programmer") while a job seeker may wants to make contact with the project lead and show they he/she is good fit for their process in particular. This kind of thing makes "spinning" your resume important and perfectly legitimate. If just exposing everything worked for programmers, Google would already be a great way to find programmers.
It just often isn't appropriate to have a single, world viewable resume. Job search is a delicate dance. Personnel departments and higher management may want to filter job seekers out an arbitrary criteria ("we want a backend/frontend programmer") while a job seeker may wants to make contact with the project lead and show they he/she is good fit for their process in particular. This kind of thing makes "spinning" your resume important and perfectly legitimate. If just exposing everything worked for programmers, Google would already be a great way to find programmers.
You can set your CV to private and only searchable by employers. Unless your employer is signed up for SO Careers I don't think you'll have a problem.
Anyways, it can simply be thought of as your personal resume. You don't have to actively be seeking a job to fill out a CV.
Anyways, it can simply be thought of as your personal resume. You don't have to actively be seeking a job to fill out a CV.
I think LinkedIn is viewed in a similar fashion. While it's sole purpose is not job seeking, it's clear that it can be very useful for that.
Posting you resume on a jobs site does not necessarily mean you are actively looking for a job. And I highly doubt an employer would fire someone just for having their resume publicly posted. Besides, if you’re employer is that fickle, maybe you should have your resume out there, just in case.
Actually the story they are pitching is that when you find someone's resume online and email them job offer, they might not be available. They are trying to solve this problem by showing only people actively looking for jobs in search results. It is similar to Github's "I'm available for hire" checkbox announced couple days ago.
Why would that be better?
Won't this have the same problem as linkedin, programmers will delist themselves when they started getting daily calls from desperate recruiters ?
Stack Overflow charges quite a bit of money for the right to search for candidates (plans range from $500 for one week access to $5000 for a year) so that should limit the number of inquiries.
Also, you can easily remove yourself from the search results.
Also, you can easily remove yourself from the search results.
In the financial sector recruiters can typically make around $50k for placing a single senior dev, paying an annual 5k fee is nothing
That probably happens with Stack Overflow anyway, but only people with the JobHunting bit set will come up in search results.
500$/week just to see some 900 CVs is a highly offensive price. He should have started low and increased the price gradually.
I've heard somewhere (possibly from Joel himself, to be fair) that it typically costs a company around half a year's salary to hire an employee (between recruiting costs, etc.) $500/week is a drop in a very large bucket for most employers - at least the kind that are doing active recruiting. They're probably spending way more than that just in personnel time to review resumes - and in fact, being able to filter a bit better by quality will save them that much more in the screener's time.
I can't provide episode number, but I can concur anecdotally that this was discussed on the Stack Overflow podcast. It was probably at or around the debut of the jobs subdomain.
I think this is one strategy. Start with a high price for something, then iterate lower to find the sweet spot -- particularly if your product is new or beta, and you deliberately want to limit your initial user base.
Why would I pay $100 for this instead of using a free website like ComputerJobs.com, Dice.com, Monster.com etc? I'd think the quality of employers would be about the same.
So far I see zero benefits for me but lots of moola for JoS.
So far I see zero benefits for me but lots of moola for JoS.
Yeah, charing for participation is silly. It reduces the number of potential candidates. Headhunters have the equation right: Charge when you actually hook people up.
Not sure how you'd solve the problem of people finding each other on Programmer Search and then just emailing each other externally.
Not sure how you'd solve the problem of people finding each other on Programmer Search and then just emailing each other externally.
> Yeah, charing for participation is silly. It reduces the number of potential candidates.
I'd call that a feature. It cuts down on the resume spam. By charging $100 you create a filter to reduce the noise. It makes the people with jobs happier because they don't get as much crap and you make he job hunters happier as it's now easier for them to find jobs.
Everyone wins by charging.
I'd call that a feature. It cuts down on the resume spam. By charging $100 you create a filter to reduce the noise. It makes the people with jobs happier because they don't get as much crap and you make he job hunters happier as it's now easier for them to find jobs.
Everyone wins by charging.
I tried the free trial search, that he uses in his OCaml/Houston example. I find it quite hard to believe that there is a Common Lisp programmer in Bagdad, AZ and a Clojure programmer in Window Rock, AZ.
Well, the OCaml kid is legit, but, no, there are no lisp programmers in Bagdad or Clojure programmers in Window Rock... did someone say there were? Do you need one? Window Rock is a dusty tiny town, seat of the Navajo Nation--I've actually been there, it has one grocery store and a single strip mall.
Maybe you did a search that had 1 result, and then you edited your search, and the Ajax refresh didn't come back fast enough so it still showed one?
Maybe you did a search that had 1 result, and then you edited your search, and the Ajax refresh didn't come back fast enough so it still showed one?
No, I'm not looking for a programmer in either of those cities. I was just testing it out, to see if I could give it anything that wouldn't invite me to sign up and search.
I just didn't notice the number to the right, and clicked the "Show Results" button each time. After I read your reply I tried it again, this time looking for AJAX updates across the entire page, and I saw it. I think I would have found it on my own had the "Display Search Results" button been disabled or hidden when no results were found.
I just didn't notice the number to the right, and clicked the "Show Results" button each time. After I read your reply I tried it again, this time looking for AJAX updates across the entire page, and I saw it. I think I would have found it on my own had the "Display Search Results" button been disabled or hidden when no results were found.
There should be something that can be added to each user's icon that indicates their hire-ability. Perhaps only for users above a certain reputation.
This site was clearly developed for large companies having problems hiring because of their size. The lack of an even remotely useable demo made me snicker at the minimum $500/week price point.
I'm too lazy to look at the site, but I'm wondering how they are solving the problem of people forgetting/not bothering to uncheck the "available" option? I suppose if they charge a small fee, people would have an incentive to delist themselves after they find a job.
Joel Spolsky thinks we should all hire people who regularly use his software. He thinks those people are cool and he really likes how their time, effort and reputation on his site are something they can sell to recruiters for additional revenue. This is literally his dream come true.