LinkedIn quietly removes option to export contacts(venturebeat.com)
venturebeat.com
LinkedIn quietly removes option to export contacts
http://venturebeat.com/2015/07/23/linkedin-quietly-removes-option-to-export-contacts-makes-users-wait-up-to-72-hours-for-their-data-archive/
131 comments
- LinkedIn has employed "Dark Patterns" for a long time to scarf up your Address Book via your e-mail id. Then unless you are VERY careful you will end up spamming everyone with an invite.
- They also employed a MTM attack on your mobile "Intro App" https://threatpost.com/linkedin-intro-app-equivalent-to-man-...
- Have you noticed that the LI News feed is a high-noise collection of crap?
- and on and on
"Monetizing your users" is rapidly making that site useless for almost everyone.
- They also employed a MTM attack on your mobile "Intro App" https://threatpost.com/linkedin-intro-app-equivalent-to-man-...
- Have you noticed that the LI News feed is a high-noise collection of crap?
- and on and on
"Monetizing your users" is rapidly making that site useless for almost everyone.
LinkedIn was the first in a long line of social networks I deleted starting 4 years ago. Not sure how anyone gets value out of enough to justify.
LinkedIn is not a social network. It's a site which holds my CV and then recruiters message me with Job Specs. I either like the spec or don't, and sometimes I get interviews from it.
I accept any friend request from recruiters/colleagues and beyond that never ever use the site.
My justification is I like getting job specs, and the cost is essentially nothing. Sure I hate that it's got a side panel asking me to connect with an old Wheel of Time fansite e-friend from Norway who was in my email contacts and I've not spoken to in some 15 years but it's hardly the end of the world.
I accept any friend request from recruiters/colleagues and beyond that never ever use the site.
My justification is I like getting job specs, and the cost is essentially nothing. Sure I hate that it's got a side panel asking me to connect with an old Wheel of Time fansite e-friend from Norway who was in my email contacts and I've not spoken to in some 15 years but it's hardly the end of the world.
"Social" in the sense of leveraging (exceptionally aggressively) the social graph and personal connections.
Less so in terms of content / context.
Less so in terms of content / context.
It's funny you say "monetizing users". Immediately after reading that, I opened up linked in and I had a message in my inbox from IBM providing me a free trial to some software and it had a little "sponsored" tag on the inbox item.
Dear god this site is wretched.
Dear god this site is wretched.
It's so unfortunate that LinkedIn is successful in its domain despite its passively unethical ways. This company never gave me any positive vibes. It's always been recommendations that people begged from their co-workers and fluff talk about own profile. They are like the Ryanair of software industry. Least concern for the users. It's on my todo list to get rid of my minimal account info on LinkedIn as soon as possible.
Except Ryanair are actually getting much better at customer service these days, while still nearly always being the cheapest.
Linked In spammed me once when they reached some sort of milestone. The email had no remove-me-from-this-list link or way to tell Linked In that I didn't want to receive emails. I found the CEO's email address and forwarded it to him, asking him to remove me from the mailing list. He sent back a nasty email and deleted my account.
I've not looked back and my life is exactly as it was, minus a few unwanted emails.
I've not looked back and my life is exactly as it was, minus a few unwanted emails.
Please post the email. LinkedIn is scum, the more people know it, the better.
Do you still have the email from Jeff?
Wow, yeah. That would be an interesting one to read.
Please put up a copy of your letter, the semi-mythical "way to get off LinkedIn's mailing list"!
I should try that with the repeated "sign up" requests I get.
Huh. It seems I'm the only one here who finds value in LinkedIn.
Yes, it has led to actual, paying jobs. It takes some management on my part, but it's a lot easier than hunting around from site to site, or going to meetups, or any of that other stuff.
Do I get spammed? Sure. That's why I have a specific email account for them. Some of the spam is quite informative. I learn about openings early on, and can often find the hiring company by taking the text of the spam and searching the various job boards.
I get genuine requests, too. I take the time to respond to those just as genuinely.
For all the talk of the importance of networking around here, I'm kind of surprised at the antipathy. It's very low effort, just a few minutes a week.
I regard a lot of the complaints as symptomatic of the overall industry. I finally started going to meetups, and the signal-to-noise is just as bad, if not worse.
Yes, it has led to actual, paying jobs. It takes some management on my part, but it's a lot easier than hunting around from site to site, or going to meetups, or any of that other stuff.
Do I get spammed? Sure. That's why I have a specific email account for them. Some of the spam is quite informative. I learn about openings early on, and can often find the hiring company by taking the text of the spam and searching the various job boards.
I get genuine requests, too. I take the time to respond to those just as genuinely.
For all the talk of the importance of networking around here, I'm kind of surprised at the antipathy. It's very low effort, just a few minutes a week.
I regard a lot of the complaints as symptomatic of the overall industry. I finally started going to meetups, and the signal-to-noise is just as bad, if not worse.
> Huh. It seems I'm the only one here who finds value in LinkedIn.
I don't get the hate either. When it comes time for your next job search, it's incredibly valuable to have a consolidated list of everyone you've ever worked with where you can see where they work now. When I was looking for some part time work while launching my (bootstrapped) startup, I reached out to about 50 people from my LinkedIn network and it worked out great for me.
As for spam, I just filter and/or ignore it (yes, I get a ton of it, maybe 10+ recruiter emails a day).
I don't get the hate either. When it comes time for your next job search, it's incredibly valuable to have a consolidated list of everyone you've ever worked with where you can see where they work now. When I was looking for some part time work while launching my (bootstrapped) startup, I reached out to about 50 people from my LinkedIn network and it worked out great for me.
As for spam, I just filter and/or ignore it (yes, I get a ton of it, maybe 10+ recruiter emails a day).
> I learn about openings early on, and can often find the hiring company by taking the text of the spam and searching the various job boards.
This would be great if it could be automated somehow: paste email to a macro job board and get links to matching posts.
This would be great if it could be automated somehow: paste email to a macro job board and get links to matching posts.
It is a tradeoff. If you are looking for a job, or are new to the industry, linkedin is better than trying to build a professional network otherwise. After you have been in the industry for, say 15 years, and pretty much know most of the people working in your space, are highly specialized, then the recruiter emails will feel like spam. My guess is that for the first case, you aren't specific enough about yourself, so recruiters have a good chance of reaching you, based on your profile. After a certain amount of time, your profile readily doesn't distinguish your interests clearly. For example, a java developer tag at the start of one's career is quite different from a senior java developer who has understanding of internals of JVM. Recruiter may not know about the second case enough to be of much help.
This link seems to still work for exporting CSV of contacts, including email addresses: https://www.linkedin.com/addressBookExport
FYI: You can't export contacts from Facebook either. The API no longer supports getting the entire friends list (restricted to return only those friends who have also installed the same app).
There is a "download all my facebook data" option, but that only gives you a plain "firstname lastname" list. No contact information there either.
There is a "download all my facebook data" option, but that only gives you a plain "firstname lastname" list. No contact information there either.
One of the main issues I had with LI personally (beside the already posted dark patterns) was the 3rd party scrapers who used the LI API to recreate their own listings with LI data. So this means if I changed the data on LI, the scrapers wouldn't update their own copies of the site. Even when I deleted my LinkedIn account I had to hunt down separate sites and go through emailing adventure to get the data removed.
I want to be in whole control of my public data, that's why getting a domain and posting a blog is maybe more tedious but better at the end.
I want to be in whole control of my public data, that's why getting a domain and posting a blog is maybe more tedious but better at the end.
I requested my data when I commented first on this thread and just got the notification that it was ready. So it was 21h for me. Still way too much, but it's less than three days...
you have to go to Connections and search a 1st connection name before seeing his/her email and contacts. You won't see that if u go straight to the person profile. What was previously a 1-click process is now more like a 3-click process. A resultant of Linkedin seeming to be incredibly agressive on monetizing?
Stuff like this is why I never signed up for LinkedIn in the first place.
Did they remove that option even for paying users?
I only use LinkedIn to find former coworkers and classmates. After that I email them directly.
However I get lots of connection requests from recruiters. I always accept them. I figure that greatly dilutes whatever value linkedin might have once had because most of my connections are recruiters who wadte their time on me because I dont log in a whole lot.
However I get lots of connection requests from recruiters. I always accept them. I figure that greatly dilutes whatever value linkedin might have once had because most of my connections are recruiters who wadte their time on me because I dont log in a whole lot.
LinkedIn is a worthless piece of spammy shit of a website these days. I haven't bothered deleting my account but I haven't logged into it in like a year now and any mail I get from them that somehow makes it through the filters is reported as spam.
I can only surmise they made this change to make it harder for (more) people to bail because they know how dreadful using their site is now and this is an easier "fix" than a Dominos-style mea culpa and positive changes.
I can only surmise they made this change to make it harder for (more) people to bail because they know how dreadful using their site is now and this is an easier "fix" than a Dominos-style mea culpa and positive changes.
Some sites just give off a vibe that prevents me from ever trusting them, LinkedIn is the most predominant in that category and I have never been able to put my finger on exactly why. The email proxy apps and the pay to see who viewed your profile aspects don't help.
I'm not saying that it's any worse than any other sites, but LinkedIn has always felt like a shady company, like they're not on the users side.
I was really hoping that the Google+ reboot would fulfill the niche market that LinkedIn dominates, but it did not.
I'm not saying that it's any worse than any other sites, but LinkedIn has always felt like a shady company, like they're not on the users side.
I was really hoping that the Google+ reboot would fulfill the niche market that LinkedIn dominates, but it did not.
The "best" feature they have is automatically sending notifications to all your peers (and through email) when you change one little thing in your profile. And they show specifically what you edited. You can disable it of course in settings, but you have to know about that. I've seen enough awkward situations come out of this. How is it even possible that they think it is okay?
I can see the rationalization: I've added React and Javascript to my LinkedIn profile, so it's probably nice to publish that to recruiters that I'm connected with, or friends who can endorse them.
Of course, I really don't want to spam them while I am rewriting prose about jobs until it's done, though, so it'd have been nicer if the spamming didn't happen until I pushed some kind of "publish" button.
Of course, I really don't want to spam them while I am rewriting prose about jobs until it's done, though, so it'd have been nicer if the spamming didn't happen until I pushed some kind of "publish" button.
its because they tell the user that you clicked their profile. what kind of bullshit is that, I wanna compare myself to other people without them knowing.
Try using the Incognito Mode in Chrome.
Of course, that will only give you a public view of a profile, but it seems to hide your identity nonetheless.
Of course, that will only give you a public view of a profile, but it seems to hide your identity nonetheless.
LinkedIn really is one of the worst websites I've ever used. I wish there were viable alternatives.
Are you for real or just exaggerating to add some unneeded emphasis to your disdain of LinkedIn?
While I don't think LinkedIn is the shining star, it's definitely not one of the worst websites I've ever used; it's actually been quite helpful for connecting with people.
While I don't think LinkedIn is the shining star, it's definitely not one of the worst websites I've ever used; it's actually been quite helpful for connecting with people.
Can't speak for the original poster but I'd say, without exaggeration, that in relation to what it could be, given its inputs, LinkedIn is the worst website I've ever used.
Even if you consider the number of design dark patterns used and deliberate content obfuscation to be justifiable from a business perspective, they manage to screw up things they don't have an excuse for. The jobs board has an abundance of jobs, unrivalled data to match people with them, and yet shows me very few, with very poor relevance, and big, shiny logos in lieu of a decent headline. LinkedIn Groups was the clunkiest discussion service I've ever seen (although they seem to have tightened it up a bit) which must be part of the reason why article spam vastly exceeds anyone's desire to have significant discussions in there. The UI feels cheap, tacky and glossy and my browser feels like it's choking on the infinite scroll. Even the part of the site which is well executed also happens to be the repository of the world's dullest linkbait...
Even if you consider the number of design dark patterns used and deliberate content obfuscation to be justifiable from a business perspective, they manage to screw up things they don't have an excuse for. The jobs board has an abundance of jobs, unrivalled data to match people with them, and yet shows me very few, with very poor relevance, and big, shiny logos in lieu of a decent headline. LinkedIn Groups was the clunkiest discussion service I've ever seen (although they seem to have tightened it up a bit) which must be part of the reason why article spam vastly exceeds anyone's desire to have significant discussions in there. The UI feels cheap, tacky and glossy and my browser feels like it's choking on the infinite scroll. Even the part of the site which is well executed also happens to be the repository of the world's dullest linkbait...
I can't talk about the interface but for people who don't have an account there, this website is absolutely hostile. (think: much worse than most)
I'm a calm person but I needed serious gmail filter tinkering to catch all those we-want-you-to-join-or-feel-bad emails.
I'm a calm person but I needed serious gmail filter tinkering to catch all those we-want-you-to-join-or-feel-bad emails.
I'm not following... you're getting emails from LinkedIn even though you haven't signed up? You mean those 'I accidentally clicked a button without reading it and it spammed all my contacts' emails from current members?
Ironically, LinkedIn is the only site I've encountered where non-members get more access than (free-tier) signed in users. I regularly open a profile in a private window via Google search because it won't show me 3rd-degree connections without paying for them, but will happily share those profiles with Googlers...
Ironically, LinkedIn is the only site I've encountered where non-members get more access than (free-tier) signed in users. I regularly open a profile in a private window via Google search because it won't show me 3rd-degree connections without paying for them, but will happily share those profiles with Googlers...
> I'm not following... you're getting emails from LinkedIn even though you haven't signed up? You mean those 'I accidentally clicked a button without reading it and it spammed all my contacts' emails from current members?
As with many others, I get these constantly: "I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn." with seemingly no way to disable them. You can stop them for that one person's 'invitation', but invariably someone else will start the process over again. I have a filter set up that sends all LI email to trash
> Ironically, LinkedIn is the only site I've encountered where non-members get more access than (free-tier) signed in users.
I can't even imagine how this is defensible. This kind of behavior doesn't give me any reason to want to make an account.
As with many others, I get these constantly: "I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn." with seemingly no way to disable them. You can stop them for that one person's 'invitation', but invariably someone else will start the process over again. I have a filter set up that sends all LI email to trash
> Ironically, LinkedIn is the only site I've encountered where non-members get more access than (free-tier) signed in users.
I can't even imagine how this is defensible. This kind of behavior doesn't give me any reason to want to make an account.
I think the worst thing they do is ask you to connect with your email account and then they continually spam your contacts to join LinkedIn. It's bad, but they're not the only ones doing that.
Interface-wise it's not that bad, but I don't use all the features (free user) and don't spend much time on there.
Interface-wise it's not that bad, but I don't use all the features (free user) and don't spend much time on there.
[deleted]
Try whitetruffle. Much less useless spam.
Agreed. LinkedIn used to be great, but is not completely unusable.
The website itself is awful to use, but the community is even worse. It is now just a tool for shameless recruiters to spam left and right.
I spent a lot of time working on my profile, clearly explaining that I reject connection requests from strangers, that I ignore messages for open jobs which don't include a certain set of items and I still get spammed all day long.
The problem is LinkedIn gets its money from recruiters who signed up for premium accounts so they cater to them.
The website itself is awful to use, but the community is even worse. It is now just a tool for shameless recruiters to spam left and right.
I spent a lot of time working on my profile, clearly explaining that I reject connection requests from strangers, that I ignore messages for open jobs which don't include a certain set of items and I still get spammed all day long.
The problem is LinkedIn gets its money from recruiters who signed up for premium accounts so they cater to them.
> The problem is LinkedIn gets its money from recruiters who signed up for premium accounts so they cater to them.
I never thought about it that way, but it makes perfect sense. I deleted my account sometime last year (I think), and I deal with no shitty recruiters now.
I never thought about it that way, but it makes perfect sense. I deleted my account sometime last year (I think), and I deal with no shitty recruiters now.
I have the same opinion about them. worst UI. Useless emails. You have to pay them money for no reason.
They're fighting a symptom instead of the disease.
They changed a process to make it slower?! o.O
3 days sounds an awful lot as if human intervention were required. What purpose would this serve?
3 days sounds an awful lot as if human intervention were required. What purpose would this serve?
Since LinkedIn shut off their contacts APIs, folks have been looking for other ways to get at LinkedIn connections data. Export is an obvious solution - even though it requires some friction on the part of the end user, people are often willing to jump through a couple hoops if your app solves a real pain they have. By increasing the friction, people developing apps which try to make use of LinkedIn data have to try harder and inflict more friction on their users, hopefully (in LinkedIn's eyes) shutting down more of those apps for good.
One optimistic possibility is so that if you leave your LinkedIn account logged in on a computer somewhere, another individual can't immediately export all your contacts, which could have competitive or security implications. It takes multiple days and you get notification of it happening.
I think you've hit the nail on the head, here.
Extremely unlikely. I'm sticking with the non-optimistic theory.
If it were really about protecting user privacy they could just have you re-enter your password to download the contacts, which is the industry standard thing to do when someone is logged in but doing something you think needs extra protection against them having accidentally left themselves logged in on a public system.
3 days is a good number for someone rage-quitting to let it slip off their radar and just lazily remain a user, not really a useful time period for security purposes.
If it were really about protecting user privacy they could just have you re-enter your password to download the contacts, which is the industry standard thing to do when someone is logged in but doing something you think needs extra protection against them having accidentally left themselves logged in on a public system.
3 days is a good number for someone rage-quitting to let it slip off their radar and just lazily remain a user, not really a useful time period for security purposes.
"What purpose would this serve?"
Lock-in is the only answer that makes any kind of rational sense. The harder you make it to get your data out of any software/website the more friction you add to people who may want to try alternatives.
Lock-in is the only answer that makes any kind of rational sense. The harder you make it to get your data out of any software/website the more friction you add to people who may want to try alternatives.
LinkedIn has never been interesting to me for anything other than looking at what past coworkers have been up to. I've never once had an experience where LinkedIn led to a job and in fact after I deleted my account my recruiter email volume dropped by an order of magnitude. I've also read that potential employers search candidates LinkedIn contacts to see if there are any existing employees and if so ask them about the candidate. Governments, employers, media, LinkedIn itself and malicious types frequently use all that personal information people add on LinkedIn to cause harm.
The users are what is for sale on this site. I'm not a LinkedIn user, it's not worth it.
The users are what is for sale on this site. I'm not a LinkedIn user, it's not worth it.
My 2c: My previous company was circling the drain (lost main customer, slowly downsized from max of ~25 to me being #5 when I left.)
My job hunting was basically updating my profile on LI and light searching.
Contacted by a Recruiter. They updated my resume to look more professional. Working as a contractor-to-hire at a state IT position.
There is a lot of spam, and I have no interest in the "facebook lite" feel of the site... but I got a 20% raise, will get about the same when/if I get hired - with state position benefits.
Site is worth it for me for, honestly, the minimal amount of effort I put in to keep my resume updated and do slight interaction with those on the site.
My job hunting was basically updating my profile on LI and light searching.
Contacted by a Recruiter. They updated my resume to look more professional. Working as a contractor-to-hire at a state IT position.
There is a lot of spam, and I have no interest in the "facebook lite" feel of the site... but I got a 20% raise, will get about the same when/if I get hired - with state position benefits.
Site is worth it for me for, honestly, the minimal amount of effort I put in to keep my resume updated and do slight interaction with those on the site.
Same here - a light LI update and recruiters are all over me. Alternatively, one month of subscribing to LinkedIn Premium (or whatever) got me some great leads at good companies - it was very easy to target the right level of higher-ups - but I had a good gig by the time I got the ball rolling with them. So I can agree with the complaints but in another sense it's one of those technologies that's like having a superpower compared to the old days of job hunting when I graduated from college in 2003.
> The users are what is for sale on this site.
Isn't that true of pretty much every advertising driven site?
Full disclosure: I used to work at LI.
Isn't that true of pretty much every advertising driven site?
Full disclosure: I used to work at LI.
I haven't been on LinkedIn in a while, but are there ads on it? From my perspective LinkedIn is probably the most obnoxious social media site (in a doesn't-even-try-to-hide-it way).
Advertising accounts for about 25% of revenue.
http://www.quora.com/What-is-LinkedIns-business-model
http://www.quora.com/What-is-LinkedIns-business-model
Although this was my experience as a FT employee, since I've switched to consulting, LinkedIn has brought me leads and some of those have converted. No active advertising by me either, just the fact that people in my network know that I'm working independently now has caused them to ping me with projects.
Not only that but I found when I didn't have a LinkedIn account, the recruiters who found me were of much higher quality. They found my github account, my blog, etc, and actually had potential jobs that I found interesting. On LinkedIn, they just stuff their emails into a giant cannon and spray away.
Everything you write is pretty terrific except somehow you think it's bad?
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.
When I'm the "thing" being sold, the onus is on the vendor to provide a value that keeps me there.
LinkedIn seems determined to be as anti-user as possible, and as someone who values my privacy instead of social networks, I understand where OP is coming from.
Just deleted my LinkedIn account because there is no value for me there.
When I'm the "thing" being sold, the onus is on the vendor to provide a value that keeps me there.
LinkedIn seems determined to be as anti-user as possible, and as someone who values my privacy instead of social networks, I understand where OP is coming from.
Just deleted my LinkedIn account because there is no value for me there.
Agreed. Even when I was actively looking for a job, LinkedIn was no help. I deleted my account years ago and have never missed it, even a little.
I have a hard time believing employers use this site to recruit? I have a fake account I put up years ago. I get requests--daily--from people I don't know?
I think it would be a better site if it didn't focus on this networking "friends" thing? Let people pad their resume! Let them lie about their abilities? It seems like it turned into another Facebook? "
I get this daily:
"Hi ,
I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn."
From strangers? I don't know why these people want me on their professional network. As a job I listed: I manage __________ID. I am in control of it--most of the time. It's a strenuous position, but I can't get anyone to take over the job!
I think it would be a better site if it didn't focus on this networking "friends" thing? Let people pad their resume! Let them lie about their abilities? It seems like it turned into another Facebook? "
I get this daily:
"Hi ,
I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn."
From strangers? I don't know why these people want me on their professional network. As a job I listed: I manage __________ID. I am in control of it--most of the time. It's a strenuous position, but I can't get anyone to take over the job!
Recruiters add liquidity to the labor market. I really don't see how they are a bad thing.
Recruiters have a serious "market for lemons" problem. Some are good, a lot are terrible spammy bucket shops. Dealing with the bad ones just increases your transaction costs.
Adding fake liquidity actually removes liquidity.
Imagine if you were selling your house, and I created a service that would bombard you with 10 fake potential buyers a day. You only have time to deal with 2 buyers a day. Chances are, you'll miss out on everyone who is actually interested.
While LinkedIn does not intend to create fake recruitment attempts, it works out the same in the end.
Imagine if you were selling your house, and I created a service that would bombard you with 10 fake potential buyers a day. You only have time to deal with 2 buyers a day. Chances are, you'll miss out on everyone who is actually interested.
While LinkedIn does not intend to create fake recruitment attempts, it works out the same in the end.
But the liquidity isn't fake, hence why the firms pay recruiters rather than waiting for the actually-interested people to beat a path to their door. The jobs are real, as are the candidates willing to actually show up to an interview. If you have a job and no suitable candidates, sourcing them is a valuable service, even if a few people get annoyed by the recruiters (better by them than by the employer...) along the way.
The jobs aren't always real, and the candidates aren't always even remotely qualified for them.
Have you ever dealt with a recruiter?
Scum that spam people are like real estate agents sponsoring the PTA meeting -- they are trolling for listings.
Scum that spam people are like real estate agents sponsoring the PTA meeting -- they are trolling for listings.
Plenty thanks, and on the rare occasions I've actually been remotely interested in the job they're promoting they've been more effective st getting me interviews than responding to actual employers' paid listings with carefully crafted cover letters.
This is a fairly low bar for calling another human scum
Thanks to people like this who pass out resumes without authorization and shop candidates, I lost out on a key job opportunity at a time where I was in a pretty bad personal situation, and the job market was not so great.
So maybe I'm mean, but I have no respect whatsoever for contingency recruiters.
So maybe I'm mean, but I have no respect whatsoever for contingency recruiters.
In your hypothetical you would contract a real estate agent who would use their expertise in the market to pick the best offers. Getting 100 offers would mean more competition and the likely hood that your agent finds an even better offer than if you had only received 10.
If you have a high quality house, er - I mean, if you have skills that are in demand, I highly recommend you get an agent (like hired.com), because you're probably missing out on those good offers.
If you have a high quality house, er - I mean, if you have skills that are in demand, I highly recommend you get an agent (like hired.com), because you're probably missing out on those good offers.
As in high frequency trading, additional liquidity also equates to addition volatility. That can be good or bad, but a market needs to have enormous "stickiness" for additional liquidity to be an unalloyed benefit. Labor markets are a good example, with search costs high on both sides of the table, so maybe we grant that point.
But there's relatively little evidence that recruiters actually reduce search costs, rather than shifting them around on balance sheets.
But there's relatively little evidence that recruiters actually reduce search costs, rather than shifting them around on balance sheets.
I would argue that the job markets are incredibly sticky. With HFT, dollars are fungible and shares usually don't have a regional preference for their buyers. There also isn't a resource cost of acquiring, training, and integrating a new share into your portfolio.
Recruiters typically work for for-profit businesses, that maximize returns on sales, meaning they are going to try to charge organizations slightly less than it would cost the organization to do it in house.
The increased liquidity in job markets drops the amount of time it takes to match a job opening with a job seeker, which eliminates inefficiencies. You're not factoring in the income difference someone makes by being placed in the ideal job sooner.
Recruiters typically work for for-profit businesses, that maximize returns on sales, meaning they are going to try to charge organizations slightly less than it would cost the organization to do it in house.
The increased liquidity in job markets drops the amount of time it takes to match a job opening with a job seeker, which eliminates inefficiencies. You're not factoring in the income difference someone makes by being placed in the ideal job sooner.
> the income difference someone makes by being placed in the ideal job sooner.
I don't know how you can tell what I'm factoring in or not, since I deliberately avoided this calculation. It can benefit either employees or employers, depending on elasticity / market power. In other words: you're not factoring how much faster expensive senior employees can be replaced with recent grads ;).
That said, there is also a cost to sloppy, spammy recruiting, illustrated in the other responses: it can end up increasing stickiness if enough people start ignoring all recruiting communication because it is all spam. That makes it even harder/more expensive to recruit, and grows the market for recruiters. There are some nasty incentive structures in there.
I don't know how you can tell what I'm factoring in or not, since I deliberately avoided this calculation. It can benefit either employees or employers, depending on elasticity / market power. In other words: you're not factoring how much faster expensive senior employees can be replaced with recent grads ;).
That said, there is also a cost to sloppy, spammy recruiting, illustrated in the other responses: it can end up increasing stickiness if enough people start ignoring all recruiting communication because it is all spam. That makes it even harder/more expensive to recruit, and grows the market for recruiters. There are some nasty incentive structures in there.
I dislike receiving emails from recruiters, especially when they're multiple times per day when I've never indicated to anyone in anyway that I'm looking for work. The fastest and easiest way I have reduced recruiter email was by just deleting my LinkedIn account. I got them down to like once or twice a week that way. Now I don't get any because any of the ones that continued to email I've asked them to stop.
I consider myself lucky if I get more than one a month. I understand the problem that you and others have with deluges of crap, but some of us are appreciative of any interest we get. The "hot" market seems to be rather geographically and specialty limited.
Recruiter emails are basically spam built from templates. They'll include jobs for which I'm obviously not qualified for if the recruiter knew anything about me. I've received emails that still had the template variables in them or had wrong names.
Having followed up on recruiter emails a couple of times I have to also state that it is a less pleasant experience than going through the employer directly. All your communication is through the recruiter and you get no feedback at all. In the case you have done an on site interview and you got to meet people, having be the recruiter telling you that the employer wasn't looking to move forward, with no explanation whatsoever, makes a bad experience even worse.
In other words, these aren't lists that I think anyone would want to be on. I agree that some areas are better for jobs than others which is why I live where I do.
Having followed up on recruiter emails a couple of times I have to also state that it is a less pleasant experience than going through the employer directly. All your communication is through the recruiter and you get no feedback at all. In the case you have done an on site interview and you got to meet people, having be the recruiter telling you that the employer wasn't looking to move forward, with no explanation whatsoever, makes a bad experience even worse.
In other words, these aren't lists that I think anyone would want to be on. I agree that some areas are better for jobs than others which is why I live where I do.
Most of my recruiter contacts have been direct recruiters of companies, so when I move forward I am dealing directly with the employer.
That said, I haven't found dealing with employers directly to give me any more understanding of my background or information about my progress than dealing with third-party recruiters.
I have certainly received my share of terrible recruiter emails, but only from posting my resume on job boards. LinkedIn has been a steady stream of mostly good hits, with the not-so-good hits coming directly from companies.
That said, I haven't found dealing with employers directly to give me any more understanding of my background or information about my progress than dealing with third-party recruiters.
I have certainly received my share of terrible recruiter emails, but only from posting my resume on job boards. LinkedIn has been a steady stream of mostly good hits, with the not-so-good hits coming directly from companies.
I consider myself lucky if I get more than one a month. I understand the problem that you and others have with deluges of crap, but some of us are appreciative of any interest we get.
Also, hot Russian girls want to meet you tonight!
Also, hot Russian girls want to meet you tonight!
sergiotapia(1)
why hasn't anybody disrupted linkedin yet? what would you like to see instead of linkedin? snapchat for business professionals?
How cool would that be? The use case for me for Snapchat is stupid easy video and image sharing to directed parties. What if you could interface with companies that way? Usually when I see a job I'm interested in I have to go spruce up my resume and then have a bunch of formal conversations with the company in question yet I never get to see a true picture of the job because of that.
Some instant low-friction point-to-point type of communication could make job hunting interesting and fun. It would be nice to send a quick video message with low-pressure to ask about a job. Maybe it could keep you in the mind of the company for jobs that aren't available now but will be coming up in the future.
Some instant low-friction point-to-point type of communication could make job hunting interesting and fun. It would be nice to send a quick video message with low-pressure to ask about a job. Maybe it could keep you in the mind of the company for jobs that aren't available now but will be coming up in the future.
AngelList already seems on that path.
This is a good question.
First, I think that LinkedIn includes too many features. Influencers, groups, pulse and stuff like that. I'm still trying to find a use for groups. Something more focused on networking would be great.
Second, as I mentioned in a previous message, LinkedIn caters to recruiters because that's how they get their money, and to me it makes it insufferable. There is this running joke "Being a developer on LinkedIn is like being a woman on match.com".
I believe it would be really hard to monetize a sane and clean website for professionals without turning into this spamming juggernaut.
First, I think that LinkedIn includes too many features. Influencers, groups, pulse and stuff like that. I'm still trying to find a use for groups. Something more focused on networking would be great.
Second, as I mentioned in a previous message, LinkedIn caters to recruiters because that's how they get their money, and to me it makes it insufferable. There is this running joke "Being a developer on LinkedIn is like being a woman on match.com".
I believe it would be really hard to monetize a sane and clean website for professionals without turning into this spamming juggernaut.
Ideally, the LinkedIn replacement would also be the recruiters replacement.
Anything that eases communication and discoverability between companies and professionals without either getting flooded with barely-relevant matches.
Anything that eases communication and discoverability between companies and professionals without either getting flooded with barely-relevant matches.
Lens.io seems to be a new competitor. https://www.lens.io/
The site took 4 seconds to load because of a 5.2 MB .gif used at the bottom of the page. These guys have a lot to learn.
(Disclaimer: I work at Lens.)
We do have a way to go in terms of optimising the site, but we are currently only open to a small number of alpha users. I can safely say that by the time we open the floodgates to the general public, these issues will have been addressed.
Thanks for the feedback!
We do have a way to go in terms of optimising the site, but we are currently only open to a small number of alpha users. I can safely say that by the time we open the floodgates to the general public, these issues will have been addressed.
Thanks for the feedback!
Network effects.
Is Network effects a company? If so, can you give the url. Googling doesn't help much in this case.
EDIT:If you were talking about social network effects, this is embarrassing.
I don't know that all business professionals can be catered to by the same service. I wonder if some (e.g., recruiters) have needs nearly diametrically opposed to others (e.g., developers).
Or maybe it's just a matter of getting the feature set right, something that seems rather off on LinkedIn now.
Or maybe it's just a matter of getting the feature set right, something that seems rather off on LinkedIn now.
I think this is probably right. For example, the LinkedIn competitor OilPro is doing extremely well focusing on a specific oil and gas market segment. I think "LinkedIn for Computer Scientists" or more specific genres would do as well as OilPro.
Isn't that StackOverflow careers?
The only thing I use and it is really quite valuable is just the simple database of resumes and how I'm connected.
LinkedIn is so ridiculous that it now limits how many searches per month you can do. Not only that, but the $30/month service I am trialing does not increase/remove the limit!!
LinkedIn is so ridiculous that it now limits how many searches per month you can do. Not only that, but the $30/month service I am trialing does not increase/remove the limit!!
whitetruffle is pretty good (I have no affiliation w/ them whatsoever, I just hate LinkedIn that much I would like to help out its competitor)
I deleted my account 6 months ago. LinkedIn is untrustable.
[deleted]
Are there any tools out there that can create something akin to a LinkedIn profile for static hosting? Something like Jekyll?
Part of the value that LinkedIn adds is that there is some degree of authenticity to the resumes.
There are some API standards for background checks between businesses and agencies, so that could be a good place to start. You could offer authenticated profiles, where people can't lie on their resume about where they worked.
Of course, LI could just implement this if you became too competitive to them.
There are some API standards for background checks between businesses and agencies, so that could be a good place to start. You could offer authenticated profiles, where people can't lie on their resume about where they worked.
Of course, LI could just implement this if you became too competitive to them.
> Part of the value that LinkedIn adds is that there is some degree of authenticity to the resumes.
Can you explain this? I can add any company and whatever job title and list of responsibilities I want without any verification.
Can you explain this? I can add any company and whatever job title and list of responsibilities I want without any verification.
It's not perfect but it makes it possible to spot lies. For example if you manage your company's profile on LinkedIn you can see when a new person says they've started working for you, and you can click a "they don't really work here" button. Of course people can still claim to work for "Y C0mbinator", but then on their profile it won't click through to the same company as listed on other people's profiles.
It also let's you make better judgements on likelihood they're lying. It's not impossible to create an authentic-looking fake profile, but generally speaking if you see someone claiming to work for X company and connected to lots of employees from X company it's a safe bet that they worked there.
It also let's you make better judgements on likelihood they're lying. It's not impossible to create an authentic-looking fake profile, but generally speaking if you see someone claiming to work for X company and connected to lots of employees from X company it's a safe bet that they worked there.
I agree this works for smaller companies, but for larger companies (>=500 employees), no verification is likely to take place.
> There are some API standards for background checks between businesses and agencies
Can you list some or are you referring to LinkedIn?
Can you list some or are you referring to LinkedIn?
I wish I knew. My last background check was through HireRight, and the only reason I know they have automated systems set up with different employers and agencies is because one of the systems screwed up and needed manual verification.
It might be what Checkr is sitting on top of.
It might be what Checkr is sitting on top of.
You can create a public resume on Resumonk. e.g. https://www.resumonk.com/aditya
Disclaimer: I'm the Co-Founder of Resumonk.
Disclaimer: I'm the Co-Founder of Resumonk.
Maybe something like h-resume? http://microformats.org/wiki/hresume
Serendipitously, I also found something similar this weekend, but specifying one's resume in JSON rather than XML: https://jsonresume.org/
Did that at one point. Lost the JSON file in a hard drive death though :/ The day prior to the crash I had wrote a note to put it in a git repo and then forgot. Otherwise it's a pretty nice way to manage a resume.
Time to abandon ship!
Linked in is the king of dark patterns and practices. I was foolish enough to sign up for a free 30 trial period (of course handing over credit card details with the expectation they wont just automatically charging me and seek my permission before charging). I didn’t check my cc statements for a few months and there you have it ...linked in charged me every month after the trail period ended.
Did you ever have trial magazine subscriptions? I cannot think of any subscription-based service (other than MMO subscriptions) where the implicit assumption was not, "Keep charging unless they cancel during the trial period".
This behavior being so common is one of the reasons I have a nearly gut-level aversion to services that OFFER a free trial.
I much prefer a free tier of service, with a clear indication of the upsell options. For services I like (like Toggl) that have a free tier of service, I am still skittish of the trials of "pro" tiers, precisely out of the fear that it might be a hassle to cancel, rather than a "we assume you're going to cancel".
Everything I recall reading about setting up a subscription service suggests that the default-to-stay-subscribed method leads to more revenue (as people forget), and as customers we're accustomed to think, "well, that WAS my fault ...". In a normal subscription scenario, even, that probably is nicer to customers. However, for a __trial__, I would prefer to see an end of the paid service, rather than to start receiving bills.
This behavior being so common is one of the reasons I have a nearly gut-level aversion to services that OFFER a free trial.
I much prefer a free tier of service, with a clear indication of the upsell options. For services I like (like Toggl) that have a free tier of service, I am still skittish of the trials of "pro" tiers, precisely out of the fear that it might be a hassle to cancel, rather than a "we assume you're going to cancel".
Everything I recall reading about setting up a subscription service suggests that the default-to-stay-subscribed method leads to more revenue (as people forget), and as customers we're accustomed to think, "well, that WAS my fault ...". In a normal subscription scenario, even, that probably is nicer to customers. However, for a __trial__, I would prefer to see an end of the paid service, rather than to start receiving bills.
I get what you're saying but your trial subscription example isn't that unusual.
A better example of dark patterns is how they repeatedly try to get you to sync your email contacts by sneaking it in at random points, where you may accidentally click through it.
Their website has also become a minefield of upsell links, some disguised as benign engagement (e.g. "Add a new skill") while others are much more spammy (e.g. "Follow this unrelated business which promotes through us").
A better example of dark patterns is how they repeatedly try to get you to sync your email contacts by sneaking it in at random points, where you may accidentally click through it.
Their website has also become a minefield of upsell links, some disguised as benign engagement (e.g. "Add a new skill") while others are much more spammy (e.g. "Follow this unrelated business which promotes through us").
[deleted](1)
Not sure I share the experience w/LinkedIn that apparently the majority of HNers have. I get very, very few recruiter messages through LinkedIn. The ones I do get are thoughtful and do a very good job of matching skill-set, background, etc.--they have obviously read my profile and are not just fishing.
This has not always been the case. I used to get the hated torrent of "I see you have 12 years of development experience, how about this entry level position!!!" crap, but I haven't seen one of those in a long time. Either recruiters are getting better, or something I put in my profile has quieted down the garbage.
Either way, I don't think there's much that I've put on that site that I'd feel the need to "export" so the topic of this article seems to be a non-issue. You folks don't have alternate copies of your resume and contacts somewhere?
This has not always been the case. I used to get the hated torrent of "I see you have 12 years of development experience, how about this entry level position!!!" crap, but I haven't seen one of those in a long time. Either recruiters are getting better, or something I put in my profile has quieted down the garbage.
Either way, I don't think there's much that I've put on that site that I'd feel the need to "export" so the topic of this article seems to be a non-issue. You folks don't have alternate copies of your resume and contacts somewhere?
I also have found the recruiter email to have gotten a lot better recently. As an experiment (as my startup is hiring - I wanted to see what the candidate experience might be like these days), I expanded my LinkedIn profile to trigger as many recruiter-friendly tickyboxes as possible, expecting a deluge of spam. I got about five messages, all fairly well crafted and personalised to some extent. Honestly, I get more spam to my email address than InMail these days.
I also ran a fun experiment where I set up another LinkedIn profile nearly identical to my own, changing the name and gender and writing a very terse summary for each job. Boy, does he get a lot of random spam. I wonder if by writing a more detailed description of my skills/experience/contributions, I somehow generate better inbound messages...
Speaking to the point about "what would you export", I definitely have contacts who I am only connected through via LinkedIn; a key example being former colleagues whose personal email addresses I never got, and whose work emails I barely remember. I think it depends on the kind of network you have built there, though. The more work you've put into your LinkedIn connection pool, the more you want to export it.
I also ran a fun experiment where I set up another LinkedIn profile nearly identical to my own, changing the name and gender and writing a very terse summary for each job. Boy, does he get a lot of random spam. I wonder if by writing a more detailed description of my skills/experience/contributions, I somehow generate better inbound messages...
Speaking to the point about "what would you export", I definitely have contacts who I am only connected through via LinkedIn; a key example being former colleagues whose personal email addresses I never got, and whose work emails I barely remember. I think it depends on the kind of network you have built there, though. The more work you've put into your LinkedIn connection pool, the more you want to export it.
> I also ran a fun experiment where I set up another LinkedIn profile nearly identical to my own, changing the name and gender...Boy, does he get a lot of random spam.
Alternate hypothesis: bad recruiters looking for software developers filter by gender...
To be honest, I've had two emails from recruiters in three years, both highly targeted to specific terms in my profile, and I nearly accepted one of the jobs. Skipping those horrible spam-magnet keywords altogether is a good start.
Alternate hypothesis: bad recruiters looking for software developers filter by gender...
To be honest, I've had two emails from recruiters in three years, both highly targeted to specific terms in my profile, and I nearly accepted one of the jobs. Skipping those horrible spam-magnet keywords altogether is a good start.
[deleted]
Title might act as a filter as well. I cycled among "Senior Software Engineer," "Product Manager," and "Engineering Project Manager", and got most of the spammy shotgun recruiters when I called myself a Senior Software Engineer.
It would be an interesting experiment to create lots of identical profiles with single variables changed to see how they each perform, but that's likely against LinkedIn's terms of service. They should add the ability to A/B test tweaks like this and let you optimize your profile for whatever level of recruiter interest you'd like.
It would be an interesting experiment to create lots of identical profiles with single variables changed to see how they each perform, but that's likely against LinkedIn's terms of service. They should add the ability to A/B test tweaks like this and let you optimize your profile for whatever level of recruiter interest you'd like.
I've never been on linkedin but i get 10-15 "requests to connect" every week - luckily i've filtered them to skip the inbox, since unsubscribing to them doesn't seem to do anything.
actually, this feature was being exploited by spammers. a pending contact was still exportable.... so you add thousands of people, then export the list and send them email. easy way to gather targeted business email addresses that are worth money.
as much as i may or may not like linkedin(i dont much), i think this little bit of info is useful when judging the reasoning behind the decision to turn it off.
as much as i may or may not like linkedin(i dont much), i think this little bit of info is useful when judging the reasoning behind the decision to turn it off.
1. To start with, they sneaked in the request to access all your email contacts and constantly spam them in your name which can be embarrassing at times to say the least.
2. Their mobile apps do the same with your phone contacts, cleverly hiding the checkmark (in smallest font) to disallow the uploading of contacts. I have unknowingly let them look through my contacts at least two different times prompting me to never install their app again.
3. Letting others know that you viewed their profile. This is fine as long as you know about this feature but I bet that a bunch of us were taken by surprise in the early days to find out that our "online research" on someone was not private unless if you're incognito.
4. Charging you beyond the free trial period without any email or notification about it. I agree that many businesses do this but some of them like Amazon and Netflix are nice enough to allow you to disable the future payments before the trail ends. Also they tend to notify you about the payments.
5. Letting people have access to my email and other contact info even when I haven't accepted their request to connect. This may have been fixed with the recent change but may just have been one of those hidden features that led to their popularity with the recruiter world in the first place.
I am sure I missed out a bunch of other things here but these are the reasons why I can never trust LinkedIn.