_______ __ _______
| | |.---.-..----.| |--..-----..----. | | |.-----..--.--.--..-----.
| || _ || __|| < | -__|| _| | || -__|| | | ||__ --|
|___|___||___._||____||__|__||_____||__| |__|____||_____||________||_____|
on Gopher (inofficial)
URI Visit Hacker News on the Web
COMMENT PAGE FOR:
URI Show HN: Jobs by Referral: Find jobs in your LinkedIn network
b8 wrote 20 hours 0 min ago:
There's sites where you can pay for referrals or ask for them for free
on Blind though. Most people accept randos on LinkedIn, so unsure how
many refer you. The only people who've referred me on Linkedin are my
previous co-workers.
Aurornis wrote 10 hours 24 min ago:
Referral processes now ask how you know the person and why youâre
referring them.
Referring randos to be nice isnât a thing any more at any company
that has been paying attention.
b8 wrote 4 hours 58 min ago:
And people who do it for money will copy and paste whatever they
want in there. I had strong friend referrals and got rejected
anyway at Tesla and Amazon.
AznHisoka wrote 19 hours 33 min ago:
More people have done this over the years that some companies have
started ignoring them. Because theyâre just as much noise as
regular applicants
orliesaurus wrote 21 hours 9 min ago:
Remember Blind? This is like Blind+++
bsoles wrote 21 hours 37 min ago:
I've read the instructions steps as:
1. Download your entire LinkedIn data.
2. Give us your entire LinkedIn data.
The "larger" data they are asking for includes "... connections,
verifications, contacts, account history, and information we infer
about you based on your profile and activity ..."
nicksergeant wrote 21 hours 0 min ago:
We've added some privacy details here: [1] .
You absolutely do not need to upload all of your data. Just a CSV in
the format we need (which is now updated on the homepage as well).
URI [1]: https://jobsbyreferral.com/privacy
toyg wrote 23 hours 3 min ago:
The feature is interesting and I'm sure you're in good faith, but
you're effectively doing LinkedIn-scraping, just outsourced to your
users. Why not use the official API?
(The GDPR implications of this service are also significant. Being in
the US does not exempt you from observing that if any of your records
are from European users.)
nicksergeant wrote 22 hours 18 min ago:
Answering your GDPR question: we use cookie-less analytics with [1]
and we do not pass user data to the backend endpoints, which you can
verify by viewing the network calls. When you upload the ZIP or CSV
the extraction/parsing happens entirely client-side, and then we use
auto-generated IDs to map connection data from the JSearch API
response to the client-side stored connection data.
URI [1]: https://usefathom.com/
toyg wrote 21 hours 49 min ago:
That's good, you might want to write that somewhere - even just to
assuage people's worries in general.
nicksergeant wrote 21 hours 9 min ago:
Yep, done at [1] .
URI [1]: https://jobsbyreferral.com/privacy
shados wrote 22 hours 26 min ago:
Assuming they don't have an EU presence of some sort, EU law doesn't
apply to them.
Now if they want to open up shop in the EU, or use a payment
processor to charge money that has EU presence, things change.
toyg wrote 22 hours 22 min ago:
> Assuming they don't have an EU presence of some sort, EU law
doesn't apply to them.
That's not correct. If they handle EU people's data, they are
responsible for it and can still be fined. Obviously this cannot be
enforced if they never visit and have no assets in the EU.
shados wrote 22 hours 19 min ago:
Its correct purely because of jurisdiction. EU laws don't apply
for people with no presence in the EU, unless there was some kind
of treaty where one country agrees to enforce another's.
That's just how laws, any law, works. The EU can "fine" all they
want but it would be entirely symbolic.
That's like if US restaurants had to enforce EU food safety laws
when on US soil because a EU citizen is eating there.
Fortunatelly, unlike US laws, GDPR, by virtue of being EU law, is
actually readable by normal human beings, so its fairly
straightforward:
URI [1]: https://gdpr.eu/article-3-requirements-of-handling-perso...
toyg wrote 21 hours 55 min ago:
Yes, and "the monitoring of their behaviour as far as their
behaviour takes place within the Union" absolutely applies to
examining activity of LinkedIn users from the EU.
As for jurisdiction in general: the US routinely jails people
for activities that took place outside the US, as soon as they
set foot on US soil - occasionally even when they don't even do
that (Kim Dotcom). European convictions for civil matters will
not result in an arrest warrant, but can result in financial
penalties and confiscations applied to anything that has to go
through Europe in one way or the other.
The limits of enforcement, in the internet era, are becoming
mostly practical rather than theoretical. Which is interesting
and poses a number of new, unanswered questions. Simply
speaking, one cannot just wave away any law simply because they
don't live in this or that place anymore.
shados wrote 21 hours 45 min ago:
Yup, but Article 3 point 2.a has a fairly strict definition,
where for an entity outside of the US to be considered as
"offering service" to EU members requires some kind of strict
ties. The de facto examples is offering a product by
specifically mentioning payment in Euro, or having presence
on an domain with a top level TLD of a member state. If
there's no ties that shows the offering is made to EU
members, it doesn't apply.
Very very little tie is required (eg: just having one
employee in the EU in a 50,000 people org would do it right
there), but the law has been fairly consistently interpreted
as such.
I get where you're coming from, but this isn't a if or but or
theoretical. Its just how GDPR gets applied. I probably
confused things by trying to introduce poor analogies, when
the law itself is fairly clearly interpreted a specific way.
nicksergeant wrote 22 hours 44 min ago:
LinkedIn's API is pretty locked down to partners, which you must
apply for. There's also no documented API to retrieve connections.
The approach we've taken here is that you upload data that you're
comfortable uploading. You don't have to upload your entire LinkedIn
ZIP archive -- you can just upload the Connections.csv file (which
you can review before you upload).
thih9 wrote 23 hours 8 min ago:
What happens with the personal data that gets uploaded? Is the payload
stored or used for any other purposes? Is there a privacy policy?
nicksergeant wrote 22 hours 3 min ago:
Hi! I answered this in a few comments but:
The app performs its functions entirely client-side except for the
job search to JSearch, which only requires the company name.
> What you choose to upload to JobsByReferral.com is entirely up to
you - you don't need to upload the entire ZIP. You can upload the
Connections.csv-formatted file after you review it. You could also
obfuscate person names if you'd like, before uploading.
> We also do nothing with your data. You can verify the app does not
send your data to any backend endpoints _except_ for company name (so
that we can find jobs at that company).
Edit: we've added some privacy details here:
URI [1]: https://jobsbyreferral.com/privacy
Fuzzy1000 wrote 23 hours 23 min ago:
The next best thing would be to have an overlay that allows you to
pinpoint where and how you made a connection
shados wrote 23 hours 30 min ago:
It really shows how AI is going to change the entire industry.
Let's imagine tomorrow a Product Manager at LinkedIn wants to introduce
this as an official functionality? They're going to have to run it by
management or their pod (or find the PM in charge of that area if its
not them), finish existing project, wait for resources to be ready,
have legal/marketing/compliance involved, get it developed, go through
all the other red tape, etc.
I don't know exactly how LinkedIn works internally, but I'm sure some
of this is accurate.
So maybe, MAYBE they'll have it in a couple of months? But someone can
build it in a few hours, even if they're not super good at this stuff.
It changes everything about how we think about products and SaaS
software.
alexp2021 wrote 22 hours 29 min ago:
Not sure it changes EVERYTHING as the issue of sales and marketing
still favours LinkedIn. Sales/Marketing is very expensive and
sometimes even difficult to predict. Building is not everything.
shados wrote 22 hours 21 min ago:
Right, the point Im trying to make is that if someone has a
requirement, they can build it on their own, for themselves, at
much lower cost (because they don't need sales and marketing for
themselves).
It was always possible (hire software devs to do it), but the bar
and cost is much, MUCH lower.
alexp2021 wrote 22 hours 12 min ago:
Sure, no doubt about it.
deadbabe wrote 22 hours 32 min ago:
It changes nothing, what you describe has always been the case even
before AI. There are things people can build in a weekend that take
weeks or even months at a larger company. Large companies have a way
of slowing everything down, for reasons that have nothing to do with
coding.
shados wrote 22 hours 29 min ago:
Correct, but the amount of people who can do it has drastically
increased, and the amount of time it takes for most people to build
these things has drastically decreased.
deadbabe wrote 21 hours 8 min ago:
It has not drastically increased. One could even argue it has
decreased. Ultimately, the productivity gains will perish to
bureaucracy.
thih9 wrote 23 hours 13 min ago:
> But someone can build it in a few hours, even if they're not super
good at this stuff.
Note that the end result is not the same as what LinkedIn would have
built. Perhaps in some ways better and in some ways worse.
E.g. personally I am not comfortable bulk uploading personal data of
myself and my network to a third party server.
dotancohen wrote 4 min ago:
> personally I am not comfortable bulk uploading personal data of
myself and my network to a third party server.
The subject of this show HN is completely client-side.
shados wrote 22 hours 30 min ago:
Yup. But my point is you can build this yourself, FOR yourself. So
if you're not comfortable with using this one, you can build one on
your own that you can trust (because you built it yourself).
Thats the whole point. In an AI world, you're no longer bound by
the limits of what 3rd parties do or don't do, plus or minus some
datasets (like in this case, the job postings).
nicksergeant wrote 22 hours 58 min ago:
Yep! I agree to the principle - I also would not trust a random
third-party app with my personal details. Though as noted in my
other comment, this app is mostly client-side (including the CSV
and ZIP extraction), except of course for the JSearch calls to find
jobs by company name, and the CSV export if you choose to use that.
nicksergeant wrote 23 hours 29 min ago:
This is exactly where I think we're heading as well. This project
took about 2 hours.
98codes wrote 23 hours 15 min ago:
Primarily because LinkedIn has to bother with complying with their
privacy policies and other T&Cs, and your site has none of that.
Why should I take all of my data and give it to you, a rando on the
internet? Is it being stored? Will it be shared? Sold? Maybe, as
there's nothing that says you won't.
Looks neat, but strong pass because of the above.
shados wrote 22 hours 28 min ago:
Correct. But you can build this thing on your own, for yourself.
LinkedIn didn't, and you don't trust this third party. So if you
had the problem its trying to solve, you could just spend the 2-3
hours and build it for yourself, even if you don't have all the
necessary skills to do so.
That's the whole point.
dotancohen wrote 3 min ago:
And in the process you develop another skill you can add to
your LinkedIn profile.
nicksergeant wrote 23 hours 2 min ago:
Those are totally fair points but what I agreed with here was
that people will create _personal_ software to solve a particular
itch for themselves, which is what I did here for my friends. I
just decided to throw it on HN as I have some API credits
remaining :)
1970-01-01 wrote 23 hours 54 min ago:
Caveat: I know people that don't use LinkedIn, but will "keep a
profile" for reputational reasons.
Aurornis wrote 20 hours 23 min ago:
Keeping a profile is how the majority of people use LinkedIn.
All of the timeline discussion stuff is a small minority of their
users. You can completely ignore it, as most do.
radarsat1 wrote 20 hours 34 min ago:
You mean you know.. most people?
hackernewds wrote 23 hours 58 min ago:
Perfect feature that LinkedIn should've developed themselves. Thank you
for this!
pmdr wrote 23 hours 34 min ago:
LinkedIn doesn't want you working, 'cause working people don't really
have time to waste on LinkedIn (unless that's their job). LinkedIn
wants you on their app with a racing heartbeat every time you get a
notification that you hope will lead to job.
dijit wrote 23 hours 59 min ago:
I really want the inverse of this.
I even wrote a version of it, but like many side projects; I lost
motivation after leaving the original company I was working at (where I
was integrating with things).
I really want a way of recommending people you've worked with
previously; should they happen to apply to your current workplace.
I've worked with some absolute stars and would gladly work with them
again.
My original design (that I even got working) had two ways of
"recommending" people, essentially you had either: select people from
your linkedin network or add an email address/phone number and name you
know them by.
Then after selecting a person you're asked how closely you worked with
them; becuase sometimes it's a nice person but you can't speak to
competence: sometimes, it's someone you were really in the trenches
with and they had your back.
I also design the opposite of this, where you would "un"-recommend
people, or essentially downflag their application.
The thing is, my system wasn't fully integrated in the the HR
management system, so it would add a comment if someone applied with
the correct details but recruiters didn't have access to the database
of recommended people- it also had an issue where someone could
impersonate someone else by pasting the same linkedin link - though
then they might need to know who might be recommended.
Anyway, nothing foolproof, just making it easier for people with a good
reputation to be integrated into the company easier.
whall6 wrote 22 hours 15 min ago:
URI [1]: https://www.pedestal.work/
willsmith72 wrote 23 hours 37 min ago:
i totally agree on the problem, ex-colleages can be one of the best
datasources for predicting the quality of a hire
but how is your solution better/different to a referral, other than
the un-recommendations? (which i like the idea of but am weary of
ethically)
dijit wrote 23 hours 30 min ago:
Mostly due to it's automated nature.
I wouldn't go out of my way to tell our internal recruiters about
every person I might enjoy working with again; additionally I don't
necessarily think they'd care to chase someone down - especially so
if there's not a currently open position.
I'm also normally not directly plugged in to HR's candidate
management system as an IC, unless someone is escalated; at which
point then I might give a referral.
The value of such a solution is that people can just quietly plug
away recommendations when they first join and forget about them
until that person happens to apply later on, at which point their
notice is not just noise.. it becomes a signal on an emerging
opportunity. One that might not have otherwise been there.
Bonus; if recommendations are tagged with the user who made them,
HR could reach out for additional context on the candidate.
gergely wrote 1 day ago:
But it is there: If you search for jobs and expose "All filters" there
is a filter called "In your network" which filters down exactly to
this.
giancarlostoro wrote 21 hours 25 min ago:
Do you pay for LinkedIn Premium or something?
zamadatix wrote 17 hours 30 min ago:
I do not and the filter is available in the job search page for me
as well.
nicksergeant wrote 23 hours 30 min ago:
Really?! I still cannot find this in the mobile app or desktop
:lolsob:
alright2565 wrote 17 hours 27 min ago:
URI [1]: https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/collections/hiring-in-networ...
98codes wrote 23 hours 11 min ago:
It's there -- go to the jobs tab, answer the first time questions
if they come up, and when you get the job list, click All Filters,
and scroll the filter list down (admittedly, pretty far down);
there's an "In your network" toggle.
citizenpaul wrote 20 hours 39 min ago:
I still can't find this. The job list is "infinite scroll" for
me so there is no bottom. I don't see the word filter anywhere.
Is there a URL?
iLoveOncall wrote 19 hours 48 min ago:
You need to switch back to classic search to see those filters
(on mobile at least).
nicksergeant wrote 22 hours 4 min ago:
Ah, wild! Yes I see it now! That is really quite buried.
Edit: seems like this is only the "Classic Search", and
presumably may disappear once "AI search" is no longer optional?
kjkjadksj wrote 23 hours 14 min ago:
Use the old search
citizenpaul wrote 20 hours 39 min ago:
Whats the old search URL?
DIR <- back to front page