zlacker

>>winsto+(OP)
Seems like an unfortunate decision. Opt-in would have been the more respectable move here.

>>ruperp+u2
Maybe, but, depending on how it's implemented, these profiles might technically be "public" but not indexed by Google or have easily guessed URLs. In any case, it seems like the only information this would leak beyond what would be on a LinkedIn profile is the fact that you've taken a TripleByte assessment and done well. That seems pretty innocuous.

>>pmille+L2
No, the profiles have other information too, like what geographical regions you want to work in, what kind of job you’re looking for, etc. This could give away information to one’s employer that they might have preferred to keep quiet. I predict that a nonzero number of people will be harmed, embarrassed or at least inconvenienced by this.

>>haram_+K3
Counterpoint: they may not display everything you see when you log in to TripleByte. You're complaining about something that hasn't happened to anyone and may not happen at all. This time next week, you may have a valid argument, but not yet.

>>pmille+t4
I’d much rather know that now, rather than waiting until after it’s already happened to find out whether or not it’s a privacy violation.

>>wolfga+U4
Have you tried asking?

>>pmille+Y4
I don’t think I should need to. If a company is going to unexpectedly publish information about me on short notice, the onus is on them to consider the implications and explain what they’re doing.

>>wolfga+b5
Okay, so, you're concerned about a potential privacy violation, but won't take steps to find out if there is one to begin with? I don't have a lot of sympathy for that position. Go and fill your TripleByte profile with misinformation if it suits you, I suppose.

Edit: I missed that there's a privacy setting to make the profiles non-searchable. So, I guess you care enough to complain on the internet, but not enough to even ask if there's a privacy violation? Seems like there's a name for that.