zlacker

[return to "Tell HN: Interviewed with Triplebyte? Your profile is about to become public"]
1. ammon+z4[view] [source] 2020-05-23 05:18:34
>>winsto+(OP)
Hey everyone. Happy to answer any questions about this. Basically, we think that LinkedIn profiles don't do a good job of showing engineering skill (especially for self-taught people or people from non-traditional backgrounds). I'm excited to just build better support for showing side projects and GitHub contributions. LinkedIn profiles have become the default engineering resume (despite the fact that most engineers are not particularly happy with their LinkedIn profile). But there's lock-in. I hope that we have enough scale to be able to chip away at this.
◧◩
2. yaacov+b6[view] [source] 2020-05-23 05:36:51
>>ammon+z4
Thanks for coming to answer questions here even though you’re likely to get dragged through the mud for this decision.

FWIW, I agree with other commenters that this is a betrayal of trust but I don’t have anything original to add.

◧◩◪
3. ammon+fa[view] [source] 2020-05-23 06:29:35
>>yaacov+b6
Well, sorry that you feel this way. I don't agree right now (clearly). But I'll certainly take this seriously and think more about it/listen to feedback. We're talking about relatively basic profiles, to give us the canvas to launch public achievement badges (that we hope allow us to better help people who don't have traditional credentials). My view, building this, is that we're not displaying anything more private than hundreds of other companies. Stack Overflow has public profiles. Hacker Rank has public profile. AngelList has public profiles. Even HN has public profiles. We are launching public profiles for a product that has not had them in the past, and I get that that's a more sensitive thing to do. What we've focused on to keep that from harming anyone is what data we include in the profiles. I wish we'd include more details about that in the email.
◧◩◪◨
4. ALittl+Od[view] [source] 2020-05-23 07:12:49
>>ammon+fa
I've always wondered if people who use corporate doublespeak like this realize how transparent they are.

Why not just say "We think we'll make more money by sharing private information our users trusted us with, without their consent." Then at least I think you'd get points for candor and honesty. As is, no points for either and everyone reading knows what you mean.

By the way, is it true you require a government id to delete your account? If so, why?

[go to top]