Weren't GitHub profiles the new technical resume? How well did that work in practice, and how would this Stack Overflow approach be different?
I was under the impression (from reading HN/Reddit) that while engineers do read GitHub profiles if explicitly linked in a resume, nontechnical recruiters do not. And they are the gatekeeper to said engineers.
Not every programmer likes to share his side-project code on public places like GitHub - for many reasons. Or pullrequest to some opensource mess. Code you write and problems you solve at work usually can't be shown on GitHub either.
So, this "show me your GitHub" thing for me is no different from "show me your Facebook, wait what, no FB account??" experience with non-technical HRs ;)
Conventional resume is totally OK for a first step in recruitment, I don't understand the need for extra fanfare.
Resumes are extremely easy to exaggerate or fabricate. I haven't seen fake github profiles yet (and I suspect they would be more trouble than they are worth).
I am often brought in on the hiring process to vet peoples technical skills. I used to just try to ask questions in the hour or two I got with the person, this seemed no better than flipping a coin. Even if the person was honest and we were both talking about the same skill, but how do I know that their experience with that skill is applicable? Now I insist on seeing a portfolio of some kind for coders. A Github, Bitbucket, Sourceforge or any other publicly viewable body of source will do.
15 minutes with someones code is a much better predictor of skill than even several hours of discussion. It costs a lot less too.
Very recently, a close friend was looking for a job (as a junior dev - focused on web). After applying and getting rejected, we decided to try a different approach - he basically gave up and decided to the following:
1) added buzz keywords in his resume
2) hosted an instance of gitlab and took various open source projects (stuff that was not popular, but had enough polish), modified them and uploaded them.
After a week, he was able to land multiple interviews. While he did get called out once, almost all engineers/non-tech hr didn't bother calling his bluff.
I am not suggesting that you should lie on your resume or steal open source projects, just that depending on one factor (like github, or resume, or white boards) is futile and that tech hiring in general is broken.
> While he did get called out once, almost all engineers/non-tech hr didn't bother calling his bluff.
I see plenty of GitHub profiles that are filled with forked/starred projects from other people, and nothing of substance.
I don't bring it to the candidate because it is worthless and there are more interesting things to talk about. But that doesn't mean I didn't see it ;)
Actually I have never once in my life see a good github profile.
I don't like this notion of having a "good" GitHub profile. GitHub started off as an easy place for me to dump code, no matter how crappy. Dumb ideas, samples from learning, incomplete experiments, whatevs.
Then I noticed that I had started censoring my code krapola. I was sepf conscious about the code I was making visible, as I didn't want to be judged. Then I decided that lame. Now I shamelessly put garbage on GitHub, too.
Coding poorly & having fun trumps curating a collection fancy schmancy artisinal repos. And I've also learned that my good code often lives at work, and never makes it to GitHub.
I'm the same way. I removed a lot of old stuff from my early days because I was afraid I was going to be judged on it. Now I don't care. GitHub is my dumping ground for everything. I start a new project almost every time I want to learn a specific thing so I have lots of incomplete projects on there simply because I move on once I learned the goal task.
Unfortunately like most people all the clean and polished code lives in private work repos. All those things I learned from the unfinished repos is being used in work code. Oh well.
I have a self-hosted Gogs instance for all the stuff that I want private (either because it's shit or because it's really personal information that I don't want to put on anyone else's computer, including GitHub's).
Noone gives a f* about the code you have in your github. Noone will read it ever.
When I say a "good" profile. That means you put a link in your resume to ONE project you want to show. The landing page is a README with a paragraph to explain what is the app, a quick start, and a few screenshots.
If you've got a link to the website (or desktop installer) AND there are a few icons of external integrations in travis-ci/appveyor/unittestthing/packager then your repo is absolute perfection. =)
> I see plenty of GitHub profiles that are filled with forked/starred projects from other people, and nothing of substance.
Though I haven't interviewed candidates for a long time, I happen to be
curious about somebody from time to time. The very first thing I do watching
their GitHub profiles is to filter-out all the forks, only leaving "sources"
(how GitHub calls them).
haven't seen fake github profiles yet (and I suspect they would be more trouble than they are worth).
There are loads, usually with a fork of a couple of popular JS libraries, maybe a couple of commits but no PRs. Once word leaked out that having a Github was "a thing".
I wonder if you would think that about my github profile. I don't have any JS, but I have forked a few C and C++ repos to make minor changes and hold them until upstream accepted them. I don't think I have deleted any of them. Then I have a few experiments answering questions I wanted answered.
It is not particularly hard to determine if fork n` fix is the reason for the repo. A search for the name of a project will find out if it is a truly lazy copy. Then asking a few questions about why some class or function deep in the code does a thing can determine at least the level of motivation of the copier.
If I can ask an unlimited number of questions about the code and the copier can answer them competently does it matter if they copied? They are competent in the code they pointed me at.
It is hardly a perfect system, it is just better in every way than only an interview.
Sure, but these ones are definitely box-ticking exercises, I guess some "thought leader" on LinkedIn said all the best companies only hire people with Github, and off the masses went. There are loads of placeholder "tech blogs" too.
I have years and years of experience in software, I have a half dozen or more non-work projects I've contributed to or solely developed, some involving hundreds of hours of dev work, most of them on github. None of those projects are public though. And I suspect a lot of other developers are in similar situations. Public contributions on github usually fall into one of two categories: contributions to big open source projects (rare) or pet projects of little substance (common). These are just some of the reasons why using github as a resume is extremely fraught with difficulty. If you're lucky then it works well, but chances are you won't be lucky.
The difference between GitHub and StackOverflow/StackExchange ist that the latter is explicitly targeting the job market. They have done so since the early days, if I remember correctly:
There are company/country combinations where publishing your own work done in your free time is possible -> but it takes weeks/months of stupid bureaucracy to be officially accepted. At some point it's just not worth it. So while it's an interesting data point when someone does have the GH profile, it doesn't really mean much if they don't.
I'm a geologist, so I'm rather fond of the puns, etc that he's made here, but the point is that a straigraphic column is a great way to lay out a resume. It gives a vertical visual depiction of what the person has been doing from most recent to longest ago.
That's exactly what the developer story is. I really like that they've used that visual layout. It's a very effective way to convey activities and employment history.
Is it really now? That sucks as I don't really engage with SO that often; Hardly ever really. Sure, if I Google for something SO results come up, but normally I search YouTube for a talk/tutorial or search Github for snippets of code.
Yes it is like Quora, just with domain specificity. I guess you see this as a bad thing, but both sites are tremendous fonts of information. What is preferable to you? Academic papers? Books? Conference Talks? Random Blog Posts? Man pages?
Whenever Quora pops up in my search results, it's generally garbage. You get opinion pieces that a bunch of other people happen to agree with.
Stack Overflow is certainly better. Probably 90% of the time you can dig up the correct answer somewhere on the page.
But it's incredible how much of the world's knowledge is still locked away in books. The internet is ok for computer programmers, but for basically everything else it feels like we're still decades away from the "information superhighway" dream.
I have seen numerous versions of the "New Resume" in the last ten years or so. It's really hard to replace something universal that everyone understands, even if it's antiquated. I doubt this will fair much better.
I don't see anything on here that I couldn't do with my LinkedIn profile, TBH.
I do kinda wish I knew the secrets of how to get 2-3 recruiting emails a day though. Unless it's "have 5 more years of experience," I think my profile could use some help.
> Live in a tech hub and fill in your linkedin profile.
Done and done.
> You do need a few years of experience + some buzzwords.
3.5 years. What buzzwords do I need? I just want to be able to find a job in a few weeks the next time I am looking. I don't think that's too much to ask.
Edit: I misspoke; by "find a job in a few weeks," I meant "start getting interviews within a week or two." No amount of LinkedIn profile magic will help me get a job directly, obviously.
I was about to say you won't find a job with linkedin. At best, it just an indication of some potential companies in the area. Keep the list somewhere in your mind, you never know what could happen to your current job.
... and while I was writing this, I just received a message from a startup that raised 200M and want me to join one of their team of 3 known ex googlers on some hard industry problem. [How crazy. I applied there last year and they never replied]
Well nevermind, linkedin is awesome. Now that I think about it, I left my last job because of a lead from it. :D
If it doesn't work for you. You are not in a tech hub or you don't have a profile rare enough. What's your city? and link to your profile?
I currently work in San Francisco. Seems like the hubbiest hub currently hubbing, no? As for my profile, I don't know how rare I am. I'm an average developer who can actually program and write solid production code. I'm a widget... the kind of person companies claim they need but can't hire.
I don't blog, tweet, or use Facebook. Do I need to do those things to attract attention?
One trick in Linkedin is to update your "Job Title" in your most recent job. That triggers something that premium recruiters can see. I cannot back this with certainty but have seen this work for my own profile a few times.
I'm not sure if it's just your most recent job title or any update that triggers that, but I did get significantly more views when I was actually looking and did trivial updates on my profile every couple of days. I wouldn't necessarily want to signal that I was looking to my current employer or coworkers though. I'm aware you can turn the "notify your network of profile changes" setting off, but I wonder if it's a wise thing to do.
And, all that twiddling of one's profile seems like a stupid thing that I'm reasonably sure people generally don't do. Maybe I just need to write a bot to automate it.
No great company name. No special univerity. Starting with a slight handicap here.
Intro is too long. Make it shorter and to the point. After 5 or 10 lines, it get hidden automatically.
[Do you realize that you have the equivalent of "I am open totally to leave my current company" while you're working at your current company?]
You lack a lot of keywords. Only Python, DynamoDb, AWS. You must have touched other things. The titles are 4 times "software engineer [intern]". You NEED MORE KEYWORDS.
The short line on each company is good and well written, I love to get context. =)
The content is missing substance. Add business metrics, how many users? how many servers? how many dollars going through? how many mails send [at the mail company]?
Yeah. Can't do anything about my university or past companies. I do realize I have the equivalent of "I am totally open to leave my current company," because for the right offer, I would. Saying I'm "open to opportunities" means precisely that: offer me something that betters my current and future situation, and I might take it. If a company doesn't understand that, they're deluding themselves.
I have no visibility into these business metrics because they don't tell me.
What would be examples of trendy job titles? I can safely and ethically change my previous job title, as long as it doesn't imply I was an executive and accurately represents what I did. (They officially don't care about job titles. It's literally whatever you want as long as you don't claim to be an executive when you're not.)
Believe it or not, changing these job titles to what they are now actually got me far more attention than what I had before (which was just the "official" job title, which didn't necessarily reflect the things I was actually doing).
Lol, I guess I should have specified emails written in good English that weren't asking me to move across the country for some shitty 3 month contract.
Wait so hiring managers who didn't have more then 60 seconds to parse my resume now have the time to go through years of my stackoverflow activity? Sweet!
It's an interesting idea, but I prefer to take my experience and tell a story that specifically targets the role for which I am applying. From that perspective, having a single "story" out there for all potential employers isn't optimal for me.
This is authored by a Jay Hanlon, "VP of Community Growth". Apparently, the role includes publishing clickbait.
He squeezes in a humblebrag: "...if you're like me, and still just a little proud that you got off the waitlist and eked your way into a school above your intellectual weight class..."
And he uses scarcity to scare devs into creating a profile: "It only takes a few minutes, and you do NOT want some other joker snapping up the good URLs."
I like where this is going (i've built something similar, if private [1]).
Resumes in their current form don't work well as a source of truth about anyone's career. The main issue being that we put summarized/editorialized information in instead of details. It's like discarding the data you used to generate a chart and then updating the chart directly going forward.
It's not the new resume by a long shot. But it does point to some large flaws resumes have.
Resumes in their current form don't work well as a source of truth about anyone's career. The main issue being that we put summarized/editorialized information in instead of details. It's like discarding the data you used to generate a chart and then updating the chart directly going forward.
You also can't manage the things you put on a resume. You can't easily search, tag, sort, view by company, position etc. You're doing all that in your head and then putting the result on paper.
There should be tools to help with this stuff (I built one [1]) and those tools should put the resume in it's proper place, as an output of some other more comprehensive source of truth.
A lot of negativity here, but I really liked my profile on stackoverflow careers, and I really like this. I felt like it was pretty different from linkedin, here are some things I like/liked:
- easy to list my favorite technologies and books.
- easy to link to github to show projects, easy to link to stackexchange.
- UI gave good guidance on how to write a better description
As someone who's hired hundreds of software engineers over the past 15 years, it did the best job generating the kind of resumes I like to see.
My recent job search lead me to the idea that the traditional resume is broken. Temporal view only gives recruiters and hiring managers the bullet points to qualify you in whatever bucket that they need.
Instead of a traditional CV/Resume, I went with a single page narrative approach with a link to the temporal view on my LinkedIn profile. Initially there was some pushback as the recruiters were bellyaching over the fact that they needed to actually read my essay, but as time progressed I discovered that this format became a tool.
By forcing the hiring manager/recruiter to actually read and understand your background, inbound leads were much higher quality and the initial phone screen was extremely easy. Out of 100+ job applications, i got 20 or so responses, and of those 20 responses, 10 offers.
Out of the 20 responses, 19 were good fits and had good hiring managers with a company that had a decent culture.
I am definitely using the narrative approach again for my next job hunt.
I haven't sent a resume in a while. Usually I just give a "cover letter" of sorts that says a) why I'm interested in the job b) what I can offer/why they "need" me, c) why I think so (usually just talk about experience).
I have a website that lists my workplaces and my main projects and of course my GitHub, both of which I link. I guess that's my "resume".
Mine's not a cover letter in the usual sense but that's the closest analogy I can think of... I just write an email saying those three things and links to my stuff.
I would take a step further and just make a 1-2 page project/product recommendation for their company based on the role that you're applying for.
It takes more time, but the last time I was job hunting, I did it with several startups and got interviews with all of them (no referral). The resume + cover letter converted much worse for the other companies I applied to at the time.
Looks like you made your CV your cover letter and your LinkedIn your CV.
The effect is that you used the mindspace otherwise occupied by the CV to tell your story - to brand yourself. There's only one you, but there's thousands of CVs indistinguishable from yours (and mine), so it makes sense that this worked better.
I've had success with the "T style" where I list the stated requirements verbatim from the job posting on one side and how specifically I meet those requirements on the other side. Combined with some narrative about relevant experience, it's way better than just a chronology.
I thought the "new resume" was Stack Overflow Careers, which I spent USD$29 for back in the day. To SO's credit at the time, they offered a full refund if one was ever not satisfied. I never took them up on it, though I should have considering that it was a waste of $29 for all the value I got out of it. I spent a fair bit of time sprucing up that profile, got very few hits, and the quality of the leads was no better or worse than what I'd get off LinkedIn. IOW, random recruiters spamming.
So when the recent email hit my inbox, it was with a healthy dose of skepticism that I just immediately deleted it.
StackOverflow as a company may have grown a little too quickly; I wonder how much $$ they make from this and whether they should just focus on their core which is community and maintaining a decent community rather than these marketing-led stunts.
These aren't mutually exclusive goals. We have people dedicated to growing and maintaining the community (on Stack Overflow, as well as the other sites in the Stack Exchange network), people who work on large feature areas (e.g. Documentation), yet more people who are focused on the Jobs and hiring/recruiting experience for developers, etc.
I'm more curious to know how these affect the profits of StackOverflow and what gets more bang for the buck or if random ideas are being tried out seeing which one sticks.
I see some other comments about preferring other ways to tailor your application or have specific approaches when you apply for particular jobs and I definitely agree with both:
But I don't think this is really aimed at supplanting that. It's really just trying to put a better face on the "passive" approach to things and I like it for that.
Does anyone have a security@ contact address for stackoverflow that they know is monitored?
Unfortunately there is no way to opt out of this service right now. (edit: I don't want to email security to ask for an opt-out, it would just be nice to opt out until they fix the actual security issue.)
Edit: Found a web form they use on security.stackexchange.
Not sure what issue you're referring to, but you can reach us through the contact form linked at the bottom of every page on our Q&A sites (like the one you found) or by email to team@. Mentioning something like "security vulnerability" in the subject or the body will help get it looked at faster.
Edit: checked internally, and this specific issue is being fixed as we speak.
Thanks, I've done that now, hopefully you can find my submission I did put 'security vulnerability' as the top line in the body. If that doesn't narrow it down search for 1635976 also in the body.
It's an either an information disclosure issue or an authorization issue (depending on your point of view), I won't say more on here.
146 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 177 ms ] threadI was under the impression (from reading HN/Reddit) that while engineers do read GitHub profiles if explicitly linked in a resume, nontechnical recruiters do not. And they are the gatekeeper to said engineers.
So, this "show me your GitHub" thing for me is no different from "show me your Facebook, wait what, no FB account??" experience with non-technical HRs ;)
Conventional resume is totally OK for a first step in recruitment, I don't understand the need for extra fanfare.
I am often brought in on the hiring process to vet peoples technical skills. I used to just try to ask questions in the hour or two I got with the person, this seemed no better than flipping a coin. Even if the person was honest and we were both talking about the same skill, but how do I know that their experience with that skill is applicable? Now I insist on seeing a portfolio of some kind for coders. A Github, Bitbucket, Sourceforge or any other publicly viewable body of source will do.
15 minutes with someones code is a much better predictor of skill than even several hours of discussion. It costs a lot less too.
1) added buzz keywords in his resume
2) hosted an instance of gitlab and took various open source projects (stuff that was not popular, but had enough polish), modified them and uploaded them.
After a week, he was able to land multiple interviews. While he did get called out once, almost all engineers/non-tech hr didn't bother calling his bluff.
I am not suggesting that you should lie on your resume or steal open source projects, just that depending on one factor (like github, or resume, or white boards) is futile and that tech hiring in general is broken.
I see plenty of GitHub profiles that are filled with forked/starred projects from other people, and nothing of substance.
I don't bring it to the candidate because it is worthless and there are more interesting things to talk about. But that doesn't mean I didn't see it ;)
Actually I have never once in my life see a good github profile.
Then I noticed that I had started censoring my code krapola. I was sepf conscious about the code I was making visible, as I didn't want to be judged. Then I decided that lame. Now I shamelessly put garbage on GitHub, too.
Coding poorly & having fun trumps curating a collection fancy schmancy artisinal repos. And I've also learned that my good code often lives at work, and never makes it to GitHub.
Unfortunately like most people all the clean and polished code lives in private work repos. All those things I learned from the unfinished repos is being used in work code. Oh well.
Noone gives a f* about the code you have in your github. Noone will read it ever.
When I say a "good" profile. That means you put a link in your resume to ONE project you want to show. The landing page is a README with a paragraph to explain what is the app, a quick start, and a few screenshots.
If you've got a link to the website (or desktop installer) AND there are a few icons of external integrations in travis-ci/appveyor/unittestthing/packager then your repo is absolute perfection. =)
Though I haven't interviewed candidates for a long time, I happen to be curious about somebody from time to time. The very first thing I do watching their GitHub profiles is to filter-out all the forks, only leaving "sources" (how GitHub calls them).
There are loads, usually with a fork of a couple of popular JS libraries, maybe a couple of commits but no PRs. Once word leaked out that having a Github was "a thing".
It is not particularly hard to determine if fork n` fix is the reason for the repo. A search for the name of a project will find out if it is a truly lazy copy. Then asking a few questions about why some class or function deep in the code does a thing can determine at least the level of motivation of the copier.
If I can ask an unlimited number of questions about the code and the copier can answer them competently does it matter if they copied? They are competent in the code they pointed me at.
It is hardly a perfect system, it is just better in every way than only an interview.
Why would someone with real skill and therefore a real profile work there? Let all the fakers go work at shitty companies.
https://business.stackoverflow.com/careers/
Source: Me sending my resume to recruiters + watching the view statistics on github.
My favorite resume of all time is Matt Hall's stratigraphic column resume: https://static.squarespace.com/static/549dcda5e4b0a47d0ae1db... (His blog post about it is here: http://www.agilegeoscience.com/blog/2010/12/17/resume-20.htm...)
I'm a geologist, so I'm rather fond of the puns, etc that he's made here, but the point is that a straigraphic column is a great way to lay out a resume. It gives a vertical visual depiction of what the person has been doing from most recent to longest ago.
That's exactly what the developer story is. I really like that they've used that visual layout. It's a very effective way to convey activities and employment history.
I guess I'm screwed...
Stack Overflow is certainly better. Probably 90% of the time you can dig up the correct answer somewhere on the page.
But it's incredible how much of the world's knowledge is still locked away in books. The internet is ok for computer programmers, but for basically everything else it feels like we're still decades away from the "information superhighway" dream.
(Stack Overflow would definitely love this to be true.)
I do kinda wish I knew the secrets of how to get 2-3 recruiting emails a day though. Unless it's "have 5 more years of experience," I think my profile could use some help.
It doesn't guarantee 2-3 per emails per day, but a few per week is certainly achievable.
You do need a few years of experience + some buzzwords.
Done and done.
> You do need a few years of experience + some buzzwords.
3.5 years. What buzzwords do I need? I just want to be able to find a job in a few weeks the next time I am looking. I don't think that's too much to ask.
Edit: I misspoke; by "find a job in a few weeks," I meant "start getting interviews within a week or two." No amount of LinkedIn profile magic will help me get a job directly, obviously.
... and while I was writing this, I just received a message from a startup that raised 200M and want me to join one of their team of 3 known ex googlers on some hard industry problem. [How crazy. I applied there last year and they never replied]
Well nevermind, linkedin is awesome. Now that I think about it, I left my last job because of a lead from it. :D
If it doesn't work for you. You are not in a tech hub or you don't have a profile rare enough. What's your city? and link to your profile?
I don't blog, tweet, or use Facebook. Do I need to do those things to attract attention?
https://www.linkedin.com/in/paul-miller-0383b741
And, all that twiddling of one's profile seems like a stupid thing that I'm reasonably sure people generally don't do. Maybe I just need to write a bot to automate it.
Sigh. I don't know how to LinkedIn. :P
Intro is too long. Make it shorter and to the point. After 5 or 10 lines, it get hidden automatically.
[Do you realize that you have the equivalent of "I am open totally to leave my current company" while you're working at your current company?]
You lack a lot of keywords. Only Python, DynamoDb, AWS. You must have touched other things. The titles are 4 times "software engineer [intern]". You NEED MORE KEYWORDS.
The short line on each company is good and well written, I love to get context. =)
The content is missing substance. Add business metrics, how many users? how many servers? how many dollars going through? how many mails send [at the mail company]?
I have no visibility into these business metrics because they don't tell me.
What type of keywords do you suggest?
I try but I cannot understand your situation. I couldn't work without business and user metrics. That's the only thing changing from a job to another.
Keywords: More technologies. More trendy job titles. [Don't know what's relevant to your past jobs. Can't help.]
Believe it or not, changing these job titles to what they are now actually got me far more attention than what I had before (which was just the "official" job title, which didn't necessarily reflect the things I was actually doing).
There are endless variations referring to close jobs.
Oh please - not again.
"What fresh hell is this?"
This is the only reason I created a logo for my open source project, so that it sticks out whenever someone posts about it.
There is nothing more unreadable than a Stack Overflow resume. Well... except a project on github that doesn't have a readme.
Let me customize it easily (e.g. for a role or job) and present that customized view to different audiences.
He squeezes in a humblebrag: "...if you're like me, and still just a little proud that you got off the waitlist and eked your way into a school above your intellectual weight class..."
And he uses scarcity to scare devs into creating a profile: "It only takes a few minutes, and you do NOT want some other joker snapping up the good URLs."
Resumes in their current form don't work well as a source of truth about anyone's career. The main issue being that we put summarized/editorialized information in instead of details. It's like discarding the data you used to generate a chart and then updating the chart directly going forward.
[1] https://jobrudder.com
Resumes in their current form don't work well as a source of truth about anyone's career. The main issue being that we put summarized/editorialized information in instead of details. It's like discarding the data you used to generate a chart and then updating the chart directly going forward.
You also can't manage the things you put on a resume. You can't easily search, tag, sort, view by company, position etc. You're doing all that in your head and then putting the result on paper.
There should be tools to help with this stuff (I built one [1]) and those tools should put the resume in it's proper place, as an output of some other more comprehensive source of truth.
[1] https://jobrudder.com
As someone who's hired hundreds of software engineers over the past 15 years, it did the best job generating the kind of resumes I like to see.
Instead of a traditional CV/Resume, I went with a single page narrative approach with a link to the temporal view on my LinkedIn profile. Initially there was some pushback as the recruiters were bellyaching over the fact that they needed to actually read my essay, but as time progressed I discovered that this format became a tool.
By forcing the hiring manager/recruiter to actually read and understand your background, inbound leads were much higher quality and the initial phone screen was extremely easy. Out of 100+ job applications, i got 20 or so responses, and of those 20 responses, 10 offers.
Out of the 20 responses, 19 were good fits and had good hiring managers with a company that had a decent culture.
I am definitely using the narrative approach again for my next job hunt.
Did you happen to post about this anywhere (on a blog maybe?). I'd love to see the narrative version and hopefully learn a thing or two.
I have a website that lists my workplaces and my main projects and of course my GitHub, both of which I link. I guess that's my "resume".
That's also what I do and recommend.
Out of curiosity, in which country are you? AFAIK, here in Australia, not having a cover letter would pretty much prevent you from getting a job.
We always have to fill a message when posting a resume. Write a short paragraph and that replaces the cover letter.
I wouldnt call that having 'no cover letter at all'
They give you the criteria they recruit based on, you write about how you meet them. It's a cover letter +
It takes more time, but the last time I was job hunting, I did it with several startups and got interviews with all of them (no referral). The resume + cover letter converted much worse for the other companies I applied to at the time.
The effect is that you used the mindspace otherwise occupied by the CV to tell your story - to brand yourself. There's only one you, but there's thousands of CVs indistinguishable from yours (and mine), so it makes sense that this worked better.
So when the recent email hit my inbox, it was with a healthy dose of skepticism that I just immediately deleted it.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12687415
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12686741
But I don't think this is really aimed at supplanting that. It's really just trying to put a better face on the "passive" approach to things and I like it for that.
Unfortunately there is no way to opt out of this service right now. (edit: I don't want to email security to ask for an opt-out, it would just be nice to opt out until they fix the actual security issue.)
Edit: Found a web form they use on security.stackexchange.
Edit: checked internally, and this specific issue is being fixed as we speak.
It's an either an information disclosure issue or an authorization issue (depending on your point of view), I won't say more on here.