Of course I forgot to stop it (they were pretty quiet also) and they charged me 1400+ eu for a full year because...why not - no refunds (that's what their page says).
I know, I know...should have read the whole shebang. Lost 1400 euros for something I didn't really use. I was about to pay for a month and discontinue but now I feel robbed. I do websites myself and I write in `bold - caps - red` when I'm about to charge someone for a full year.
If someone messes with your CC, call your bank immediately. Chargebacks are a powerful tool. Use them.
I really love the feeling of safety that I get from chosing the max amount, being sure that I won't be overcharged.
So unfortunately if you get points I'm guessing you're from North America and probably won't be able to apply.
I haven't searched but there might be such services available to you in a nearer bank.
Edit: As a meta-sidenote, it was very difficult for me to write this comment without feeling like it would come across as corporate shilling. I have no connection to Citi and nothing to gain from recommending their card, but there's no way for anybody else to know that, and the issue of selling old accounts is a real one (though don't know about HN specifically). I wonder what the best solutions are to this sort of issue.
When I order a 20€ item, I generate a credit card number valid for a single use of 20€. If the merchant tries to charge 19.99€ or 21€ or any different amount it will be rejected (and the merchant may have to pay penalty for payment being rejected).
Edit: 2 months ago! Microsoft needs to fix LinkedIn. They bought them 6 months ago, if they dont change this dark pattern behvaior, they appear to be sanctioning it.
People who would otherwise act sensibly can talk themselves into some shady stuff when there's money and career advancement at stake.
> force the minions to make dark choices
Unless some project manager was tied to a chair and beaten with a rubber hose, no one was forced to do anything.
If a career criminal takes 1400€ from me because his employer has set unrealistic performance goals, I still want that criminal to see justice and my money returned.
Basically, that criminal's employer should also face dire consequences or his take away will be "lets properly vet the next criminal I hire so this doesn't happen again".
Now, this is not Uber levels of shady shit, but it's a start. I hope if we remain vigilant and make our voices heard things will improve for the better.
"Really? Automatic billing? For an entire year?! I never ordered any such thing, I just set up impossible revenue goals! Oh my cheese and whiskers!"
I have no faith any US administration will ever do anything good for its citizens but keep fighting the fight.
Even though I was paying per month for the Creative Suite, I was told that I was only able to cancel my subscription during a small timeframe each year. If I didn't take advantage of the opportunity at that time, I would have to fork out for the service each month for another full year. I couldn't preempt it by asking to have the subscription cancelled when the year was up - I had to notify them at that time. I did have the option to cancel early if I paid a large penalty (some large percentage of the remaining monthly payments as far as I recall).
The whole thing left me with an aversion to Adobe in general and provided the impetus I needed to look at other solutions.
LinkedIn barely serves any useful purpose any more, and with Microsoft in charge I don't imaging them using the data for positive-for-me purposes.
This sounds like you don't do business often (with US corporations?) They're hoping more people like you just let it ride. That's how they're making money.
Hit them where it hurts - have the bank perform a chargeback. Enough of that happens, and their rates to accept credit cards goes up.
I don't think one chargeback changes anything, but if people are more aware (not just in case of LinkedIn, but in general), this could make this shady business strategy less profitable.
Disclaimer: LinkedIn employee, but in a different team.
What if credit cards had an api or so for requesting monthly payments... similar to how app permission works.
I now have zero desire to use any paid Google service ever again.
You should file a complaint with you consumer protection agency.
And ask you bank to cancel the payment, just call it fraud.
I know, it's easy to feel like you were being stupid. But they are intentionally preying in you, it's not by accident, it's by design. That IMO makes it fraud, fight back.
Amazon is actually really good with this. I got a mail early January that I had just been signed up for a whole year of amazon prime, which I saw after my holidays 2 days into the 'subscription'.
I was instantly fuming and ready to rain down hell fire when I conveniently found a button to cancel. I could easily undo the whole thing from the site with no user interaction. They made it very clear the money would be refunded. Props to them.
I called their customer service and the guy who answered was well prepared for the call because it must happen to them all the time. At least I got a six-month refund.
When you sign up for the free trial, it literally says right there on the checkout page "Total after free trial: ($99.95 x 12 months) $1,199.40". Beyond that, they email you 7 days before the trial ends to warn you.
(Also, "free" auto-renew trials like this without refunds are by themselves shady imo)
A trial that automatically turns into a paid subscription isn't a trial, it's a deferred subscription with an initial free period. Stop calling that a "trial".
There are so many shady business practices, and I love it when the EU fights back :)
There's always people wanting to add me, but then they mostly don't introduce themselves. Even half of the recruiters who add me don't do an intro. How is that networking?
The articles seem pretty low quality. Sorry to say it, but a lot of them seem to be written as a form of homework, as in "you should write something to be seen". There's rarely any insightful comments on news pieces either.
And then there's Oleg. Doing a parody of him is basically the only form of humour on LinkedIn. Do you agree?
The endorsements system is messed up. My 6th grade teacher endorsed me for "derivatives" and "investment". That's not quite the same as a colleague or a manager, is it? But you won't know unless you check all those links.
The one thing it's good for is as a replacement for a rolodex. No need to have business cards anymore, you have LinkedIn.
I'm interested in 5 points.
Title (or if contract, length of contract).
If those are supplied up-front, I can immediately accept or dismiss 95% of messages. However at the moment I have to ask for 1 or 2 more points usually.
Only then do I usually go onto Glassdoor, start asking about why the role is now available, employee and contractor turnover, average employees time at the company and work environment.
Endorsements I agree are ridiculous, you can go on Fiverr and buy 20 customised endorsements within 24 hours.
The last time (among many) that I accepted a generic, canned message request, I waited a week for the guy to say something to me. Nothing, and I dropped him.
One problem for LinkedIn is that they have not made themselves so obviously above-board that a suspicion like mine would be implausible.
Most of the content on LinkedIn is self-congratulatory circe-jerking (for lack of a better term). People give Reddit shit for that, but it has nothing on the ego-stroking and pandering that happens on LinkedIn.
That's the only thing I use it for. It was "ok" a couple of years ago, I even went premium for 2 months while looking for a new job (not worth it, at all!). Now it's just spam.
My last company just used it as a cheap ad platform. Staff where encouraged to "like" the weekly billboard.
A sleazy site abused by sleazy companies, including the owner.
edit: Oh, forgot to add.. I think people only give endorsements so you think twice about disconnecting them (you'll lose their endorsements).
They want access to your contacts list. People are more likely to add someone who is connected to a person they already know/are connected to.
I have to ask any sales people seeing this--does this ever work? Is it simply to get your content marketing materials to show up in my feed for nurturing? Or do you expect me to accept and be open to hearing a sales pitch? What is the success rate of this tactic?
It's always something like "I hired a guy nobody else wanted, and to everyone's surprise they worked hard and prospered."
Or "A guy made a bad mistake, but I didn't fire them because now I'd paid x millions for his education."
- URLs not being clickable or selectable in many contexts for no good reason
- icon positions/sizes being off by a pixel between different pages
- if you're typing a message in their mobile app, and the text input field loses focus for whatever reason, everything you typed in so far is erased (this was true a few years ago and I essentially "rage-quit" the LinkedIn app after that)
... that I am absolutely convinced that their technology stack is a Frankenstein's monster of different chunks of code and logic, with a similar-enough skin on the outside for all of the parts to fool the managers (both inside and outside LinkedIn) into believing the website works.
(I know, I know: in a way all software projects relying on other libraries are Frankensteins, but you know what I'm talking about here: the parts don't even fit together properly)
These kinds of "ignores its own rules" bits fits perfectly with that.
I really wonder what the internal culture of that company is. I bet there's a lot of turnover, leading to this mess.
About 2 minutes later, I figured out what had happened. The redesign had moved the Contact & Personal Info section to the side of the screen, and by default it was collapsed. Originally it was right under your profile picture & job title, but for some reason they decided to move & hide it. Very strange.
I tried many paid services like Ads, Premium, and API. They are subpar. I recruit better via Reddit than via LinkedIn, you can post in a group with hundreds of thousands and it is a ghost town when nobody pay attention. they refuse API access for obvious uses, etc.
Wait. That was just a dream.
(Though my initial tech-centered recognition was a common reference to Google Tag Manager :)
Despite all that, I've been afraid of missing job opportunities if I left the platform. And I don't know why, because I've only found one job through Linkedin in 10 years.
I wish I had the guts to leave it entirely.
Everone has a job title like 'dynamic individual searching for creative opportunities' when they really mean unemployed. It's like a game where everyone pretends while simultaneously knowing that everyone else is pretending too.
To be fair, that sounds a lot like job-hunting, in general. The whole process can be filled with rituals meant to obfuscate the fact that you just want a job.
I wish I could have an alternate profile or A/B test. I think my current one is detrimental to the job search because I list jobs going back 17 yrs vs my resume which is tailored to my current field. With a second profile, I'd narrow it down. Maybe I should do that anyway.
XING is focused on German speakers and claims circa €150 million in revenue. Viadeo claims 65 million users. They're not exactly small or overtly failing entities.
Just get it done. Maybe see if you can export your data first, just for your own peace of mind. :)
So just override referrer header, and you'll see a lot more.
I'm having a really bad day with typos and overlooking them.
You are correct; it does work with https://google.com as referrer. I'm updating the entry.
EDIT aaand it stopped working. It was either a glitch or it will lock you out after a few requests.
I did it four years ago and they've honored it since.
What I'd like to know more, is if LinkedIn tracks non-logged-in viewers somehow. I have an inkling there's some kind of cookie-mongering taking place that informs the person's profile that you viewed who you are (if they are able to ascertain that). It's just an inkling, but strong enough to make sure I'm always browsing others' profiles in Incognito.
On the computer I used to access LinkedIn from, I use two browsers. One for general browsing, and one for "more sensitive content" (eg things with passwords). I used to log into LinkedIn with the second one.
Trying to look at public LinkedIn profiles using the general browser (which has no LinkedIn cookie) never works. Always shows the log-in-wall. Whereas looking at the exact same profile (cut-n-pasting-the-url) using the browser-used-for-secure-content did always work. 100% reproducible.
On the other hand I don't use Google any more (mostly StartPage or DDG), which is likely why I hadn't noticed the use-Google workaround.
> Select what shows via searches on Bing, Google, etc. as well as on public profile badges and permitted services like Outlook, when the viewers are not logged-in members or did not bind their LinkedIn account to their account on such services.
Its not anyone who isn’t logged in but rather a subset of unauthenticated users who discover your profile through a specific set of avenues
Clicking on the informational icon next to “public” reinforces what they mean:
>All LinkedIn members as well as others who find you through search engines (e.g. Google, Bing) or other servies.
How is "accessible via the home page of 99%" of the Internet not public?
I don't use it myself but I've heard from others who have, several times, received offers for jobs in the company they were already working at.
That dropped the amount of er... idiot recruiters substantially. :)
Heres the article about the court case.[Aug 15, 2017]
That said, I too find that people use LinkedIn in different ways, I try to only link with people whom I know personally, ideally have worked with, and know something about me. I do occasionally get random invites (which I assume is someone trying to reach me) which I will accept and add a calendar entry to remove in 2 weeks. Then if I haven't heard anything from them for 2 weeks I know it was just random 'contacts' spamming or 'people you might want to link with' spamming.
For example SMTP is an internet standard yet almost none of the new tech is standardized chat, social networks.
> social networks
This is on it's way (sort of) in form of ActivityStreams, webmentions + h-feed, etc. Making something into a standard unfortunately takes a lot of time but with the GDPR it might even get a push, data portability wise.
I often use LinkedIn to check out famous people's credentials because I am generally curious about their backgrounds. From time to time I do get a "hello" from really big SV companies, otherwise I would have a hard time to get an initial interview without a LinkedIn profile. I am sure they send like 10,000 requests every month, but it still help speeds the progress with a recruiter directly reaching out to you.
But there was an embarrassing anecdote, something a lot of users had faced before. One day I was on LinkedIn and it asked me whether I want to import contacts, I hit "no thanks", but I think there was another confirmation which I pressed "next" and LinkedIn sent out an invitation to everyone in my email contact list, including many mailing lists. Some mailing lists rejected the email, but some let the email through its filter.
I wonder what I'll do if/when I need to engage in a "traditional" job search. There's no way I want to let them into my life, professional nor otherwise.
As for the ongoing "networking" aspect: It reminds me all too much of the "can you do something for me" networking permeating the traditional job search. I've met a minority of really helpful people and generous spirit, in the past, in that context. But, it's individuals you get to know, personally; the proforma data exchanges are mostly just part of the routine and are at best a pre-cursor to those few real connections.
I can't see LinkedIn or its like ever "algorithmizing" that. Though, like I said, I don't have experience with it.
TL;DR: If I'm not a networking cynic, I'm a pragmatist. And with the way LinkedIn has spammed me, because one of my friends once touched their property, however briefly and/or indirectly, I'm not very optimistic their model matched my experience of what actually works and is useful.
And, I don't want their cooties.
Furthermore, they are very aggressive at sending any of these fees to collections if you dispute their shady tactics -- I personally know people who've been bitten by this.
It has left such a bad taste in my mouth that I always strongly suggest everyone to abandon them. What they do is technically legal, but definitely should not be. The company can't die soon enough.
I mostly just crosslink across reputable, indexable domains and make sure the same keywords show up everywhere that’s possible. :-)
But, yeah, nothing seems to think my web server should be in the top ten of any keyword search.
I think there is a misunderstanding here. Things work the other way around. People do not seek you, linked in takes you to them.
A recruiter more often is looking for people with your skillset, than looking for you specifically.
In other words they are not typing in your name into a search engine, they are typing "aws architect python" etc.
If they were seeking you specifically, they probably already know enough about you and will just get to emailing you directly.
I created a dedicated email address for Linkedin. And yes, I do receive a lot of spam on this unique email address. For testing purposes, I regularly update this email address to a new one every 6 months, and spam begins to flow a few days after the address change. So I believe either LinkedIn resells email addresses, makes users emails public and easy to scrap, or regularly gets hacked.