Luckily there's a lot of sites out there, and there's starting to be more services like the OP's - which I will be able to visit!
Eg, when you visit a site you, imo - agree to some degree of privacy violation with that site. Ie, it's reasonable to expect them to know your IP. It's reasonable to expect them to know your rough location. It's reasonable to expect them to know your username if you log in, and etc.
What's unreasonable is the 50 sites that cascade off of an initial visit. I may have been fine giving my IP to bobsblog.com but not Google/etc.
Come to think of it, this would be a neat "contract" that sites could agree to. Like No JS, such that browser clients could enforce it and get the expected UX on those sites. /shrug, just thinking out loud i suppose.
You can to some degree massage what your browser sends, to varying degrees of success, but there is not an easy 'send only non-unique things please' button. Obviously the IP has to be sent regardless, the only way to get around that is VPN and similar tech.
Just because mega-corps and wireless telcos have gimped the wildly popular mobile computers and taken away their ability to interact (no ipv4, no ports, not much beyond web) doesn't mean interacting directly is bad or unsafe or giving away some 'secret' information.
No, we need more people directly interacting with other people via the internet protocol. We desparately need widespread ipv6 adoption so that everyone can have their own IPs and expose them all to each other in the emergent network we call the 'net.
This 'IP as privacy risk' is scaremongering and very unhealthy.
Plenty of civil cases use just IP's to prove copyright infringement. That's how BitTorrent cases catch infringers, regardless of who actually did it.
Watch Leonard french on YouTube, copyright attorney, it doesn't matter to judges in Pennsylvania wether an IP is a person or not. They say it is, and thats good enough.
That's why discord was created. So everything is proxied and safe for streamers and anyone online. Maybe you don't involve yourself so you don't know any better, but I've seen it happen, personally, friends get stalkers from the online world simply because the game they played was P2P, or the server admin for vent/teamspeak was a total creep with their friends.
It's not how it should be, but that's how it is.
That's like saying there's no privacy or security risk to everyone knowing your home address or your phone number. I can understand if you're not concerned by it, but it's non-zero.
Privacy-wise, knowing your router's IP address is enough to score/segment you and (over time) to build a profile on you.
Security-wise, an IP address enables bad actors to scan and potentially attack your router and possibly your internal network.
Real Security Experts™, am I wrong?
Things evolve, things change, we learn, we adapt.
Many world governments will happily track down a dissident by their ip, kidnap them in broad daylight and then torture them. Just because you're not one of them doesn't mean those people don't exist and don't have real concerns.
But I am not going to wear a bullet proof vest while sitting around at home in my safe country. It'd be absurd to suggest so. The same applies to 'hiding' your IP during normal activities on the internet.
Willful IP blindness is one way to have communication over IP without allowing it to be used for tracking: https://github.com/bslassey/ip-blindness
After being slapped in the face by this for a few months now, I can tell you that this means absolutely nothing.
very unhealthy indeed if you're a reporter in some parts of the world not doing what's judged to be right.
Not really, unless the intent is to discriminate against immigrants to the US / people outside the US / people who went straight into a career from high school.
Why assume nefarious motivations?
GP maybe has Facebook in mind that did exactly this.
If I have more time, what I'd strife for with this project is to become a competitor of LinkedIn (e.g.), but with only private profiles. Companies are then charged when they query for people with skills/certificates that they are interested in. Or they'll pay a subscription for unlimited querying. Users know they are not tracked by the platform itself, and companies that query users agree to a (TBD) license that limits their usage for HR goals.
It'll provide public statistics on what companies query for, so if users with Java experience see that Kotlin is queried more than Java, they'll have an indication of what skill to invest their time in. (Just an example.)
(Any Clojurians that find this subject interesting, feel free to contribute.)
The next phase will be to share it with colleagues and friends, to get some early feedback going. Then I'll expand it from a self-hosted website (/ tool to generate your CV from your local machine) to a hosted platform where people can sign up.
Then I'll probably first market it to a business sector (/ Reddit groups e.g.) with a higher-than-usual amount of privacy-concerned people. Then branch out if it's successful.
Note that I'm just brainstorming here, it's not like I've done something like this before myself.
What I'd like even more than trying to turn this into a profit-oriented company is to do something more philosophical/political. Hear me out:
Create the Resumator tool, and turn it into a platform, as described above.
Create a charity organisation that owns the platform, uses the generated income to maintain it, and invests into other like-minded charity organisations.
Get governments to support the platform + foundation. They could even self-host Resumator themselves, and make it mandatory for recruitment to be done through the platform. Right now, if a Dutch organisation needs a Java developer, they can create an "easy apply" LinkedIn vacancy. A (probably also Dutch) Java developer now has to spend spare time (or even time in which they are supposed to be working for their current employer) searching LinkedIn for that vacancy. If they click it, the organisation that posted the vacancy pays Microsoft (/LinkedIn) money. So a Dutch employee was less productive because they had to search for a new job instead of just getting an offer, a Dutch company had to pay money to hire that employee, and now the previous employer will pay LinkedIn (/competitors) money. When will the government realise that this money that is going to $usa_based_company can go to its own tax paying citizens?
And at the very least, create an API standard for CVs. It's strange to me that it's 2020 and we still have to share PDFs to get a job, where each CV has a different layout, and the person reading it has to look for the relevant section again and again. And often after that, we still have to create a Workday/whatever account and put in the same information again.
Edit: Oh and no more of this "talking to independent recruiters" nonsense. Companies can query for profiles themselves, no need to add more middle-men in between that add no value whatsoever.
Edit: Bah, brainfart. Do you have a repo where I can follow this?
I would like to inform anyone working on such bio website that there is a need gap for a universal employee verification system which works to independently verify employee experience even if the former company has shut its shop. LinkedIn could have addressed that problem, but it chose to become another cat videos platform(I personally have nothing against cats).
https://needgap.com/problems/54-better-employee-verification... (Disclaimer: My problem validation platform)
An applicant makes a claim about a former position, but there's no way of verifying the veracity of that claim. There's no notarized and properly archived record which allows verification of the authenticity claim.
So, any 3rd party service that claims to be able to verify authenticity invariably acts as a neutral, impartial, trusted authority. In essence, this what a notary or notary public does in the analogue world.
If such a service would be a private business, it's impartiality can and will automatically be contested - as per your example in the link. You could look towards the public administration and set up a publicly governed system (e.g. tied to public pension rights) which registers employment. But such a system would also come with a few fundamental questions regarding trust and privacy. And finally, you could look into a distributed network of actors verifying each other through block chain technology, but that still doesn't solve the problem of governing those actors and how they behave.
In my corner of the world, employers are legally obliged to hand out a signed form to leaving employees that confirms their erstwhile employment. It's entirely up to employees to produce those copies when asked to verify the claims they make on their resume, and employers are free to take this into account as a formal condition to consider an applicant. It's also up to applicants to seek and reach out to their previous employers and secure a document if they didn't receive one, even when those have dissolved. This system puts the responsibility entirely with the employee, which may, arguably, be the best of all the bad options out there.
>In my corner of the world, employers are legally obliged to hand out a signed form to leaving employees that confirms their erstwhile employment.
It is common in my region as well. But the issue as the person who posted the problem says, is the 3rd party independent verification companies which verify past experience of a candidate on behalf the future company; they have no idea about how a email system works and require email from a company which has long gone.
It looks like the generated links are just based on the person's name as well, so it would be pretty easy to find a lot of people fast. Letting the user generate UUID (or something) based URLs that are valid for a limited time only should be standard.
I would love for the page to have more polish - maybe you could do it all using CSS and not JS :) about.me does a good job of this. I say this as a grudging backend developer: the "designy-ness" really does work to help any page seem more credible.
Curious: is it your intention to make money with this project? On the one hand, awesome that you're doing this for free and presumably trying to get users. On the other, I myself would worry that the service "might go away one day", and although charging doesn't prevent that, it may be useful to find some way to better communicate the trustworthiness of your application not just in terms of privacy, but longevity too.
Uh, why? And since it's just a free text field, what makes it better than me just hosting something on my own?
Sadly the majority of newer ones never seems to have got that memo.
- profile page: https://keybase.io/ytjohn/
- public folder: https://keybase.pub/ytjohn/
- github profile readme: https://www.aboutmonica.com/blog/how-to-create-a-github-prof...
UPDATE: They do let you create a homepage with an index.md or index.html. (https://ytjohn.keybase.pub/). However, you would be on your own getting the information from your profile page onto your public webpage. You would just be hosting a static page and not benefiting from the verified identity portion on the profile page.
It is remaining as the same but with log out button that's it nothing is coming up
The left justified desktop version looks fine, but the flush justified mobile version is kind of ugly.
Oddly enough, even if I select "desktop site" in the Chrome menu on mobile, it is still flush justified.
Web authors: don't use flush justified text. It never helps you, and usually hurts you.
Gosh, as long as I'm nitpicking, here's another one. If I click New Bio, it lists my location as:
PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA
No, no, no! Proper names should never be forced into ALL CAPS. Besides being wrong and ugly, it makes me think you coded the site in COBOL.