I never saw a message like that
What I've seen is "Does Person knows about Technology/Skill" and then you can click to endorse that
Well, today I got one "fake" endorsement, not far from what I do, but not what I had added to my list of skills
I don't see anything "shady" about this as much as I do see it as a targeted use of their system, in a germane method.
If you are not keeping linkedin as a silo of professional, superficial, contact with the many many many people you will work with over your career - and you don't understand why things like endorsements both happen and are a part of the linkedin ecosystem, then you're not using linkedin correctly.
Firstly, you shoul unsub from all notifications from linkedin aside from who has viewed your profile.
Second, its not facebook, thank god. You're not there to impress people by the content you create. You're there to show that your influence in your field is a positive attractor via the quality of your network; if you have good people and companies recommending you - then you have more marketability for your CV...
The people posting to linkedin groups really frequently telling you what to follow and what valuable BS skill/fad thing thats new - they are typically marketing, sales, bizdev and unskilled folks... stay away from the idea that you're going to show the world how farking smart you are via a linkedin post.
Work hard - build a good network. Have strong ACTUAL skills. People who know you will hit "yes, they DO know this" when linkedin asks this...
Good or big? Commercial companies usually pick big, and history has proven that there is no way to achieve both big and good (MySpace and Facebook being the obvious candidates).
Yes. But linkedIn doesn't come in there at all.
Keeping track of that network is enabled via linkedin. You do NOT need to follow all the personal lives of people you work with. You should keep a pulse of where they move to and what position they hold over the years.
So if you leave a company and had a great rapport with your peer Z -- and they go on to startup X and become head of Y and you are looking to work in a department like Y with a person like Z... then this is a good thing.
So, yeah - i think Linkedin comes in.
Further, assuming you transition to consulting. Recruiters and the like will seek out people with skills on linkedin to fill positions they only know about. If you are strong, you are your own best/worst negotiator when it comes to getting these contracts.
This is called "networking" and people have been doing it since long before LinkedIn. If you want to learn how, read Dig Your Well Before You're Thirsty by Harvey Mackay.
So everyone looses, even recruiters, as they get more false positives when searching for skills.
It is a short business-win for LinkedIn, but a long term loss.
And how to be sure about the differentiation?
Bit I have to say I'm biased:
I really do not give much on these sites. I tried LinkedIn years ago, but nearly no one used it here in Germany. I used to use the local equivalent, but it really was a big waste of time, at least for me and all the people I know who used it.
Recruiter spam, self-exposers, and so on. Nothing ever came from it. Really nothing.
So these sites ultimately live of the dreams of people and of recruiters with the (imho) wrong incentives.
E.g. they know _when_ a user endorsed, and if they endorsed all four or individually. And they know more about the user--ie how often he endorses, and who he's connected to.
And, yes, I agree with your low opinion of linkedIn and co. (Even though a close friend of mine actually got a job with the MathWorks in Germany through linkedIn---she was cold-emailled by an internal MathWorks recruiter.)
(It's intended for chefs, not game developers.)
I laughed harder than usual at that. I wonder what a "groovy" professional would be? :)
Nowadays, Groovy seems to fading as well.
Our requirements are that whatever I choose must be Java-based, and have some nice framework.
Within those constraints, is there a good Grails replacement?
There is another interesting jvm language:
Web framework for gosu:
But it is even less popular and I'm not sure if it even has an active community.
But yeah, it's much smaller than Grails.
1. Assuming you just created an account on HN and immediately see a comment you disagree with. Can you downvote this comment? [Y/N]
2. A YC Company just posted a job posting to HN, can you post why you are a perfect rock-ninja for the job as a comment? [Y/N]
3. Can a comment receive greater than -4 comment Karma? [Y/N]
4. Can you downvote a comment reply to your OP comment? [Y/N]
5. How important is being civil in HN threads [Very Important/Not Important]
This might work....
Of course... that doesn't make a lot of sense for a personality trait either... It makes as much sense as describing someone as C++. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here.
edit: for clarity
[ Groovy ][ Chilled ][ Fights "The Man"]
The related skills sidebar is also hilarious.
It's just crowdsourced tagging with a different name. This way, recruiters who pay LinkedIn $10k/yr can more easily search profiles for keywords.
Presumably LinkedIn has some algorithm by which they look at people with similar skill set groupings, and say ah, statistically most of the people with this set have these three additional skills, and then farm that out to your network to see who endorses it. New endorsements tweak the skill set, which feeds back into the algorithm. It's almost like a glorified, twisted game of The Game of Life.
I don't use LinkedIn to do keyword searches really, but if you're into that sort of thing, I imagine that having tagged profiles is still much more useful than not having them.
Presumably, if you're a typical recruiter, you'll combine a keyword search with a list of schools or companies that your clients agree are a good proxy for aptitude.
Or you'll do a bit of manual pruning, blast some subset of the search results, and see what sticks.
Nobody said the smart recruiters are their target market.
The real business of LinkedIn is selling services to employers and space to advertisers .
The more data points they have on each user, the more numerous results they can return to recruiters and more specific targeting they can do with ads.
Endorsements are a way to easily, indirectly expand a user profile by turning the additions into 1-click suggestions and consents rather than requiring real action by the user.
If it were socially acceptable I expect they'd ask users to upload profile photos and estimate salaries for their connections too.
The thing is that endorsements at least are pretty noisy data. What's the point of shooting for quantity at the expense of quality?
Personally, the endorsements I receive are fairly noisy, but I'm acting as the second level of informed filter by choosing what to accept.
The endorsements which make it to my profile are accurate.
Unless I'm unique, I'd expect the resulting graph of accepted endorsements to be reasonably useful.
Login to LinkedIn;
Hover over "Profile" and click on "Edit Profile";
Scroll down to "Skills & Expertise";
Click on "Edit";
Click on “Manage Endorsements”. It is not highlighted but it will accept a click when you hover.;
Click on the skill where you want to remove endorsers and then uncheck any endorser you want to remove.;
When you’re done, click on “Save”;
Some of the results: Memes, Poetry, Salads (ten endorsements!), Tree Identification, Punk, Pickles (not to be confused with Cucumber), Shampoo, Extortion, Glitter Tattoos.
EDIT: removed superfluous "the".
It took me a good while to notice and another good while to stop laughing. Of course a tiny bit less observation on my part could have published that to my actual profile.
I got the idea that I could get a bunch of people to go and endorse him for Scala on LinkedIn. The (far fetched) goal being that he'd inadvertently accept the endorsement and end up returning in the top results for local Scala experts.
So I went and endorsed him for that. He didn't fall for it. However I also endorsed other colleagues. One of them caught on the troll and endorsed me back for 'Genocide' and a bunch of atrocities.
Maybe people are just trolls like I am and endorse OP for the sake of lulz.
The fact is your endorsements are going to trail your most recent skills by years in most cases, and so unless you've been doing the same thing year in and year out, endorsements present a distorted picture of your overall skill set.
This is especially true in technology, where your most recent skills are generally your most valuable ones.
What you can't do is prevent getting endorsements in the first place. LinkedIn will not let you disable receiving endorsements.
As presently implemented the endorsement system is rather pointless, but I do think there's some potential for improvement in making it more meaningful. Perhaps make it more like the recommendation system where you'd be required to actually write something instead of just clicking a button.
I already maintain a personal and a work facebook account (for example to add someone as a facebook app developer on an app you own you have to be friends with them, but I don't want to be "friends" with all my co-workers). There's not much you can do about linked in at this point since it's ubiquitous. I just try to avoid the spammy bits.
Unfortunately, this has not worked the way they may have intended. Any widespread data-oriented company has to work hard to keep noise at low levels. A means probably intended to reduce the noise in this case has become a source of noise rather.
Emphasis mine. If this is true, this is even worse than the spammy "would you like to endorse?" stuff.
Still, I believe that there is a window of opportunity for a determined group to disrupt linked in in much the same way that Google attacked Altavista, by offering substantially better quality combined with a different business model.
gladly my linkedin profile is as useless as my gplus one (which i have to have to comment on youtube kitten videos)
Alright, the system's a joke.
In hindsight, I should have added something like "TARDIS Repair" or "n-dimensional Temporal Hypergeography". :-)
My most endorsed skills I have not used for years.
Of course, if you had more of a "karma" style system, you'd have to implement a way to mitigate abuses of the downvote mechanism. But I feel like that's an easier task than trying to derive meaning from endorsements that cost the endorser nothing, and hence mean nothing.
If the stakes aren't real, the results aren't real.
Those are not the only techniques available. If you look at how Google's PageRank works, a link is like an endorsement, but there's no downvoting possible.
So I consider the whole thing a joke and endorse people for the most ridiculous things I can. Here are some of my favorites: footprints, sandwiches, trees, safety, anger, hunger, eating, money, typing, girls night, walking, Goal-oriented individual with strong leadership capabilities, MS-DOS.
One thing I really hate is that every change to my profile propagates to my whole network and to the headhunters. I am ok with spamming the headhunters, but I feel very weird having my friends receiving updates like this from me. Sometimes you are just keeping a profile updated, you are not getting promotions or something worth noting.
I think their goal was to create more 'value' in their product but in fact made it less reliable and therefore less 'valuable'.
I called him up the next day and we both laughed about it. He then added it to his profile. Since then he's been seconded on that skill by somebody else, too.
Was good return for me as many returned back favor thinking I spent time for them.
"You have endorsed Coworker for SVN, Java and XSLT"
Where I work, I don't think a week has gone by without this happening. It's all in good fun. :)
I always sorta thought that LI was randomly generating these things somehow.
The recommendation system is just as fictitious as the endoresements: it has been my experience that many recommendations are quid pro quo and have no legitimacy. Many come in a circular fashion so when assessing talent you need to walk through each of the players trying to figure out what their real motivation was.
I've watched the sausage being made. I remember once when we had to choose a team member to punt at one shop I worked, and there was universal agreement on the target, the team long having grievances about their productivity, poor quality product, etc. The deed gets done, and over the next week I see a several of my peers, including his highly critical direct manager (who hands out absurd recommendations like candy), author lengthy, lauding recommendations for this person. They were trying to trade in a recommendation to assuage their guilt, or for future considerations in return. This seemed incredible to me because it should be professionally damaging to do something like that, but in the real world it simply isn't: There are no consequences or downsides to handing out ridiculous endorsements and fictional recommendations.