[HN Gopher] Manfred Awesomic CV: Open source machine and human c...
___________________________________________________________________
Manfred Awesomic CV: Open source machine and human compatible CV
standard
Author : jmrobles
Score : 81 points
Date : 2022-03-27 09:14 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| kkfx wrote:
| Honestly I'm deeply against "standard CV", the only who benefit
| form them are giants who trade humans as livestock. If I choose
| to propose myself for a position I want another human on the
| other side reading who I declare to be and my motivations,
| digging as needed because choosing someone for a job MUST BE a
| serious human business. For similar reasons I'm deeply against
| those who mass-send CVs to anyone: when one need desperately a
| job, any kind of, and try fishing the best option MUST not be
| mass sending but simple State made public matching platform where
| any one _on both sides_ for free can consult the other side mark
| some offers /people as interested to book a contact etc.
|
| The actual "job market" is abomination that must be annihilated
| and companies who can't have enough HR resources for their scale
| simply must be resized by nature because being unable to humanly
| process human resources means a bad/too quick/too unbalanced
| dangerous growth. Similarly for companies who fail to have call
| centers etc (yes, Alphabet is one of them).
|
| We are not robots, we are human who work to live, not the
| contrary, and we are a society not a factory.
| david_bonilla wrote:
| You see a "standard CV" as an oppression tool. I see it as a
| tool to give control over their data, back to the users.
|
| Now you have to upload the same data to LinkedIn, Angels.co,
| Hired, and hundreds of other services. With an open standard,
| you could update your data just once.
|
| We are not robots, we are humans who work to live, and we
| shouldn't have to build our CV every time we look for that
| work.
| kkfx wrote:
| I was never, ever on those platforms, after the Uni I have
| just use word of mouth and acquaintances.
|
| I consider matching platform useful in the modern time
| because remote work is a thing and cross-country job seeking
| is common, but for me such platforms MUST NOT be public and
| must be very limited in terms of data they grab/display
| because is not a matter of oppression or "build my own CV"
| but a matter of how we seek workers.
|
| The actual system is antechamber of the Chinese one in
| western sauce, that need a social score, witch can be in
| various forms, including "number of stars/upvote and positive
| comments", and the social score is harmful for the society
| because no one can really control "the honesty" of the score
| and many can trade it. You probably know well the river of
| cyclic polemics about Amazon reviews/buyer feedback, same for
| TripAdvisor etc: in theory the social score is good, in
| practice the seller give something to the buyer in exchange
| of a good review (corruption, cronyism), the platform
| manipulate reviews for it's own interests, the State give bad
| scoring to political opponent etc, see China for a practical
| example.
|
| The society of interpersonal relation have "a bit of
| risk/incertitude", but can't be manipulated much because of
| scale and kind of parties involved. The social score still
| exists, but only at small personal scale, like the personal
| scoring systems you might have on emails, nntp news, ...
| anyone have it's own and share it to friends/relatives, it's
| a limited and distributed one that encourage honestly and
| can't do big damage on scale when honesty lack.
|
| Also you might have read about other river of polemics from
| CVs crafted to pass the "initial ML pre-selection" with even
| people who try to make a business selling crafted CVs to
| stories like https://idiallo.com/blog/when-a-machine-fired-me
| again the solution is simple avoid conditions that can give
| such outcomes.
|
| Just try a small game: how much people and enterprises in
| mean have earned in the '60s than now? For my knowledge now
| VERY few earn far more, but in the mean 99% earn far less.
| That's means a thing: the system is broken. There is no free
| market capable of self-regulation, there is no leviathan
| PUBLIC State that regulate (classic liberalism and socialism)
| but just a corrupted clepto-corporatocracy. Do you really
| like actual system? Beware: "coming back" does not means
| dropping good things born thereafter, does not means travel
| back in time, means just take the good, correct the bad and
| keep going. It's name is not time travel but evolution.
| version_five wrote:
| The page says the structure is based on an internal format that
| was used for storing employee data. I can see value in a standard
| record format from that perspective, eg if employee bio and work
| history are being kept on file.
|
| I agree with the other comments that this should not exist for
| job applications, and that asking for a job application in
| machine readable format is basically saying "we're not going to
| read this". I would never use a channel that asked me to apply
| this way.
| ergonaught wrote:
| If you can't easily and intuitively understand why you shouldn't
| call it "Mac" here in 2022, I confess to zero confidence that
| you'll have successfully achieved any other objectives. Just
| being frank. The "Go" team ignored sense and it seems to have
| worked out somehow for them, so it may be moot to lose my random
| individual interest so quickly.
| jmole wrote:
| Who was using "Go" before Go?
| oneplane wrote:
| Every Go player on the planet, and every English-language
| speaker.
| isaacimagine wrote:
| Go!
| mdasen wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go!_(programming_language)
|
| There is another language called "Go!"
|
| https://github.com/golang/go/issues/9#issuecomment-66047478
|
| Russ Cox's response was, "The naming similarity is
| unfortunate. However, there are many computing products and
| services named Go. In the 11 months since our release, there
| has been minimal confusion of the two languages, so we are
| closing this issue."
| techdragon wrote:
| The go team had the entire power of Google to subtly rebuild
| their search engine to not suck for this one stupid naming
| choice. I remember the earliest days after the language's name
| was announced... it was nearly impossible to search for
| anything to do with it. It took months for anything to get
| better. The early conventions of calling it "go-lang" or
| "golang" stem from these days when it was just utterly
| impossible... and then Google realising they were affecting
| their recruitment pipeline (which Go was explicitly designed to
| help) stepped in to help fix the search discoverability so it
| wasn't impossible to learn about this new language that people
| outside of Google should learn so Google didn't have to teach
| its recruits the language designed for them.
|
| In case the tone comes across harsh, I was trying to hold back
| just how I really feel. I can read and write in Go, but I hate
| the entire language and it's ecosystem. It's obvious to me that
| it was designed to be a better Java for Googlers at Google
| living in a monorepo world... the only positives I have to say
| about it are that talented people have somehow managed to write
| excellent and useful tools and software using it, but I really
| can't like a language that makes me feel like I'm programming
| with the accidental child of BASIC and Java. However this isn't
| a thread about Go, I just wish the poor choice of name had
| doomed it to obscurity and a quick death.
| mikl wrote:
| Wow, epicly bad project name there. Maybe take it one step
| further and call it "Google Search" or "Microsoft Office"?
| b20000 wrote:
| so how does this put more power in the hands of candidates?
| voidfunc wrote:
| I love the idea but the name is going to be a problem for
| discoverability.
| corrius wrote:
| This will only benefit recruiting firms in order to automate
| processes such as the one behind this project, I don't see how
| this would be beneficial for anyone else.
| b20000 wrote:
| exactly
| david_bonilla wrote:
| Let me give you a couple of use cases where a standard CV would
| be beneficial to workers.
|
| 1. You want to apply to one position but you only have your
| data on LinkedIn. If you wanna export it, you only have PDF as
| an option. You can't adapt or update it. 2. Even if you can
| adapt or update it, if the company or service where you want to
| apply doesn't support a standard format, you will have to re-
| enter the data, one by one.
|
| Finally, all this friction discourages some candidates to apply
| to some positions.
| indymike wrote:
| I spent five years of my life working on this problem, and even
| got involved with the standards-making process. First, there
| already is a standard for resumes and has been for 20 years. It's
| called HR Open Standards Candidate (it is the successor to the
| old HR-XML standard, which in turn was based on OASYS). There are
| also five or six other attempts at making a standard CV / Resume
| too. The problem with all of them is that every time one gets
| adoption, another standard, usually created because the author
| was unaware or did not like the existing standard for some use
| case. In some cases the standard is de-facto, like the XML format
| Indeed uses, and in others it is a formal spec (like the HR Open
| Standards JSON family).
|
| The reason this problem is hard is that a resume is an
| intersection of multiple kinds of data: education, licenses,
| contact information, work history, and narrative text. Business
| can't even agree on how to best organize this data, or even how
| to represent it. Individuals? Well, the CV is all about me, and I
| want mine to uniquely be me -- even in that means using comic
| sans. Also, people don't look for jobs every day, so many make a
| new resume and a new profile whenever they start searching. So
| you have consumers of data (businesses) and creators of data (job
| seekers) who really are misaligned.
|
| Finally, business want perfect candidates, and people are not
| perfect. There's actually an incentive in job hunting for people
| to stretch the truth, which makes CV data unreliable regardless
| of format. In some cases, the automated screening is so tight
| that only a lie will get through the filter.
| clairity wrote:
| i just made up my own yaml format so i could easily create
| different versions of my resume for different job apps
| (generated through a static site generator, jekyll, in my
| case). i'm tempted to submit the yaml version rather than the
| visual version to make it easier for the machines to pass me on
| to the humans in the instances where i have to apply
| electronically. it has a bunch of points i comment out for a
| given job app to fit the compact visual format, but the
| machines can take all of it into account without issue, raising
| the potential hit rate.
| colesantiago wrote:
| This looks like this project will benefit machines more by
| screening candidates out automatically before they've reached the
| human stage.
|
| So effectively candidates will be rejected before they have even
| applied.
| tibanne wrote:
| Good company filter if you ask me.
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| This is an interesting concept but as we have seen when the
| semantic web started out it only really served to enhance search
| engines instead or large tech companies would internalize the
| semantics of the data. Making large formats for interoperability
| never really caught on.
|
| Naming the standard Mac is also an issue (due to a product by
| Apple Inc.) but since its an acronym you should always format it
| as MAC
| mdasen wrote:
| > since its an acronym you should always format it as MAC
|
| That's the American convention, but it can vary elsewhere. If
| you look at BBC articles, you'll find that initialisms (like
| HIV) will be capitalized, but acronyms (like Aids) will only
| have an initial capital letter. Since "Mac" will be pronounced
| rather than saying "M-A-C", the style in a lot of the world
| would be to only capitalize the "M".
|
| Wikipedia's English language style guide specifically notes
| that it doesn't follow the convention of distinguishing between
| acronyms and initialisms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiped
| ia:Manual_of_Style/Capi.... There's more information in the
| article about acronyms:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acronym#Case
|
| "Some publications choose to capitalize only the first letter
| of acronyms, reserving all-caps styling for initialisms,
| writing the pronounced acronyms "Nato" and "Aids" in mixed
| case, but the initialisms "USA" and "FBI" in all caps."
| charcircuit wrote:
| That already stands for message authentication code and media
| access control.
| amelius wrote:
| There's also a cosmetics company named MAC.
| gjvc wrote:
| The original is perhaps the Project on Mathematics and
| Computation by DARPA https://www.darpa.mil/about-
| us/timeline/project-mac
| iamdamian wrote:
| In my mind, "Use a standard, machine-readable CV to represent
| your skills and life's work" is practically saying, "Commodify
| yourself!"
| chris_st wrote:
| Unfortunately, in today's job market, the first (seemingly
| only, sometimes) gate is what keywords are in your online
| resume/CV for the software to find, and hand to a human
| recruiter. And, in my experience, the human may not know much
| more than the grep-equivalent, since if they had those
| technical skills, they'd probably be doing that, not
| recruiting.
|
| So, yeah, making it machine readable will help. This does not
| really negate what you said, but is another perspective.
| eropple wrote:
| Respectfully: I think this is the case if you yourself have
| commodity skills and don't know how to network. For folks who
| find themselves in this spot, the advice I've always given
| folks I mentor is to learn to do the networking thing and
| maybe pick up some stuff that's a little bit outside the norm
| but can be leveraged for multiplier effects in the job. (They
| exist! And they're usually pretty fun.)
|
| Speaking for myself, I've never gotten a job through a
| process either initiated by a cold email from a recruiter or
| from filtering through an automatic process on the HR side of
| things, and I have a boatload of experience and I like to say
| I'm pretty good at The Technical Thing. I get jobs from
| talking to people, and I help folks get jobs (at Mux, hi,
| we're hiring!) through talking to people. I got an email
| yesterday from a new hire who came onboard because he saw a
| Who's Hiring post on HN, shot me an email, and I connected
| him with our recruiters 'cause he sounded like he'd be a good
| fit. No robots involved, except the SMTP ones. This happens
| pretty regularly and a lot of the candidates might be ones
| who'd look like a bad fit for a keyword filter.
|
| There are jobs and there are people fit for jobs where
| keyword matching is a thing. There's also a _monstrously_
| large chunk of the industry where neither the job nor the
| ideal candidate can be expressed as such. So look at that,
| and then _be that_. And if you 're finding walls, find the
| right person to talk to to help you get around those walls,
| because at places you want to be, _people want more good
| folks to be there_.
| jka wrote:
| Would you like to connect on LinkedIn?
|
| </snark>
|
| I think that the success criteria in situations like this
| should be whether the project results in effective matches
| between employers and employees, _and_ avoids as much
| ineffective matching / wastage-of-time as possible.
| teekert wrote:
| The term "Human resource" already does that for me...
|
| "Do you have some resources for me?" "What kind?" "Human is
| fine, nice and flexible"
| iamdamian wrote:
| I agree with you that the phrase 'human resource' evokes
| feelings of commodification. The difference here, in my mind,
| is that the author of this format is asking people to
| commodify themselves.
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-27 23:01 UTC)