←back to thread

369 points surprisetalk | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.427s | source
Show context
kashunstva ◴[] No.45064812[source]
I have no idea to what extent Anthropic or other employers delve into prospective candidates’ blogs; but this strikes me as too much self-disclosure for one’s own good. We all have idiosyncrasies; but calling oneself weird on a now widely published blog article seems like it risks defeating the goal of making oneself an ideal candidate for many job opportunities. Look, many of my own eccentricities have been (net) valuable to be professionally and personally, but it was probably better they be revealed “organically” rather than through a public act of self-disclosure.
replies(10): >>45064862 #>>45064865 #>>45064983 #>>45065002 #>>45065126 #>>45067111 #>>45068377 #>>45068654 #>>45068754 #>>45071285 #
kelnos ◴[] No.45068754[source]
On one hand I agree with you, but on the other... I don't really want to live in a world where being oneself (a perfectly fine, good self) is a liability.

I know I have privilege in being able to say this, but I'd rather get rejected by potential employers who don't get me, than have to pretend to be someone I'm not.

replies(1): >>45069043 #
x3n0ph3n3 ◴[] No.45069043[source]
Being oneself is fine. Being too online may not be.
replies(1): >>45071092 #
1. mananaysiempre ◴[] No.45071092[source]
The phrase “too online” has a connotation that situates it in the 2020s or at worst the late 2010s to an extent that I don’t think really fits a degree of “online” you could have been literally before the invention of the Web.