And we know what the adaptation is: calorie constraint. We evolved in a calorie constrained environment. We don't live in one now. Our set point for desire to eat is clearly too high. None of this means that glp-1 inhibitors don't have other side effects, of course.
My experience: hosted LLMs are very good, but even 30B models you run locally are quite poor (at least in Romanian). To some degree they still hallucinate words (they don't conjugate properly sometimes).
For one thing, viruses keep bacteria in check. Bacteria populations live in an equilibrium standoff with bacteriophages (viruses). The human gut contains more bacteriophage virions than bacterial cells. So eliminating all viruses could lead to bacteria overgrowth
Indeed. It is common to not have changed your mind about the thing someone is upset about, but not feel good that they are upset. There needs to be a way to communicate that
That was true of our process as it existed in 2017/2018 (and was a part of why that business was not viable). At this point, what we do is develop tests (backed by psychometric models). These are more accurate than human phone screens (and especially more accurate at finding people who have strong skills bad "bad" resumes)
I can't imagine the difficulty to accurately measure the success or failure of long-tail HR hiring processes like phone screens. The success or failure of a candidate post-hire has so many variables it must be very hard to attribute them to signals present in a screen. I imagine most of the data points are derived from signals found in successful candidates, and then trying to find them in an assessment or screen.
Its really hard, and I hope the negative tone of my comment does not suggest I don't respect the problemset and the people willing to throw themselves at it.
I’m the CEO of Triplebyte. I just looked into this, and we are not automatically making anyone's profile public without their consent. OP, it looks like you had set your profile to be visible some time ago (I can provide details via email but won’t here for privacy purposes), and just hadn’t gotten a message until now. The support response you received was incorrect; you weren’t affected by any recent changes to the site.
Since there wasn’t anything broken on our end, there shouldn’t be anyone else impacted by this. But as part of making sure that OP wasn’t visible by mistake, I had my team double-checked to make sure our previous fix from last year was properly retroactive. It was.
More generally, I don't think that tricking anyone is a viable way for us to run a business. We’re trying to create a marketplace that can open opportunities for engineers who wouldn’t otherwise have them, and we need the trust of engineers in order to do that.
As far as I can determine, the last deliberate interaction I had with Triplebyte was in May 2020, when I got an email with your name and address on it saying that my profile was about to be made public, and I replied the following day asking you to delete my account. (I assume you never saw that email, and in any case I never bothered to follow up on it through other channels.)
(EDIT: on closer inspection, the reply with my account deletion request went to candidate.support@triplebyte.com, not to you personally.)
I don't recall ever logging into my Triplebyte account between then and yesterday, and I couldn't find any evidence of doing so in my browser or search history. I guess that's your word against mine, but if you have reason to believe I'm mistaken, you're welcome to send it to me privately.
> The support response you received was incorrect
I'm very curious as to where the incorrect information came from, then.
Just following up on this, in case anyone's still reading. This is the response Triplebyte sent me yesterday:
> As mentioned on HackerNews, we cannot locate any emails from you before today. After getting in touch with the product team, I realized I had made a mistake. Upon doing a bit of digging on the back end, you set your profile set to be visible in 2019 prior to the 2020 events.
I guess I can't concretely disprove this story, but I have a really hard time buying it. I don't remember even being given the option to make my profile public when I tried out Triplebyte in 2019. To back up my recollection, the messages that they sent out about the "public profiles" feature in 2020 described it pretty unequivocally as a new feature that hadn't existed previously. Archived versions of Triplebyte's FAQ from 2019/2020 make no mention of it; they only talk about the ability to be matched with companies after completing a full interview with Triplebyte (which I never did).
And if the person who initially responded to me truly did just make a mistake, that would certainly be no big deal -- but it seems like an oddly specific and convenient mistake to make.
I responded about 24 hours ago saying why I found these explanations unconvincing, and haven't heard back. I'm posting here not to try to pressure Triplebyte into a response, but because (a) I don't know how much longer this thread will stay open to new comments, and (b) I don't really think it's likely that I'll get any further closure about this issue, so I don't plan to spend any more of my time and energy on it. People are welcome to read the discussion and judge for themselves.
> To back up my recollection, the messages that they sent out about the "public profiles" feature in 2020 described it pretty unequivocally as a new feature that hadn't existed previously.
The "public" profiles we announced (and rolled back) at the time were distinct from the visible-to-Triplebyte-subscriber-companies profiles we have today (and had in late 2019). "Visible" is doing double-duty here between public-to-the-internet (which we never ended up doing) and visible-on-our-platform (which predated the 2020 announcement).
We have no record of such an email under either the email on your account or your name (and we checked and we do have records of other emails in the same time window, including many other people who emailed us at the time for the same reason you did). I'm not sure why (have you perhaps changed your name or email since?).
I'm going to have our support team get back in touch with you via email for further details here. Can you reply here if you haven't been able to do at least one round of back-and-forth with them within the next day or so?
> have you perhaps changed your name or email since?
Nope. Just to show that I'm not yanking your chain, this is the email I'm referring to: https://imgur.com/2FpAiik
The redacted name and email address are exactly the same as when I contacted you yesterday.
To be clear, I'm not trying to criticize you for not taking action on this message, because for all I know it could have gotten dropped by a mail server along the way. I'm just using it to illustrate the fact that I wasn't even aware that I still had an active Triplebyte account, so I find it implausible that I logged in, set my profile to public, and then completely forgot about it.
> Can you reply here if you haven't been able to do at least one round of back-and-forth with them within the next day or so?
> To be clear, I'm not trying to criticize you for not taking action on this message, because for all I know it could have gotten dropped by a mail server along the way. I'm just using it to illustrate the fact that I wasn't even aware that I still had an active Triplebyte account, so I find it implausible that I logged in, set my profile to public, and then completely forgot about it.
I have a bit broader of a question: Triblebyte is a screening platform, what business does it have making "public profiles" in the first place? Wouldn't you want to ensure that only vetted companies with vetted personnel are looking through the candidate pool? I would be worried about the litany of tech businesses that have straight up awful recruiting practices would somehow impact my reputation as a platform if it's open access.
> We’re trying to create a marketplace that can open opportunities for engineers who wouldn’t otherwise have them
Provided they're in the US. My experience as a European has been: more or less everything I apply to ignores my application. I haven't checked recently, is it changing?
I'm not implying you're wrong since you used the word trying to create. Moreover, you didn't specifically specify which group of engineers you're trying to create opportunities for. I don't even want to go in a right or wrong type of frame, because it doesn't matter, but my lack of eloquence might give that impression.
What I am implying is that the statement is a bit broad. On a more emotional (perhaps even non-rational) note: I feel spoken to yet left out, for years now.
Most employers on Triplebyte (90%) are hiring in the US currently. However, we're working on something that us going to change that (announcement coming soon).
As a Canadian, it seemed like at least 30% of remote employers were open to hiring from Canada (although it was often marked incorrectly in your system).
At the very least, a couple of U.S. companies with remote positions that claimed to be U.S. only (or "work authorization required?"), reached out to me.
Did they actually check your location or reached out randomly? Or, were they expecting you to relocate? I'm located in Switzerland and get often such bogus messages from German companies (although not on Triplebyte but I assume the bad habits are universal).
I think 2 companies reached out to me that said U.S. only in the job descriptions.
But I think some companies select U.S. only because Americans tend forget about other countries where people may be in the same time zone.
It's possible German companies are reluctant to engage with a Swiss person because German salaries are lower than what I understand Swiss salaries to be (German CoL is also much lower though)
> My experience as a European has been: more or less everything I apply to ignores my application. I haven't checked recently, is it changing?
We actually just (like, two days ago) shipped a change to be more restrictive about how we show jobs based on location. And we have a few things in the works (unfortunately I can't share details) that might result in significant increases in activity for engineers outside the US.
> Moreover, you didn't specifically specify which group of engineers you're trying to create opportunities for.
The simplest way to put this is "we want engineers who can do the job to be able to get hired". That is obviously a pie-in-the-sky goal that is more aspirational than anything else (you're never going to bat 1.000), but it's the guiding principle.
In a more on-the-ground sense, we think our assessments allow engineers who do well on them to get company attention that they might not otherwise get. And we have hard data to suggest that we are correct. Each assessment with a score of 3 or higher on an application roughly doubles the chance that that application is accepted, for example, and the overwhelming majority of outbound messages on Triplebyte go to engineers with at least one such score on their profile.
So why have I gotten 5 emails from your system in the last 24 hours when I had forgotten you existed and haven't logged into my account in at least 18 months?
I don't know what your account is specifically, so I can't say for sure.
But if I had to guess? It's because we've been ramping up a feature that is increasing the amount of outbound on our site by a very large margin (currently almost an order of magnitude) from where it was a couple of months ago.
I would login to the account, but your login page doesn't allow any actions in firefox and in chrome while it never seems to finish loading, when I click on forgot password it tries to load https://triplebyte.com/users/password/new which just spins and never loads a page.
So, under the old model, order 200k engineers applied to us. Because we were exclusive gatekeepers, around 3% of those were "accepted" onto the platform. Around 2/3 of accepted candidates received an offer, and around 1/2 of offers were accepted.
I don't know much about them, but the post does say their goal was to be "exclusive gatekeepers". If you consider it from that perspective, they had more like a 1/3 conversion rate (2/3 * 1/2). But conversion kind of seems like the wrong metric.
What metric would make more sense here, though? I can agree that from TBs perspective, they may not factor total applicants as their base # (although that is clearly their market). However this exclusivity of only using the small percentage they accept doesn’t seem to be a scalable business model. Having 1% of the devs who try their service actually accept an offer would not entice me to try their service.
>However this exclusivity of only using the small percentage they accept doesn’t seem to be a scalable business model.
For sure. That's very likely why they're making this pivot. Exclusivity was their goal, but it just turned out to not be a very profitable goal for them, it seems. I was basically just saying it seemed to be a "theory" issue rather than an "implementation/execution" issue.
