Facebook to Launch Job Postings Board | Hacker News Reader

Facebook to Launch Job Postings Board

online.wsj.com

26 pointsselvan26 comments

The last thing people would want to do is apply for a job using a personal profile. This would be worse than applying with a foxydude84@hotmail.com address.

Edit: Also, I think they've really lost the plot now and seem to be desperate for the "next big thing".

Its more like lets try to keep our 30B valuation because if we don't grow up to that level then we go to $5 dollars a share. Everyone on board is motivated to do this.

Exactly. It's a top-down "gonna be the next Google," but in this case, "let's absorb some LinkedIn functionality."

I don't see it as desperation so much as "why not?" It's like a business version of infill:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infill

It's cheap for them to start taking money for job ads and creating a place where they can be accessed, and maybe even recommending jobs based on likes or previous company associations or whatever.

You're right that people will be reluctant at first to apply within FB's domain for a job posting. But think of it from the company's viewpoint: they'll have the same potential access to the targeted demographic data that advertisers do. They could greatly increase the signal to noise ratio in the job apps they get, all the meanwhile letting applicants apply through email.

And as FB becomes a ubiquitous job board, people will get used to it being a part of their lives, and will adjust their profiles accordingly

And as FB becomes a ubiquitous job board, people will get used to it being a part of their lives, and will adjust their profiles accordingly

This kind of fairy-dust reasoning might have sounded plausible pre-IPO.

The thing is that to make a Facebook profile something acceptable to a potential employer, you to not only have to change your entire profile but make your friends tone down all their stuff. Which means essentially changing everything about your profile. And basically you'd put an end to most of the fun that gives anyone an incentive to be on Facebook.

Or you could create a linkedin profile.

What sounds easier?

I've never been in a position to hire anyone, so what sort of demographics would an employer search for?

Employers aren't generally allowed to search for, or look at, most 'demographic' information (age, race, gender, etc.). That's part of the big problem with this...

My pessimistic self sees a future where some jobs will only be available if you:

- Have facebook a account.

- Allow your potential employer to see everything in your personal profile.

Don't have a facebook account or don't want to share intimate details not related to the job? Well too bad, because there are plenty of desperate people that will.

I see facebook's mission is to be the one universal ID system, superseding passports issued by governments. To achieve that, personal profiles must be correct and accurate. Being a job search site is a calculated step in that direction, not a desperate search for a business model.

Discrimination law suits have resulted in employers not daring to ask something like "Are you married?". Same thing will happen if employers require you to open your Facebook account to them, which is like asking all possible personal questions all at once. Some good laws would be made too.

Anti-discrimination laws are rooted in the federal government's Commerce power, aren't they? I don't think we know yet the implications of the ACA ruling there. If you can't force people to engage in commercial activity they don't want (buy health insurance they don't want to buy), how can you force them to engage in commercial activity they don't want (employ people they don't want to employ)?

Facebook profiles can be expected to contain information about one's religion, sexuality, and other factors employers aren't allowed to ask about, and can get sued for trying to find out. At worst FB could create a sanitized version of your profile to share with employers.

Yes, I trust Facebook to not leak those private details through a confusion of unintuitive privacy settings, poorly thought out changes to the software, and plain ol' security holes.

Yeah I'm sure that companies are going to invest millions in finding zero day exploits and find legal nuances to find out if the employee is a Muslim or gay before hiring them...

Well, if there's a privacy error made on facebook's part, there's no investment necessary.

As far as exploits, it only takes one company willing to sell that exploit to others.

Let's assume FB will cover Microsoft's old turf.

That said, I wouldn't want to work through FB/MS anyway (think MS Certs, 'corporate dev bloat' with SharePoint... Now... FB Job Auth API). And I might be able to leverage my 'brand aversion' to isolate dev shops I do wish to work under. They probably would prefer it that I not allow the 'excess' of FB into my life anyway. Or they might simply find FB's brand generally repugnant. All in all, FB won't be leading tech-intersect-science innovation (designer drugs through cool UIs, all the NP-hard problems that come from dual hypertext/image cool URIs, neural networks and actual utilities and ecological solutions). FB, at best, will be the ID/human-auth system for SpaceX.

FB has inherently limited itself to custodian software. Keeping the 'human namespace' tidy. Boring. Like MS and its 'hardware philanthropy' FB just wants to be present with the path of least resistence. MS succeeded with its imperative to put hardware everywhere, and they naturally earn market victory with that. Well, now humans are the new hardware, and FB is approaching that model. 'Desperation' should be determined based on how closely FB mirrors MS's Moore's Law Model. That would presuppose artificial shaping of the market (something along the lines of eugenics-thinking).

There will still be innovation, and that's what we will compete for.

Since this is based on a social network platform, it seems to me that it would exacerbate cronyism...

facebook is really desperate to find a business model...seems like they are throwing the kitchen sink at the wall and seeing what sticks.

that's fine for a startup...but for a company that has IPOed it's just plain sad.

There has never in history been a company quite like Facebook. Its wild scale, its international reach, its years-long user engagement.

They're in entirely uncharted territory. The potential models are numerous and they're not getting any younger. I'm not sure what else they can be expected to do besides try a lot of things. No one else has the opportunity, so why not explore while they still can?

The interesting thing about this observation is that it could equally be applied to older tech companies.

Some notables have strayed far from their origins: Apple (was computers: now also phones), Microsoft (was operating systems: now also phones and search), Oracle (was databases: now also enterprise software and hardware), HP (was calculators: now computers, printers, and consulting), Google (was search: now also phones, social, etc.). These changes all happened post-IPO.

It seems that being desperate to find a business model is not a bad strategy for a tech company.

Depending upon how this evolves, it could cause legal issues for employers who make postings. It's illegal to discriminate by a lot of personal information such as nationality, age, race, whether they have children. All of this information is quite obvious when you look at someone's Facebook profile.

IANAL and don't know enough about employment law to know if this is a legitimate concern. It doesn't sound like this is a very serious effort ("Facebook had a third-party developer create the new site"), so maybe there's nothing to be worried about.

Look at LinkedIns stock price. Now look back at Facebook's. Now look at what LinkedIns tries to do. Back to Facebook.

This is a great idea. So far FB has been doing an awesome job. Even with a rocky start, shares dropping before $30, they have proven that they know what they are doing; share prices are all back on the up and up.

Is it possible that they're just following through on the US Dept Labor initiative and this is a PR play with the some good engagement drivers as much as it is a foray into anything else? Seems like it's being telegraphed that way.

Well at least this will solve the "employers asking for passwords" dilemma. Don't want to cough over your password? That's fine, just apply to our company on Facebook, we'll get what we need that way.

/only slight sarcasm

this could be monetized by sharing cpc revenue and cpa revenue from the different boards. could easily generate $100M in revenue in 1 year for them.

This figure is total guesswork btw before you start asking where i came up with it. it is "FMA" (reference to House of Lies)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com