Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #739934
| From | Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.electronics.design, comp.arch.embedded |
| Subject | Re: good post on LinkedIn |
| Date | 2026-01-31 03:40 +0000 |
| Organization | To protect and to server |
| Message-ID | <10ljtjk$6pv3$1@paganini.bofh.team> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <10lfqlq$3ji9g$1@paganini.bofh.team> <10li54l$21j3m$2@dont-email.me> <bmepnkpikq74292em8uqlimgfakspqanvr@4ax.com> <10linsv$28d57$1@dont-email.me> <dvvpnkhpugt5kad30mjb6pk7vngm27ptof@4ax.com> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
In case this post is too long: I do not recommend any of you to bother
to create an account on LinkedIn. The USENET is much better, but I
interact on LinkedIn with important non-engineers who insist on using
LinkedIn. One of the most important thereof even almost does not use
emails!
Don Y wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 12:36:44 -
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"On 1/29/2026 7:26 AM, Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester wrote: |
|> LinkedIn is legally obligated to provide copies of comments, but |
|> LinkedIn acts illegally. If you want to back up comments which you|
|> uploaded to LinkedIn, then now might be the time to back them up. |
| |
|Why not just scrape the site" |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
How?
"User Agreement
Effective on November 3, 2025
[. . .]
8.2. Don’ts
You agree that you will not:
[. . .]
Develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots or any
other means or processes (such as crawlers, browser plugins and
add-ons or any other technology) to scrape or copy the Services"
says
HTTPS://WWW.LinkedIn.com/legal/user-agreement
|--------------------------------------------------|
|" -- instead |
|of trying to encapsulate it in a single document."|
|--------------------------------------------------|
I saved hundreds of comments from years into a single document because
LinkedIn does not even pretnd to offer a less laborious way of backing
them up. I do not want this lame method. LinkedIn forces me.
Don Y wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 12:36:44 -
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"> Microsoft Edge took circa 12 minutes to produce this PDF file. |
| |
|None of hose metrics mean anything. It takes me an hour to get to the post|
|office (on foot!)." |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Don Y wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 17:56:54 -
|------------------------------------------------------------|
|"Another way to waste resources (in this case, your time!)."|
|------------------------------------------------------------|
Sorry, Don Y contradicts himself at 12:36:44 and 17:56:54. Time is
measured as a value more than no second. These metrics are meaningful.
It took me many tens of minutes to use a webbrowser to download circa
352 comments from LinkedIn (after it took me 5 DAYS to download almost
the same quantity (circa 470 comments) as I complain in
Message-ID: <a466fba3-4f96-5968-faef-db94f1e721a5@insomnia247.nl>
).
Instead, it took me circa 18 MINUTES to use a USENET client to
download 289 articles from alt.comp.periphs.cdr.mac
I.e. LinkedIn is slow and the USENET is fast.
N.B. that USENET client was invoked as a background process via
setsid &
so I myself could concurrently do something interesting and useful,
whereas to archive from LinkedIn I used a tedious webbrowser with a
PgDn key in a manner less pleasurable than watching paint dry, while
hoping that Microsoft Egde would not again emit:
"!
This page is having a problem
Try coming back to it later.
You could also:
* Open a new tab
* Refresh this page"
These circa 352 LinkedIn comments take up circa 86 MEGAbytes or 238
MEGAbytes.
Instead these 289 alt.comp.periphs.cdr.mac articles take up 772
KILObytes.
I.e. LinkedIn is excessively inefficient. As Don Y is lucky enough to
not use LinkedIn, he does not know that all LinkedIn comments are
small because LinkedIn imposes an excessive limitation.
Don Y wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 12:36:44 -
|------------------------------------------------------------|
|"I can't comment on LinkedIn as no one that I know uses it. |
|My understanding (?) is that it is a networking site -- a |
|way to "get jobs". |
| |
|Most of my colleagues have more than enough work without |
|any sort of "advertising" or "job mining". Makes you wonder|
|what the folks using it are lacking... (REAL contacts??)" |
|------------------------------------------------------------|
Don Y wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 17:56:54 -
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"On 1/30/2026 7:24 AM, legg wrote: |
|[. . .] |
| |
|[...] LinkedIn. AFAICT, it just lets folks advertise other people |
|that they know/endorse. The practical effect of that is referrals|
|(which is another way of saying "get jobs")." |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
Don Y sent these paragraphs to the UseNET as a NETWORKING exercise,
whether or not he has "more than enough work".
LinkedIn is a networking website.
LinkedIn is MARKETED as "a
way to "get jobs""
which is VERY DIFFERENT FROM ACTUALLY BEING "a
way to "get jobs"".
I repost many job advertisements on LinkedIn. (This is a signifcant
reason for a person (and apparently persons) following me on LinkedIn,
even though said person owns his own (probably profitable) company and
probably does not need such a job and probably shall not apply for
such a job and if he does, then he really does not need LinkedIn for
it anyway.) I warn in many of these reposts that this employer is
evil.
One student was interested in one of these jobs but it is an unpaid
internship in a continent which he would have to move to in an
extortionately expensive neighborhood, so I warned him and I gave him
a tip on a way to find an apartment if he really would go thru with
it.
Precisely no LinkedIn post and no LinkedIn comment by me is a job
application. I use LinkedIn to communicate with real contacts, like
the USENET, except that one USENET article by me is an application for
a job.
No one who ever follows me on LinkedIn or who connected with me on
LinkedIn or who invited me to connect with him or her on LinkedIn ever
applies to me for a job.
Indeed, overworked professionals invited me to connect with them on
LinkedIn in 2025. I offered to contract them. One replied declining
explaining that he is not competent for this would-be contract, so he
contacted a colleague for me. I did not get a response from a
different one, but he is busy with even more significant
projects. ("Newsweek" began publishing an article by him during
January 2026. He also publishes articles in major international
newspapers. He is not "lacking... (REAL contacts"! I did not receive
a response from him to contract him, but he did thank me for detecting
that LinkedIn suppressed an exposé by him.
I already had "more than enough work" when I created an account on
LinkedIn. I had not a job which actually pays money when I created an
account on LinkedIn - and LinkedIn alas did not change this. Cf.
HTTPS://PHDComics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=937
LinkedIn is not just to
"advertise other people
that they know/endorse."
LinkedIn also lets discussions, but LinkedIn does not do so well.
Legg wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 15:24:48 -
#---------------------------------------------------------------#
#"[. . .] #
#It has groups, similar to Facebook, [. . .] #
#[. . .] #
# #
#20yrs ago it was pretty useful. [. . .] #
#[. . .] #
# #
#Tapping into 20 year old threads (where all the good references#
#and articles were being discussed)in such a group is well-night#
#impossible." #
#---------------------------------------------------------------#
True. Accessing such old USENET threads is easy. Scrolling thru a few
years of LinkedIn comments results in Microsoft Edge screwing up with:
"!
This page is having a problem
Try coming back to it later.
You could also:
* Open a new tab
* Refresh this page"
Legg wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 15:24:48 -
#-----------------------------------------------------------------#
#"Like Facebook, it is heavily dependent on your machines' RAM and#
#is unfriendly to non-google, non-chrome browsers. This may be #
#why Edge is having issues: it would serve MS right. #
# #
#RL" #
#-----------------------------------------------------------------#
LinkedIn is limited whatever way one accesses it. This is not specific
to Microsoft Edge. Microsoft owns LinkedIn.
HTTPS://wiki.ICEList.Is/index.php/LinkedIn
HTTPS://wiki.ICEList.Is/index.php/Meta_Platforms
Legg posted via
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
which is not a "google," "chrome browser".
Don Y wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 17:56:54 -
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
|"On 1/30/2026 7:24 AM, legg wrote: |
|[. . .] |
|> Networking is just keeping track of co-workers and professional|
|> acquaintances - but there's no real controls on spam. |
| |
|And, you need a third-party "site" to do that?" |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
Yes, because they insist on using LinkedIn.
Don Y wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 17:56:54 -
|------------------------------------------------------------|
|"If I'm contacted about a potential job, I think about the |
|people that I know who might be appropriate (because anyone |
|that I refer for a position is a reflection on me!). |
|Who (if anyone) I contact is based on my knowledge of where |
|their interests lie and what they might be doing, presently.|
| |
|I know those things because of communications with them |
| directly -- not by "reading about them" on a site." |
|------------------------------------------------------------|
Good. Exactly as the aforementioned person who contacted a colleague
for me for a project which I propose.
Don Y wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 18:05:31 -
|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|"Similarly, if I am contacted about a particular employer, |
|client or potential employee, I can give a candid appraisal|
|without fear of reprisals or running afoul of legalities." |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|
Good unlike LinkedIn. LinkedIn offers a thumb-up icon without a
thumb-down icon. LinkedIn wants you to say that a person is
good. LinkedIn does not want you to say that a person is bad.
Legg wrote on Fri, 30 Jan 2026 20:22:45 -
#-----------------------------------------------------------#
#"It used to be a discussion of work-related issues and news#
#between people you knew, or were introduced to on-site. #
#Jobs or contracts seldom came up, as I recall. Participants#
#were just too disparate in specialized fields. #
# #
#[. . .] #
# #
#Supplying references to articles and publications was the #
#primary benefit, as well as keeping in touch." #
#-----------------------------------------------------------#
Yes.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-29 14:26 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-29 09:04 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-29 17:57 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-29 10:59 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-30 00:48 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-29 17:01 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-30 01:28 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-30 15:14 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 11:52 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 16:05 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 12:34 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 07:29 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 20:59 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-01 03:06 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-02 00:17 +1100
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-01-31 23:21 +0000
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 16:22 -0800
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-02-01 02:13 +0000
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-31 19:31 -0700
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2026-02-01 21:58 +0100
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-01 14:36 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 03:56 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 15:23 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 14:36 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 21:31 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-30 14:59 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-01-30 10:15 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 00:06 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-01-30 13:43 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 02:18 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 08:04 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 03:51 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 09:46 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-30 20:00 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-01-30 22:49 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-30 22:52 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 16:02 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 13:33 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 01:31 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 19:16 +0000
Re: history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-01-31 23:10 +0000
Sorry re history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 23:25 +0000
Re: Sorry re history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-02-01 02:43 +0000
Re: Sorry re history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn OrangeFish <OrangeFish@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-01 18:00 -0500
Re: history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2026-02-01 22:11 +0100
Re: history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-01 14:42 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 21:36 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 15:53 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 16:14 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-01-31 11:21 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 07:34 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-01-31 21:42 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 13:36 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 21:57 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-01 03:10 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-02 00:37 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-01 07:36 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-03 16:27 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2026-02-01 22:21 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-01-31 09:00 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 15:45 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 14:26 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 13:53 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 16:25 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 07:41 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-01-31 17:33 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 10:07 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-31 11:26 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 22:04 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-01 07:38 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-03 16:37 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-01-30 15:06 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 11:55 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn wmartin <wwm@wwmartin.net> - 2026-01-30 11:27 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 18:54 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 23:26 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-01-31 09:22 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-31 02:50 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 04:36 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> - 2026-01-30 09:24 -0500
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 09:56 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 10:05 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> - 2026-01-30 14:22 -0500
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 19:09 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> - 2026-01-30 22:16 -0500
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 22:27 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 03:40 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 22:46 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 15:20 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-31 08:44 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 17:13 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 07:55 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 08:15 -0800
csiph-web