Ask HN: How to explain job gaps on the resume? - <AUTHOR> I'm interviewing with several companies for SDE roles and have a gap of > 12 months since my last job. Is this a career killer and a huge red flag for any hiring manager?
The real reason for a break was medical but then got out of hand given i had enough savings to support myself and sort of slacked for a while (like 3-4 months).
Now i feel completely healthy, refreshed, passionate and ready to rock again. What is the best way to mitigate this issue when applying / interviewing?
Do you have any advices learned from previous experience or caveats i should be prepared for?
PS. My total work experience is 5+ yrs. <comment><USER2> A gap in your resume is called a sabbatical. You spent a year doing something else that's more important to you because you can afford it. Medical plus some recovery time is a great reason. But just playing around with some new tech, investing in your education, or even spending time on your other interests, work for charity, or see something of the world, are great reasons. Slacking off may not sound great, but many employers are unlikely to care that much about the gap, and if they do, there's always a more interesting way to phrase it.

<comment><USER3> Also, if you had good reason to take time off, but the future employer still has a problem with it, you probably don't want to work for them anyway.

<comment><USER4> I think this sort of statement is thrown around too lightly. It's a bad sign, but there's a limited amount of signal in it. It may not correlate strongly with employee experience, and lots of other positive factors might outweigh it.

Maybe it's just one recruiter's resume filter. Maybe the company actually has a great medical leave policy, or pays really well, or works on something the OP is super excited by. Or maybe the company is just really, irrationally weird about applicants having gaps on their resume, but is otherwise perfectly normal, and it doesn't matter ever again after OP signs an offer.

Sure, given two offers from otherwise identical companies OP should count this as a mark against, and sign an offer from someone who doesn't care. Given offers that _aren 't_ otherwise identical, though, what's it worth? $5k in salary? More? Less?

<comment><USER5> > though, what's it worth? $5k in salary? More? Less?

Maybe a huge amount. If an employer has a negative predisposition towards you, and you already have a small negative signal on your own resume (gap)-- they have the potential to really screw things up for you. The amount of suck you might endure is unbounded, and the probability of your recent experience on your resume becoming _worse_ is too high.

<comment><USER6> I think this answer misses the point, which is that this information is only a weak predictor of the problems you describe, thus must be discounted accordingly.

<comment><USER5> How do you discount "personal catastrophe" appropriately, though? Surely the volatility in outcomes is very important, and not some simple expected value.

A 5% chance of my house burning down is much more costly to me than 5% of the economic cost of my house burning down. Indeed, there's not really a (reasonable) discounted price I will take for a chance of my house burning down.

Of course, this kind of aggressive avoidance of risk is exactly the thing we are annoyed with the employer for... But most employers do not have their eggs in one basket to the extent that someone returning to their career from a gap does.

<comment><USER6> You normally wouldn't discount linearly. But that doesn't mean you can't put a price on it. There's a limit to how much you'd pay for insurance, for example. Some risk is part of life.

<comment><USER5> I didn't say one can't put some price on it. I said "maybe a huge amount" in comparison to someone saying that perhaps one would value it at $5k.

$5k this year is small compared to future potential career earnings; not much of a difference in probability of losing those is required to far exceed $5k. Just strict linear expected value could be bad, let alone when one weights the risk and volatility.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> As a person who's reviewed a lot of resumes, I don't actively look for job gaps, so I probably wouldn't notice. I'm more interested in what technologies you use (role), and what you've done in the past (experience). As long as you are sharp and know your stuff, you'll do fine.

Even if it is a red flag to some, I strongly believe software interviewing is a numbers game, due to randomness and bad interview processes. And once you do get a job and get back in the workforce, if you don't like it, you can switch again. And you at least won't be in the middle of a current gap.

I'd just definitely have a a go-to answer when you interview, and medical is a totally fine answer there. I don't think any competent hiring manager would ask past that due to legal risk (although there's always someone who asks illegal questions at interviews anyway).

Best of luck!

<comment><USER8> Can I bring up the converse question - who would actively look for job gaps? And why?

<comment><USER9> I usually look for time patterns in CVs. Gaps could be part of that. If someone turns over many jobs quickly I don't want to pay to bring someone up to speed only to see them leave when they should hit their stride. Or a month or 2 gap after every job can indicate they are getting the boot as most people swap one job for another.

But one gap for a year, not many would really care I suspect as long as there is a reasonable rationale if they do ask.

If someone had many long gaps then if might flag there is something going on and you'd dig around.

<comment> another-dave > Or a month or 2 gap after every job can indicate they are getting the boot > as most people swap one job for another.

Or it's a chance to take a stress-free break after finishing up one job as you've already another lined up.

<comment><USER9> Possible. I try to do that myself every change but typically I find/see companies wants you ASAP (especially if you have a decent notice period already) and is flexible with a week or few, not a month or few unless executive level.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The things you do between roles define you as a person and make you interesting. Use them as such. Tell the truth: I was sick, had enough savings to heal up and take some time off, and now I'm fresh and ready for the fight. I also did X Y Z and A B C, had some fun. Play time's over, and I'm looking to work hard.

If they can't appreciate that, then they wouldn't appreciate you in general. A self-solving problem.

<comment><USER11> Personally, I would never, ever mention _anything whatsoever_ about my health in a professional setting (or a personal one, but that is a different topic). It's absolutely none of their business, and invites silent discrimination, or worry about future health issues. In the best case it frames you as someone who is sometimes sidelined, not hearty. Why do that to your sales image?

My grandfather had a saying: never talk about your health unless it's good.

I have some relatively minor and common chronic health issues (fortunately well-managed). The day my clients or upstreams hear about any of them will be the day they are invited to my funeral—not before.

<comment><USER12> I knew a guy who was desperate to fill a cashier job. I recommended my friend who fit the bill - honest, able to stay in the same spot all day, polite, has managed teams. The guy was excited.

However, he got into an accident once, lost a leg, which was reattached and partially replaced with metal a few years ago. He walks with a limp, but can walk and stand fine. It shouldn't affect his job unless it involves heavy lifting or running.

What shocked me was just how fast the potential employer changed his tone when he found out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Those are rookie numbers. 12 months is nothing. Try an 8 year gap - after an initial 3 years experience working as a .NET dev.

I lived below US poverty level for 8 years with a CS degree and did the bare minimum of shitty contract jobs because I didn't want to be coding for someone else... eventually I realized I suck working for myself. (and now I have a normal 6 figure dev job)

The main thing you have to have is a story. I lied and said I enjoyed coding products in SecondLife and made tens of thousands of dollars coding inside a videogame, even though the truth was I only made a couple thousand. I also made my contract work sound more important, and went through the various startup ideas I tried and had a good story on why they failed. As long as story sounds plausible, it seems like you learned things related to the work, and you seem like a good person someone will give a shot as contract-to-hire even with an 8 year gap. So I think a one year gap won't be a problem at all, you shouldn't even need to do contract-to-hire.

</comment><comment><USER14> Just tell the truth. Medical is a perfectly valid reason.

Tangent: What does it say about hiring culture that a gap of 3 months is a potential deal breaker? Like anybody who would ever deign to not be employed by choice is unhirable. God forbid that people are defined by anything other than having a career working for others. A person's worth is not defined by how much economic value they create.

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you think the vague `medical` needs further elaboration?

I sure do know my medical is not related to mental health. Is it reasonable to somehow indicate that or it should be better left for an interviewer to inquire?

<comment><USER15> In the USA I am pretty sure it is actually illegal for a company to discriminate based on health issues, so a smart recruiter will NOT push this issue further than Medical. It would violate a few things and not be great if you sued and used that in court.

<comment><USER16> Legally, they can't, but the fact that you were out for months for an unspecified medical issue suggests you're likely to have more medical issues and thus would be a reason to be less likely to hire you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'd just tell the truth, I've taken off plenty of time and I generally just put it on my resume to save them having to ask: "took of some time for health related reasons and then decided to use my savings to spend some time with my passions" or whatever it is in your case. If this is a problem for a hiring manager, that's probably a red flag for you as well. I hope it doesn't end up being a problem for you; it's never been one for me, but every company is different. Best of luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! I'm still a bit hesitant to add a section describing the nature of the hiatus to a list of previous work experiences.

Seems a bit unprofessional to me as if the work experience is sorted in descending order — the gap is gonna be at the top.

So i'm at crossroads here: risk and add the medical section or prepare an answer if a follow up question even occurs. With former i'm blatantly throwing it to the face, with the latter i'm more moderate.

<comment><USER18> Contrary to what most people are saying here, I would advise to not mention medical issues. People are weird: they will be understanding and have sympathy, but when it comes to who gets the job, there's a good chance this will work against you. Not openly (it's illegal, after all), but subconsciously. Don't see this as lying; remember that it is your right to not mention this. Of course, you shouldn't conjure up some fantasy story of what you did during that time either, but in my opinion, labeling this as a sabbatical is OK.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for adressing this as this is a very valid point.

I was at the start of the process with two major companies in their respective markets just weeks after i got hospitalized (which echoed back my 12 mth hiatus later).

At the initial screening i have mentioned the reason of reschedule to be the hospital stuff. Words of support and `i know a person who have had the same problem` type of stuff came along. Next thing i know i'm out of the loop with both HMs.

One can only question was this a coincidence or an assesment i wasn't going to fit due to health troubles.

<comment><USER18> I'm going out on a limb here, but I'd say this was not a coincidence. For HR, possible medical issues are _always_ a red flag. This is the reason they're not allowed to ask about that stuff. Frankly, I'm a bit astonished by the other answers in this thread who say it's fine to mention this. Ask yourself: If there's another applicant with similar qualifications but without medical issues in the past, who would get the job? What can you possibly gain by mentioning this?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I had a 5 years gap in my career - all medical. Recently, right after that gap, I was intervieweing with multiple companies - most of them didn't even ask me, even though I was worried as hell. In the end I got almost all job offers I wanted. The only notable exception that didn't even grant me a phone screen was Amazon, their recruiter told me that ML has advanced so much in those 5 years that all my prior experience is totally irrelevant to them anymore. Oh, really. Whatever. In the end I ended up joining Facebook.

So with your 12 months gap and your prior experience, I would say nothing to worry about.

<comment><USER20> > ML has advanced so much in those 5 years that all my prior experience is > totally irrelevant to them

Most people involved in hiring are either not involved with the work being hired for, and thus have no idea about that side of things. Or else they're total amateurs at hiring itself who have, by virtue of having some measure of authority over it, deluded themselves into thinking they are awesome at it.

Arrogance and bias will lose you an awful lot of qualified applicants.

It's not even that _hard_ to work around that problem, if you're willing to shut up and listen. You can easily factor an objection as a concern instead of shutting them down entirely, which lets the applicant either show you that it isn't a major problem after all, or respond in a way that confirms that maybe it is.

<comment><USER21> I can understand if he's a PhD level scientist recruit. That it takes a while to digest all the newest methodologies if he hasn't been following.

A data engineer should have no such problem. Anecdotally, when I was recruited to Amazon, all of the people who made the shots are either SDE or SDM. It could also be a way of telling you that "This role has already filled", as it is likely with all of the people lining up for data/machine learning roles.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I took nearly a year off in the 1990s, just "doing coffee shops and bookstores." I read a lot, did some recreational programming and a little travel. Basically took it easy after a number of years of high-hour, high- visibility projects (and a high-hour, low-visibility startup that essentially crashed).

Never had any trouble with that explanation.

If they don't like it, you probably don't want to work there anyway.

<comment><USER23> "If they don't like it, you probably don't want to work there anyway."

That's always important to remember.

<comment><USER24> What does it mean, though? Is it just "sour grapes is a powerful force"?

I don't know about gaps in particular but there are lots of places I thought I'd love working that wouldn't take me.

<comment><USER22> Not complicated. It means, "you probably wouldn't want to work there."

Interviewing is a two-way street. If your potential employer is intensely interested in your leisure time then that's an interesting signal, because it's unusual (I've never had a single follow-up question to why I took nearly a year off) and could point to a bad culture (lots of possibilities here, including the company being a modern sweatshop or doing very close monitoring and metricization).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I can't speak for every company out there, but for us, we've discovered that resumes and whiteboard challenges are bad predictors of great engineers. So, we simply come up with a small project that's related to what we would have you work on if you were hired and give you around a week to finish it. You can use other people's code snippets online as well as any libraries you see fit. As long as the end result is good enough, we'd move you to the next step, which is to just test if you're a good culture fit. I know quite a few other startups are doing this as well, so maybe the method is becoming popular. I would recommend you research the companies a bit and see if it's even something they'd care about first. We wouldn't even ask you to explain a gap in the first place.

<comment><USER26> So if you have a years worth of work todo, and 50 people apply, you get the work done for free?

<comment><USER27> That would be the worst consulting experience for the company and I think you can easily tell a different between a test and outsourced work.

Also that wouldn't likely save time. If the task will take someone 2h, I'd have to spend more than that: describing the task with all the relevant context, providing a mock of the environment it needs to be plugged into, reviewing the result, fixing any issues, changing it to match the internal style, and also waiting for the solution itself which may not even arrive any time soon. It's not like every (or even most) candidates will produce something you'd want to keep.

<comment><USER26> 2 hours sure. A week not-so-much.

OP wasn't clear how big the task was.

<comment><USER27> Even worse. A week long task without internal context or being able to chat with people who know it would be next to impossible to prepare. I've seen some projects which were thoroughly specced and handed over to a consulting agency. Half were not usable, the other half need heavy fixing. It was never a happy outcome.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> First of all, I've done plenty of hiring. You should not worry about a 12 month gap. It will have a minor negative impact on getting callbacks. You might have to work slightly harder at your applications to compensate. If you're already getting calls and interviews, you've already passed through the filter since a gap is most likely to hurt you while a HR recruiter is sorting through a large pile of resumes.

You can still do things with your resume to make it more likely to get through the resume pile filter. Did you do any personal projects, classes or open source that can show continues professional interest and passion? Try putting something on your resume about it. Or if you've really done nothing but relax(which is OK!), now can be a good time to start working on professional development, then you have something to speak to when asked what you've been doing with your time.

<comment><USER29> To what degree does Army Reserve experience hurt? I have a lot of military time that overlaps with my years of employment as a corporate software developer and am considering taking it off my resume in the future to see if there is an uptick in interest on my resume.

<comment><USER30> I've never been in HR, or even in a position to hire, but if you put 2 CVs in front of me that were identical with the exception of one having guard/reserve/active duty military experience I'd always take the military one because it tells me they have are more likely to have discipline (even with knowing how big of screw ups several of my friends that served are).

And if there was a degree, i'd just assume the military was the way it was paid for as I've got probably a dozen friends that got their 4-year degrees via their military service.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> "Took some time off to explore projects. Exited to get back to work."

No answer to this question will be cited by the hiring committee/etc as a reason to thumbs up a candidate; many answers will be cited as a "red flag." Give the minimum amount of signal and move on.

</comment><comment><USER32> The main thing would be to explain that it was medical, that it is over now and you are healthy again. The fact that it went on a few more months than necessary isn't really relevant, although saying that you took a few extra months off at the end just to refresh yourself does reassure that the health issues are, in fact, all over.

It might be worth practicing, alone in front of a mirror or something, explaining this. It may or may not get asked, but if it is you want to have your verbiage ready. But health issues are not rare, and wanting to take time off because you have the money to do so, is not something most people would have any problem understanding. I've known several people who did that, and they all got employed again later, without too much trouble.

</comment><comment><USER33> "Family medical emergency".

It's not a lie (you are your own family) and they can't legally ask anything more.

</comment><comment><USER24> I stopped putting months on my resume. Nobody cares what month you joined or left. A gap of less than 2 years won't even be noticed.

"Job X, 2000-2003; Job Y, 2004-2008." I guarantee no interviewer is ever going to say "So you left Job X on December 31st, 2003, and started Job Y on January 1st, 2004? I don't believe it. How long was this gap, really?"

Job hunting often takes months, and software engineers make enough money that they have enough saved to not need to work every day to make rent. If they give it any thought at all, interviewers are going to assume you quit in the fall, spent a few months on vacation, spent a few months on job hunting, and started again in the spring.

It's become an industry joke in my circles that software engineers never 'take vacation'. They work hard for 6 to 18 months until their startup goes bust (or their consulting contract is up), take a few months off, and jump in again.

<comment><USER34> All the Dev jobs that have required security clearance all wanted exact hire and termination dates. For some of those from years ago, I'm giving a date in good faith, but if they really care, they'll catch it in the background check.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I always wonder what the HR person would get all upset over a gap for? Can someone tell me about the time they rejected a candidate because they had a gap in their employment? lol :D

I mean why do they care. If I save up money and take a year off every few years? That just means if I get bored of them I'll walk out.

It sounds like the kinda thing people care about because they're told to, but they don't actually have a reason why.

<comment><USER36> Have you been part of the hiring process before? It's very time-consuming, stressful, and hard to make a choice.

From the interviewers perspective, there's a higher chance that the person who hasn't worked for 12+ months simply isn't good enough to find a job, and it could be a waste of their time/resources to interview them instead of the person who has been consistently working.

<comment><USER37> > Have you been part of the hiring process before?

Yes for decades.

> It's very time-consuming, stressful, and hard to make a choice.

Yes

> From the interviewers perspective, there's a higher chance that the person > who hasn't worked for 12+ months simply isn't good enough to find a job

This is called sexism.

Women are most likely to be the person who raises kids takes times off to help parents.

You have just justified sex discrimination. In you are interviewing, step up and do the job properly. Interview the candidate not your stereotype.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> 1) Personally I don't think you need to explicitly address it on your resume. I personally know lots of tech people who have taken 6-24 month off to travel and had no problems getting interviews / jobs.

2) The main place I could imagine this gap coming into play is the sourcer stage (ie the recruiting person who reviews all of the incoming resumes), since most hiring managers doing resume reviews will mostly be looking for technologies / job experience. To avoid this you can lean on your network to see if you can get a referral to roles or look for head hunters who can skip you to the initial screen.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER39> TBH, I'm in a similar situation but with three years since I worked in the industry. I burned out, moved out of the Valley to be close to family, and worked odd jobs, mostly IT.

The odd jobs are getting old, and I miss programming.

</comment><comment><USER40> I did a sabbatical in 2014 and nobody cared.

I was 16 months without a job. Learned an instrument, tried to built a video game, studied a bit of CS.

Probably a question of how you frame it.

</comment><comment><USER41> I echo folks in this thread who suggest being honest. In my opinion it says a lot about you and how you communicate, as well as a lot about how the org thinks about their employees. i mean, you essentially took a sabbatical (regardless of the reasons) after more than 5 years in your career. individuals may quibble about the length-before-break, but several companies have a sabbatical-like perk built into their comp plan.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Wow! I really didn't expect the topic would get that much traction.

Props to the commnunity.

I'd like to summarize the points that stood the most strong to myself and that were most common among the commenters.

The obvious:

* _Don 't lie. If you don't feel like being completely upfront just keep back._

* _Build confidence. You should not feel guilty for taking a break._

* _Don 't put the hiatus at the top of your work experience on CV._

The not so obvious:

* _If you have been on medical, think twice if coming up with this is worth the risk. You may get chewed._

* _Sabbatical is always a safe bet. Elaborate if needed on the achievements, personal growth, projects that you 've been up to._

* _Be prepared to get lowballed if you have no other offers at your disposal._

* _Express eagerness to get back into the game._

The impalpable:

* _Don 't bring the break into focus unless the hiring manager brings it up._

* _Prepare a good answer if being asked on the nature of the gap. Don 't overburden with details, be brief and concise._

Feel free to add points that i might've missed. And thanks again for the good advice.

</comment><comment><USER42> Just be honest. Seems fine. As someone who speaks with many candidates a week, I'm more worried about people who average 1 year at various jobs across 5 years (such as someone working 4-6 jobs in a 5 year span) than someone who has a year gap that is likely more reasonably explained.

</comment><comment><USER43> Gaps are fine, and normal. Things happen (personal medical, family health, kids, breaks, personal pivots, ...). Be prepared to talk briefly about them if asked so you do appear to be caught off guard. Just keep it simple, consistent, and move on with the conversation.

</comment><comment><USER44> I wouldn't want to work for a company that frowned upon a gap in work experience based on a medical issue. If the topic comes up, tell the truth. If they balk, you should run fast and hard from that company.

</comment><comment><USER45> Entrepreneur time. I explain the few gaps on my attempts to create something of my own. I don't mind saying it didn't work out as I hoped but I got bit by the bug of creativity and went for it. Glad I did.

<comment><USER46> I did this also. I usually had examples or actual websites to show when they asked for details. Unfortunately, none of my start-ups took off, meaning I'm stuck in the middle class. 1 or 2 maybe could have if I had devoted full time to them, but couldn't at the time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> "I required time off to provide care for a loved one". No further explanation beyond that is owed.

<comment><USER48> And that loved one can be yourself.

<comment><USER42> Yea don't lie. That won't go well if you get hired and now you have to remember to keep some lie consistent.

<comment><USER49> IMHO another reason to not lie is that it further erodes the character of the lier. Lying gets easier with practice. The self-discipline of facing consequences rather than dodging them weakens. Justified guilt accumulates and weighs down the pyche, at least for some people. It gets harder to trust others, as it become more normal to assume _they_ are lying to you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> I once took almost 2 years off for no good reason. I traveled, visited friends and family, relaxed and generally did whatever I wanted. It was a great and memorable time in my life.

When I started looking for work again, I simply told them that in full honesty, and explained that I had enough money to do it.

Every interviewer reacted positively. Pretty much all of them said they would love to take a long time off like that and asked about my travels and about my projects.

</comment><comment><USER51> > Now i feel completely healthy, refreshed, passionate and ready to rock again

What did you do to get refreshed again? And can you keep this up while working 40 hours a week?

<comment><AUTHOR> First of all it is time. Some things heal slow. I thought that for any issue 3 months is just enough. I was wrong.

Second of all - medication. Takes at least six months to see any difference feel-wise and tests-wise.

> And can you keep this up while working 40 hours a week? Sure. I'm as good as > new.

<comment><USER51> Cool. Nobody has any right to pry into your business. But from a practical standpoint, they would just want to know that it's not going to happen again because you're taking care of yourself now. That's all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> I always just tell the truth. I'd rather work for a company that doesn't think it's bad that I chose not to work for 9 months. (I've even been asked by curious interviewers how I was able to take that much time off)

When I was last interviewing, I just said that I took time off to work on side projects and refresh my mind. I never had a problem. My work experience was just a little more than yours currently is.

</comment><comment><USER53> I put my two year travelling gap at the top of my "work history" section. I listed the skills I learned during that time - I taught myself Spanish, handled tricky logistical situations (shipping vehicle from Panama to Colombia), & learned to think on my feet.

Nobody ever talked about it like it was a bad thing, they just wanted to hear stories from the road! I have no problem getting a Software Engineering job.

</comment><comment><USER54> I recently took 2 years off, and it took a grand total of 2 weeks to interview at the company that I ended up getting an offer at and working for. I just told interviewers honestly that I had taken a sabbatical to fulfill one of my life goals of traveling the world. It didn't work against me as much as I'd expected it to. Of course I still had to pass the technical interview, which ultimately companies care most about anyways.

Most companies care primarily about your technical competence and don't really care about that other stuff. This "job gap" scare is vastly overrated (perhaps large corporations might be more anal about job gaps if they're just looking for obedient corporate drones, but there's plenty of work outside those kinds of companies).

But if you're really worried about the job gap thing, you could say that you were playing around with new technologies, working on your own side projects / startup, or freelancing. But if you have other experience, I don't think most employers really care so long as you're competent.

</comment><comment><USER55> As a longtime hiring manager I have zero issues with a break for health reasons (or any other reasons). I will ask questions about the break to understand the circumstances. My concern is how likely it is to reoccur. If you can show that it's unlikely to affect your work on our team, and your skills are otherwise impressive for the role, then it's no issue at all.

</comment><comment><USER56> Thanks very much for submitting this and to the commenters offering advice. I'm also trying to come back after a gap and finding it very discouraging. The positive comments here are really helpful to change my mindset and get back a positive energy to discuss the meaningful things that I've done, even if they weren't paid full-time jobs.

</comment><comment><USER57> I have had this happen, twice, due to medical.

I tell them that one was medical and the other was a sabbatical to take time to learn the latest technologies, as I do not want to scare them off with too many medical "vacations".

Yes, technically it's lying but it's the only real way I've found to properly navigate what is a ridiculous system.

</comment><comment><USER58> If the company rejects you for the truth it should probably not have been your employer anyway. You can use it as a filter.

</comment><comment><USER59> I hire and manage developers for a living.

Why on Earth would you not just say exactly what you said here?

I'm sure you could phrase it a little better but, "I had a medical problem for 9+ months and then took several more months to rest after that" is not going to be viewed unfavorably in any way if your skills are up to date.

<comment><USER37> .... because I have had a friend that was discriminated against for his manageable medical condition by a medium-size tech company in the Bay Area.

(Name of company withheld because the litigation is ongoing)

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> I have a similar situation - although my gap is much smaller (~4 months) it still is big enough to raise questions. But it hasn't. In the last 3-4 months I've interviewed with over 10 companies (multiple stages) and not one hiring manager was interested in the gap.

However, that doesn't mean the recruiters who rejected my CV didn't care about it. And that's why, to avoid any confusion about the gap I added an item on my resume which indicates what I was up to. In my case, I travelled to India to do my yoga teachers training course. So I added the course certificate with the date clearly on my CV.

So to summarize: the best thing to do IMO is to remove the possibility of confusion by adding any descriptive piece of information on your resume.

</comment><comment><USER61> Medical-triggered gap is joy a big deal. One thing I would worry about as a potential employer is if the candidate worked somewhere and is trying to hide that employer so that we can't talk to them. But if you didn't actually work, it's not much of an issue in my book.

<comment><USER62> I never hid my previous employers but I really don't want companies reaching out to my previous job. My manager was toxic as hell and actually told me to give up when I tiptoed into telling him about some mental health issues that I was working through. He also told me everyone on my team disliked me. Eventually I did "give up" and stopped trying to impress anyone. I was also the only woman and felt extremely excluded by default. I ended up only being there for 6 months.

There isn't really a productive or healthy way to share this with a recruiter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> I would just be very honest with what happened. My personal opinion is that every experience, and this includes job gaps for any reasons, can shape your personnality for the best. If the guy in front of you don't see what's positive in there, then, it migth be a sign that you should look somewhere else. This job gap probably had a huge positive influance on your life, since you now feel healthy, refreshed and passionate. I personaly had a burnout and had to stop working for a couple of months. When I came back to work, my employer tried to convince me to leave the company. But when he realized I wouldn't, he finally abendoned the idea. That year, I surpassed all my goals! Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER64> I mainly consult and contract, so 2-4months on the bench is normal.

Anyone who asks is just trying to get leverage.

<comment> blaser-waffle > Anyone who asks is just trying to get leverage.

How so? As in, "you're out of the job market for a while, so you seem sketchy, and thus I'm going to pay you less"?

<comment><USER64> Handle it delicately, but yes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> I would tell them exactly what you've told us and not try to mitigate it. And emphasize that you feel rejuvenated. Having taken this break, you may be in a better spot now than many people who have been (formally) employed continuously for the same time.

</comment><comment><USER66> I suggest a different route..find something new that you explored, if its reading up on something and compose a mini-thesis of what that subject can bring to the table as far as you applying it.

IE instead of excuse you are showing added value...much better position for you

</comment><comment><USER67> If they don't hire you because you decided to take a year off then they're not worth working for. It's easy to be in the corporate mindset when you interview someone that this person must be somehow not a "team-player" or "go-getter" because he actually values life above working like a slave robot. Work for someone who understands the human element of life and doesn't treat another human being like an object or projects the reliability and uptime of computers to the human element.

There is a huge lack of empathy in corporate environments today which is incredibly dangerous, I think that's why work satisfaction is at an all-time low.

</comment><comment><USER11> I wouldn't mention it; I presume because you are posting here that you are working in technology and, compared to most people, make a lot of money.

One nice thing about that is, of course, that we don't have to work all of the time to cover our expenses.

That seems obvious to most people working in our field, I think.

I wouldn't worry about mitigating it. If they ask, I would say something along the lines of what the other commenters mentioned re: sabbatical, but I don't really assume anyone will ask. It's not the red flag that it would be for someone working closer to wage slavery (where a gap might mean something more dire due to the necessity of constant work).

</comment><comment><USER68> Your real gap is max 4 month, not much of a gap. You can fill it in with personal project that you did some other time if you really don't want to have that gap, or just say the real reason, medical and that's it.

</comment><comment><USER69> You just do it!

I took 3 years off between two jobs to burn through my savings. I just said "I took three years off to burn through my savings" to people and they were like "cool, fine, as long as you can still code".

<comment><USER70> I don't get the rationalization. You did not want to have any savings, so you took the time to burn them off?

Surely I'm missing something here.

<comment><USER69> No, I had savings, and didn't want to work, so I didn't work for the amount of time it took to have no savings left.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> Often times recruiters are not allowed to probe any further once you bring up a medical issue. The difficulty then becomes, being able to draw upon relevant and timely situations to answer questions in an interview.

</comment><comment><USER72> There are two major issues employers have with employment gaps.

1\. Were you in jail. 2\. Did your skills decline.

As long as you weren't in jail and you can show in the interview that you still have the technical skills, you should be fine.

Also, it's none of your employer's business and you could tell a innocuous white lie. If you don't want your employer to know your business, just make something up. After you start the job, it won't ever come up again.

Something everyone should take to heart: Fake it, til you make it. Just get through the door however you can and then perform. That's all that matters.

</comment><comment><USER73> I had a 12 year gap. Went back to school, did entry level internships and then got a grad level internship which later became a full time position. You need a story and also talk to what you did to get back. There will always be folks who see the gap before they see anything else, but there will be others who find your passion real. Also network a ton, find mentors. After every interview do a retrospective with self and ask yourself what went well and what didn't. This helped me a lot to perfect my story to an elevator pitch under 2 minutes.

</comment><comment><USER74> FWIW, in some places, even employment status is a protected category: [https://www.foxrothschild.com/publications/new-york-city- now...](https://www.foxrothschild.com/publications/new-york-city-now- prohibits-discrimination-based-on-unemployment-status-over-mayors-veto/)

I remember my employer mentioning how questions can no longer ask what the candidate is working on, but can only ask the candidate's experience (no pointers about timeline of such experience).

</comment><comment><USER75> I have a similar background as yours, a gap of 1 year, 5 years of experience and I joined a startup 2 days back. I dint really felt any difference in the way companies treat people with or without a break, if you are technically sound nothing else matters. But, a few companies might negotiate for salary as you don't have any offer in hand. It's always good to do small projects and upgrade your skill set during the break. Anyways you have medical reason, so it shouldn't be a problem.

</comment><comment><USER76> One guy I hired just had it listed there as hiatus on his resume. His company was acquired and he took some time off after vesting. Didn't stop me. It didn't actually work out in that case, but I don't think it was because he took the time off.

EDIT for reply since I'm rate-limited:

> The period was slightly over a year. The resume described what he did which > was roughly (without going into detail that would de-anonymize) "spend time > in a tropical country relaxing". He described what he did to me verbally.

<comment><AUTHOR> Was the hiatus period large?

Did the resume provide the explanation to hiatus or that was communicated verbally in a talk?

</comment></comment><comment><USER77> I personally don't answer questions about this or salary. The discussion is about working together now into the future. Saying no and why is this question important to you (if it's really of interest) seems the most ethical thing to do without more info. As I recall one State recently and finally made it illegal to ask about prior salary, and in Oakland about criminal record for housing. These one sided concerns are bad for the economy short and long term. Competition and focus drive innovation.

</comment><comment><USER78> "Personal reasons" or "health reasons" \- if they probe farther they get into questions they are not legally allowed to ask. Just remember that the law (at least in the US) protects you from answering details - if they have been briefed at all about how to interview legally they will instantly back off that line of questioning.

Try to stay at your next job for at least 2 years (5 is better) so your next resume can just show the year you started/stopped working there thus hide the gap.

<comment><USER79> > _Just remember that the law (at least in the US) protects you from answering > details - if they have been briefed at all about how to interview legally > they will instantly back off that line of questioning._

It's been my experience that interviewers do _not_ back off of that question.

It's news to me that it's a legally protected question.

<comment><USER78> See a lawyer for legal advice.

They need to be very careful about probing. Personal reasons quickly leads to family status which is illegal to ask about. Likewise health can mean a disability that they are not allowed to ask about. For both of these it is important to remember the courts will judge with hindsight - given a sensitive situation was the cause of being out of work how can the deeper probing not be an effort to find out about the situation they are not legally allowed to ask about? Thus extreme care must be used in probing farther to ensure it is clear you are not asking about anything illegal.

Bottom line: it is legal to probe but you better have a lawyer do the probing because the questions too quickly can be something it isn't legal to ask.

<comment><USER80> It's perfectly legal to ask.

It is however an invitation for legal trouble, because it will change the presumption of discrimination. If the question isn't asked, then the employer doesn't know, and thus it isn't possible that the information could have been used in a way that harms a protected class. (like race, religion, over-40, Vietnam veteran, sex, etc.)

Yes, you can ask about all that stuff. You can ask if somebody is a Mormon or a Jew or whatever. Your boss will probably be unhappy, because then it becomes an uphill battle to show that you didn't use the answer to discriminate against a protected class.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER81> Like a lot of the comments here most people don't even notice the gaps if they're less than a year. I've taken 9 months of due to significant other starting a grad program and 6 months off to live in another country. No one has ever asked me in an interview. Mind you this is over about 5 years so I've only worked about 3.6 of the 5. Since then I've done quite a large number of interviews (had a case of bad job fit about a year ago).

</comment><comment><USER82> "That's classified."

<comment><USER46> "I worked for _Men in Black_ , which is now _People in Black_." Or, "I worked in Area 15, helping dyslexic aliens."

</comment></comment><comment><USER83> If it's your only significant break then it should be ok.

You should try to be reasonably up front about it i.e. make it clear on your resume that the break was for medical reasons. You shouldn't need to get into details. It's conceivable that some recruiters may have issue with it, but they are just as likely (if not more so) to have issue with an unexplained gap.

If you're asked about it just be positive: you're completely healthy now and raring to go.

</comment><comment><USER84> Be honest - just talk about what you did if they ask about the gap. Say you planned for it, saved a good amount of money, and took time off to improve yourself. It's becoming more common these days as sabbaticals or what not.

Be sure to also talk about what you learned during that period too though, specifically how you grew as an individual, etc. It doesn't need to be work related per se, but an improvement of some sort.

</comment><comment><USER85> You can explain it either honestly with medical issue during an interview, phrase it as a sabbatical where you focused on something else or yourself for a year to figure out what you wanted, and did projects on the side instead of working.

Or a "fun" way is to claim you worked for any government agency who would never verify or deny that you ever worked for them. :P

</comment><comment><USER86> Most will not even ask for liability reasons: interviewers at large companies are trained not to ask questions that can expose company to a lawsuit, which basically includes all personal questions, including medical, etc. I.e. most simple example, interviewer asks candidate about age, candidate doesn't get hired, files lawsuit about age discrimination.

</comment><comment><USER87> I don't understand why people are concerned about this, why would a gap be interpreted negatively?

Are people just assuming that a gap means prison?

</comment><comment><USER88> You could just say what you just told us - that you took a break for a medical reason, and then chose to take some extra time off. There is something to be said for not trying too hard, but focusing on going to interviews and enjoying the experience. Having 5+ years of work experience is said to be a huge advantage as well.

</comment><comment><USER89> This sounds to me like the type of thing an employer would look for to have a reason not to hire. If potential employers are looking for this, something is already wrong. It could be market-driven (eg. too many people to choose from) or they already don't want to hire you, or something else.

</comment><comment><USER37> If you feel it is really significant - invent a startup idea that you were exploring. It didn't work out. There are so many failed ideas in tech.

This gives you a way to put your outside learning in a "work" situation.

Don't overexplain. "The idea was X. We explored it until we determined the idea was not viable."

</comment><comment><USER90> I'd just say I worked on personal projects for a year to learn new libraries/languages/frameworks.

</comment><comment><USER91> I've recently gotten back into a programming job after 8 mo out of work and ten years before that doing desktop support instead of my original focus on coding.

Getting back into the flow is certainly doable.

Be honest about the basic situation, don't answer discriminatory questions, and the right companies will give you a shot.

</comment><comment><USER92> A lot of interesting responses here. While I agree with being honest about it, one issue is that the resume might be overlooked because there is a gap and you never get a chance to explain it. I am basically having to solve the same problem currently so @jobgap if you'd like to discuss pm me.

</comment><comment><USER93> Nobody has ever asked (then again perhaps someone has declined to talk to me for that reason?). In my cases the answer (had anyone asked) would have been easy: I took multi-year gaps to look after my kid. But it has literally not been an issue (note: my work experience is over 30 years).

</comment><comment><USER94> Or you could just lie like companies lie about job responsibilities. Use your friend as a reference.

</comment><comment><USER95> "I want to talk about something that some may say is a weakness. I took a Sab. But, I want to talk about my strengths and why I'm a good fit.. "

Always start with your weak points and finish strong. Setting the bar low early will make them think highly of you.

</comment><comment><USER96> Make something up. Say you were traveling, pursuing some art project, a startup idea, etc.

<comment><USER97> I would much rather hire someone who took some time off than a liar.

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> Tell them you founded a job applicant filtering startup that ultimately failed because it couldn't parse whitespace. Then wait for them to laugh. Then if they don't laugh, get up and leave: _I think we 're done here._

</comment><comment><USER99> If it was something like a 5 year gap I'd probably have some questions at least about what was going on in that time, a year or so and I probably wouldn't notice as long as everything else on the resume looked good.

</comment><comment><USER100> Be honest about it. You've done nothing wrong, on the contrary. It's perfectly fine to rest when you feel you need it.

To your employer it's an asset, you're full of energy and you can start work on short notice.

</comment><comment><USER101> "Took 12 months off for self directed sabbatical"

</comment><comment><USER102> I think gaps are not a big deal particularly for heath reasons. If you have some solid references from previous jobs it should alleviate any concerns.

</comment><comment><USER103> If you don't want to tell the truth (and why would you not?), tell them you were caring for a sick family member. Nobody's going to question that!

</comment><comment><USER104> 1\. Just shorted your dates worked from Month+Year to just Year. that'll hide gaps 2\. Say you were working for yourself, consulting, etc.

</comment><comment><USER105> How about a mother with a 10-year gap raising kids?

</comment><comment><USER106> Don't leave gaps.

Add "consulting".

You may consult anyone for anything and as long as the reader could verify it (in case it gets to that) you're good.

</comment><comment><USER107> Short term, follow the advice here.

Long term, work toward financial freedom so you don't need to contort your life to appease some HR gatekeeper.

</comment><comment><USER108> I spent a few months one summer just reading and perfecting my gin and tonic recipe. Nobody gave a rat's patootie.

</comment><comment><USER109> Just tell the truth. You don't want to work somewhere that doesn't understand basic human stuff.

</comment><comment><USER110> Just say exactly why you wrote above, I don't see why you need another thing to say

</comment><comment><USER111> Just say you took a sabbatical.

</comment><comment><USER71> When returning to the workplace, the issue quickly turns to references.

</comment><comment><USER112> You resume will be tossed in the reject bin by the scoring algorithm.

</comment><comment><USER113> > Even if it is a red flag

Why is it?

</comment><comment><USER114> tell the truth but use hipster words like , restoration, elevation, inspiration ect.</comment>


Google App Engine "Accidentally" Blocks PayPal - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/06/10/google-app-engine-accidentally-blocks-paypal/

<comment><USER2> And Arrington comes in with expert analysis from way out left field, calling foul play. Let's see what the officials have to say about this one.</comment>


Study: Nearly all cars to be autonomous by 2050 - <AUTHOR> http://www.autoblog.com/2014/01/02/all-cars-autonomous-self-driving-by-2050-study/

<comment><USER2> This is stupid for 1 reason.

It means that we're STILL going to have cars by 2050. wtf.</comment>


Ask HN: Do you connect with unknown people on LinkedIn? - <AUTHOR>

Recently, I've started receiving many invitations to connect with people on LinkedIn. As a matter of habit, I don't accept those requests.
However, I've seen people in Sales, Recruitment etc. usually connect with such people on LinkedIn. What are the positives and negatives of such connections? <comment><USER2> LinkedIn is a social networking site for business professionals. In fact, it is heavily used by recruiters and employers to source candidates for employment. So, don't be surprised if you've seen people in Sales or Recruitment who are trying to connect with you.

In regards to your question about the positives and negatives of LinkedIn connections - let me provide you some:

1.) Career Networking - We can all benefit from building a network and LinkedIn can serve that role.

2.) Identification - LinkedIn is not going to work for you if you don't identify yourself. However, if confidentiality is a concern, and if you are trying to stay anonymous, just be careful to connect with only people you know well.

3.) Search Engine Exposure - You can connect your blogs and other social networks to LinkedIn. Your LinkedIn statuses can be updated when posting to one of those places, providing the opportunity for greater network connections.

4.) Job Hunting - Let say that you are looking for a job, but you are currently employed and you don't want to jeopardize your current position. Be strategic and don't announce to your connections that you are searching for a job. You can still do your job search confidential by not providing your company's email and phone number.

</comment><comment><USER3> Usually, but with a few exceptions. If a random person tries to connect with me, and one (or more) of a few conditions is true, I almost always accept. Those conditions would be things like "We have a lot of connections in common already", "they include a note explaining why they want to connect", "it's apparent from their profile that we have common interests that justify connecting", etc.

OTOH, a few "red flags" almost always cause me to decline. Some of those are "the profile looks obviously fake" (these are the ones where the picture is a beautiful blonde woman, and her profile shows no education history, one job with a generic description like "retail" and they have like 5 total connections, and none in common), or "some guy in another part of the world, in a completely different industry, with no obvious sign why there would be any mutual interests, and there's no note explaining why he wants to connect", etc.

That said, if one of you sends me a connection request saying "Hey, this is 'soandso' from HN" then I would almost always accept that.

<comment><USER4> You get requests with a note explaining why they want to connect? I don't think I have ever seen anything other than the default message.

<comment><USER3> Not many, but every once in a while I'll get something like "Hey, I saw your article on X and really enjoyed it and thought we should connect" or something of that ilk.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Some people curate their connections. Others don't.

If curating is providing a benefit, continue. If not, then there's less reason to do it. Me, I decided to pretend to have lots of business friends years ago, but I spend so little time on the site that their status updates don't create much noise.

I don't find much value in the activity.

</comment><comment><USER6> You can always remove connections. Having a larger network won't hurt you. If it seems completely random or an accident, don't do it. But consider - "could knowing this person in 4 years be a good thing?" Almost always the answer is yes.

</comment><comment><USER7> I do. If they write a proper note stating their reason for connecting.

</comment><comment><USER8> Yes. Often recruiters ask me to connect with them and occasionally I found a nice job that way.</comment>


Can Google build its own 'Nexus car' without the help of automakers? - <AUTHOR> http://gigaom.com/2013/08/23/can-google-build-its-own-nexus-car-without-the-help-of-automakers/

<comment><USER2> If they work with Tesla anything will be possible.

(I REALLY REALLY HOPE THEY DO)</comment>


So why does Absolute Vodka freeze when no other brands do? - <AUTHOR> https://contact.absolut.com/org/absolut-vodka/d/so-why-does-absolute-freeze-when-no-other-brands-d/ <comment><USER2> I've had a bottle of (Effen) vodka sitting in my freezer for the past 5 years. Saving it for a good time. Still hasn't frozen! I didn't think any vodka could freeze!</comment>


Ethereum is winning So far picked by more than 55% of all ICO projects - <AUTHOR> https://blog.icowatchlist.com/ico-market-research-leading-blockchain-platforms-2017/ <comment><USER2> I believe it's far more than 56%. The data they're looking at appears to come from here:

[https://tokenmarket.net/blockchain/](https://tokenmarket.net/blockchain/)

But some of the projects listed as being on the 'blockchain' (the category for projects using independent blockchains) platform held/are-holding their token sale on Ethereum, like Nimiq:

[https://tokenmarket.net/blockchain/blockchain/assets/nimiq-n...](https://tokenmarket.net/blockchain/blockchain/assets/nimiq- network/)

and Decentraland:

[https://tokenmarket.net/blockchain/blockchain/assets/decentr...](https://tokenmarket.net/blockchain/blockchain/assets/decentraland/)

Nimiq is planning on launching its own blockchain and native cryptocurrency that its ERC20 Ethereum-based tokens will be converted to, but until then, its token is tradeable on Ethereum. In the Decentraland case, they will create their own blockchain, but it will interoperate with Ethereum, and their ERC20 token will permanently remain on Ethereum.</comment>


Crash Blossoms (2010) - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/magazine/31FOB-onlanguage-t.html <comment><USER2> Seems very related to garden path sentences ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden- path_sentence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden-path_sentence))

</comment><comment><USER3> Good crash blossoms are an art form, now, for headline writers. Multiple interpretations win.

The linked article exhibits several excellent ones.</comment>


Mailchimp Project Omnivore: Declassified - <AUTHOR> http://blog.mailchimp.com/project-omnivore-declassified/

<comment><USER2> Interesting that they link to a definition of spam which is 'both unsolicited and bulk'. The vast majority of people I know who are militant about spam focus solely on the unsolicited aspect. I guess spam is still in the eye of the beholder. ??

<comment><USER3> Unsolicited commercial email (UCE) is the definition I think of.

<comment><USER4> I disagree with this because it opens the door to endless argument over what 'commercial' means.

Besides, I just want a clean inbox. I don't care whether a given piece of trash came from a commercial or non-commercial source.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is from jan 2010?

<comment><USER6> Yep... previous discussion (484 days ago):

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1080700>

<comment><AUTHOR> I assumed the submission software would notice dupes of existing stories and point at them. The URLs seem the same.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Dangit.... I was looking at a job listing for Mailchimps a few months ago and got as far as "MailChimp is a DIY email-marketing service..." before closing the tab, assuming they were spammers or spammer-enablers. I wonder if they get that knee-jerk reaction a lot.

</comment><comment><USER8> This is a great read, although the tool seems predicated on transactions which both start and end in their mail system.

</comment><comment><USER9> i dont use mailchimp because there spam control is too tight- i have email lists of small business owners who i have permission to be email but since they are generic emails addresses like info@domain or support@domain they wont let me send- means i lose 15% of my list and often the ones who need the email the most

<comment><USER10> If you use their API you can add these. Takes like 5 mins to program...</comment></comment>


ELF Shared Library Injection Forensics - <AUTHOR> http://backtrace.io/blog/blog/2016/04/22/elf-shared-library-injection-forensics/ <comment><USER2> > We cannot rule out possible infection methods, but it is highly unlikely > that attackers will reliably insert a phony DT_NEEDED entry that is > contiguous with the ones generated by the linker.

It seems pretty trivial to delete the DT_DEBUG entry, shift the entries in front of it forward by one, and then add a (now contiguous) DT_NEEDED entry. That shouldn't affect the offset of the GOT/PLT segment.

Edit: The Saruman backdoor injection detection at the end seems pretty simplistic too. E.g. on FreeBSD you could arrive at the same data with just `procstat -kk pid_of_host`.

</comment><comment><USER3> Yes, you have made a good point. You could delete DT_DEBUG and shift the entries forward by one. However this would also likely open up another door for heuristics, since having no DT_DEBUG entry is suspicious. As far as procstat goes; the real point that was being conveyed shown in the bottom pane: "Unknown shared object:", the stack frame information was just a side note. In the blog post I didn't make this very clear though since I only pointed out the pane with the stack frames. Thank you.</comment>


Wednesday's lunar eclipse will be special - <AUTHOR> http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2014/1006/Why-Wednesday-s-lunar-eclipse-will-be-so-special-video <comment><USER2> I'm looking forward to the solar eclipse of 2017. It will be visible thru out all of the USA. My house is almost directly on the arc of total eclipse. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse_of_August_21,_201...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse_of_August_21,_2017)

</comment><comment><USER3> This will be visible in California in the early morning of Wednesday, e.g., see [http://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/lunar/2014-october-8](http://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/lunar/2014-october-8)

<comment><USER4> The eclipse will be visible in California, but the selenelion, the subject of the article, will not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Selenelion means "moon sun".

From selene (moon) and helion (sun).

</comment><comment><USER6> seems like we won't be able to see it in california. too bad, looks like it will be a neat phenomenon.

<comment><USER7> of course I picked now to move to California. if only I knew

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> When has an eclipse not been special ?</comment>


One of the world's most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://sijmen.ruwhof.net/weblog/1623-one-of-the-worlds-most-visited-websites-that-nobody-is-aware-of <comment><USER3> > According to another source, a public address book at locatefamily.com, > someone under the name Vladimir S. Nesterenko is living at [REDACTED] in > Moscow. Vladimir lives according to Google Streetview it's an apartment > complex far away from the Moscow city center...

Really? Someone investigating with journalists, and may be considered a journalists themselves (?), actually publishes the address of someone that they are accusing of running a scam?

There can only be two reasons for doing something like that:

a) You're an idiot, and didn't consider the implications.

b) You're asking for the public to exact a justice that you think you can't.

<comment><USER4> It's extremely likely that this person isn't responsible for the website, or knows anything about it. Criminal or shady activities in Russia (and everywhere else) are often laundered through cutouts.

You can find an example of this in "Magnitsky act: behind the scenes" where Bill Browder allegedly laundered his corporate holdings for tax fraud through various handicapped people, and eventually gangsters who were conveniently murdered.

<comment><USER5> Using that piece of rather silly putin's propaganda as a source lowers your credibility greatly.

<comment><USER4> Ahem. The maker of that documentary is anti-Putin to the extent he supports the theory that Putin blew up some Russian apartment buildings to start a war.

Browder, on the other hand, is actively surpressing the documentary; even if none of the things said about him in the documentary are true (in which case you'd think he would sue the guy who made it for libel; a guy who lives in the UK), that's pretty shady.

<comment><USER6> That filmmaker was anti-Putin and he still lives in Russia? Totally believable.

<comment><USER7> That's not uncommon. Only very high-profile Putin opposers disappear.

<comment><USER5> Or we do not hear about low-profile ones. Being high profile (Navalny, Khodorkovsky) might be even an insurance policy to keep one at least alive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Thanks for letting us know about this great "sharing" site :-)

Lot's of garbage in it, but it also has some interesting docs. I'm more interested on the technical details of it. How it works internally for scrapping, text extraction, indexing, random users creation and uploading of stuff and so on.

I understand the privacy and copyright infringement concerns, but it's not like they've hacked into those other sites and uploaded their files. They're using existing and "open for everyone" pages. Also the estimates for revenue are highly exaggerated IMHO. Sure they're making some €€€, but not in the millions range :-)

On a final note, how is this vastly different from, let's say, [https://www.scribd.com](https://www.scribd.com) ?

<comment><USER9> This is quite easy to replicate. Just need about 5 jobs that run 24/7 harvesting data.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I read through the article and I'm baffled. I couldn't watch the news video or understand what was going on at the bottom of the post... but were news outlets and the government involved for a site that's skimming PDFs, hosting them and then slapping on ads? This isn't something new and if I recall correctly SlideShare did the same thing to grow to where they are today. Is it legal, I don't know, but these types of sites are dime a dozen and nothing new..

<comment><USER11> From the article: "Multiple tax files of Dutch citizens had been published via www.docplayer.nl"

I don't speak or read Dutch, so I couldn't watch the video clip, but my guess is these tax files contained important and sensitive information. They were probably scraped from a government website.

<comment><USER12> They probably did, but someone made the mistake to put them somewhere where they were publicly available. Also the "russian" made tools available for taking down the content, tools which according to the article were working in an effective and timely manner.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Sorry if i don't understand this totally, but why is scraping for pdf and ppt/pptx files and mirroring them illegal?

If you can reach that files just scraping it means they are somehow open to public access.

No joke, i am genuinely asking.

<comment><USER14> Scraping, mostly no. Using them to make profit: yes. Since you then violate the copyright of the author as the original action was solely to make it public (assuming no profit was intended).

edit: Rehosting is not allowed as far as I know in Dutch law if you are attempting to make profit of it by not requesting it from the original owner. Rehosting it and not taking advantage and linking to the original article is allowed as far as I know. But maybe ask your lawyer for info if you really want to know.

<comment><USER15> If a file is available through non-auth http it's unclear what the copyright is. I think it depends on the particular item whether copyright was violated.

Making a file public without restriction doesn't mean another can't make profit (my ISP makes a profit by transmitting the file to me; gmail makes profit when I email the file to me; google makes a profit when they cache the file; archive makes a profit when they archive a file; etc etc).

I think if this were non-public docs then the case is clearer. But by releasing a document publicly with unlimited access via URL the author explicitly allows unlimited distribution (and due to the nature of tcp/ip redistribution). If an author wants to restrict distribution then they should restrict distribution using available protocols.

<comment><USER16> > If a file is available through non-auth http it's unclear what the copyright > is.

Protocol has nothing to do with copyright. "Non-auth http" doesn't suddenly make copyright murky.

> But by releasing a document publicly with unlimited access via URL the > author explicitly allows unlimited distribution (and due to the nature of > tcp/ip redistribution).

There is an implicit license to exactly the redistribution necessary to effect access by URL, sure, but this is not "unlimited distribution".

Republishing is, particularly, not what is licensed.

<comment><USER17> There is no implicit licence. This is an oft-circulated but fallacious rationalization made by computer people that is not in line with the law.

The law does not recognize any such thing, and until the turn of the 21st century this was a recognized hole. Technically, the World Wide Web (and indeed other systems from FidoNet to SMTP) was a violation of many countries' copyright laws. Legislators fixed the hole, but not by introducing the idea of implicit licencing.

The EU introduced provisions in 2001, by way of a Directive, that the making of temporary transient copies for the likes of HTTP and other network transmission mechanisms to work _was explicitly not copyright violation_ in the first place. This became Netherlands law in 2004, and U.K. law in 2003. Neither the Directive nor the implementing Acts and Instruments talk about licensing. It is simply not a violation of copyright by definition.

* [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32...](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32001L0029)

* [https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/RIDA2005_206.pdf](https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/RIDA2005_206.pdf)

* [http://wetten.overheid.nl/jci1.3:c:BWBR0001886&hoofdstuk=I&p...](http://wetten.overheid.nl/jci1.3:c:BWBR0001886&hoofdstuk=I&paragraaf=5&artikel=13a&z=2018-10-11&g=2018-10-11)

* [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2498/regulation/8/m...](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2498/regulation/8/made)

* [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2498/note/made](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2498/note/made)

<comment><USER18> > There is no implicit license. This is an oft-circulated but fallacious > rationalization

There is implicit copyright, I assume that's what the parent comment was referring to. In the US, it is automatically illegal to copy something and redistribute it under copyright law [1]. The same is true in the EU [2]. While copyrights are not licenses, the parent comment is correct in the sense that one does not have a license to distribute copied content until one is granted that license explicitly by the copyright holder.

[https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq- general.html#register](https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq- general.html#register)

[https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnel- web/secure/webdav/guest/docum...](https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnel- web/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/observatory/documents/div/FAQs%20on%20Copyright,%20Summary%20Report%20January%202017.pdf)

<comment><USER17> You and xe were both quite clearly talking about implicit licences.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The ad revenue estimate could be off by as much as an order of magnitude. This is a non-story. There are millions of spam websites on the internet.

<comment><USER20> Unlike most spam websites, this one actually provides a useful and helpful function. The next time I 404 on a PDF I'll be sure to search for it on this site.

<comment><USER21> Seriously, how long has he been online as an "ethical hacker"? For everyone who has the experience of looking for some texts should know that there are millions of this type of websites out there, the spam farms. Many of these sites don't even have the files ( _a common tactic is putting the links to your spamsite in a PDF, and name the PDF as some other documents people are looking for but you don 't actually have, to disguise your spam as a file, polluting the search result for everyone, bastard!_), and are just making the visitors to click ads, or scamming people to enter personal information, to pay for another related service or a premium account, and they can probably make more money. And some other websites are even distributing malicious software.

Meanwhile this website is actually an "honest" one that works for the visitors as advertised! I think it would be great injustice by selectively just enforcing the copyright laws by seizing this individual websites and its income. After all, 30% of the websites on the entire Internet are like this. I don't think the blog post really have a point.

<comment><USER22> This one is a little different. There's the blatant, willful copyright violation. And misrepresenting the doc authors as endorsing this website.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Misleading title. As the article points out, the Alexa ranking puts it outside the top 200k most visited sites.

<comment><USER24> You do realize that if it's in top 10 million, out of estimated ~640 million websites, it's right at the top? It's not misleading at all, it's quite down to the point, just like the article itself.

<comment><USER10> Alexa is generally a poor metric. In my experience directly comparing Google Analytics to Alexa for hundreds of sites, anything above 50k rank is not pushing meaningful traffic.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Here is the real question everybody should ask themselves: In today's world, Why do I try to work honestly for a dollar?

<comment><USER26> It's a very important question. IMO we should be most mindful of our work and moneymaking since we spend most of our waking life doing these things.

When we are dishonest in our moneymaking, we are probably creating unnecessary suffering for others. That's enough reason for some.

IMO it also feels easier to love and be loved (e.g. by friends, family, your children, etc.) if you are honest in your dealings with others.

<comment><USER27> >IMO we should be most mindful of our work and moneymaking since we spend most of our waking life doing these things.

Not if you whip up an aggregator site in a week that makes money on autopilot

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> The upload buttons of those sites seem to be there mainly to create plausible deniability. If any content creates trouble which cannot be made to easily go away just by taking it down, the site owners can claim they did not upload it themselves and that they don't have any records of who did. Or they could also create fake upload records if they want to stretch things a bit further. In practice, I think it's a very safe bet that 99.999999% of the documents on those sites have been obtained through scraping other sites, and are not user- submitted content.

</comment><comment><USER29> Who in their right mind puts their real whois information online? On my urls, all that's real is the email address.

I applaud Vladimir Nesterenko for making money like this.

<comment><USER30> There's no telling whether or not that's his real name.

Edit: as a commenter below pointed out, just because a person with a name lives at an address, they may not run a website that they're listed as running. After all you probably live at an address, and if I was a fraudster I could list you.

<comment><USER31> Except that if you read the article the reporters confirmed that a guy by that name lived at that apartment complex by asking the neighbors. There's no guarantee that the person who registered is actually the person who lives there but someone answers to that name at the address provided apparently.

<comment><USER15> Again, I wouldn't be so sure. It's a useful practice to use real people's info for precisely situations like this.

Step 1) register foo.com Step 2) make email address email@example.com Step 3) register bar.com using email@example.com as contact info. Include contact info for John Doe with a real address and random phone number

This meets Whois requirements and makes it a bit harder for any real lookups. It's easier than providing wholly fake info because journalists will Lee dogging. When journalists contact John Doe who denies owning bar.com then they will work it like an uncooperative subject.

<comment><USER29> > Whois requirements

Are there any? My street name is literally "private" and my phone number "000..." or something like that.

<comment><USER32> "Because registration data connects individuals or organizations with domain names, domain name registrants are required to provide accurate and reliable contact details. If the domain name registrant knowingly provides inaccurate information, fails to update information within seven days of any change, or does not respond within 15 days to an inquiry about accuracy, the domain name may be suspended or cancelled." \- ICANN ([https://whois.icann.org/en/primer#field- section-3](https://whois.icann.org/en/primer#field-section-3))

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Wow, the title doesn't do this justice. "Google makes millions from Russian organized crime" might be better.

<comment><USER34> "Organized" usually implies a, well, _organization_. This seems like it may be just one guy. I don't see anything about this site that would particularly require an "organization".

<comment><USER12> "Seems like it may be just one guy." One cannot make this statement weaker. We don't know and we cannot know now whether it is just one guy.

<comment><USER27> It's very well possible though, so jumping to "organized crime" is also a stretch

<comment><USER35> It's a well-known logical principle: always assume Russian organized crime!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Why would a Russian individual host his, rather shady, operation in the smack dab middle of Germany, and not somewhere in eastern Europe?

Why would an individual like that, who goes through the effort of obfuscating Google analytics code, leave the domain registry information out in the open like that?

Imho none of this really adds up, the whole setup seems to be quite complex and sophisticated, I have a hard time believing that anybody who's as clever as that, would screw it all up over the domain registry information.

<comment><USER37> That's easy to answer, people are not as smart and/or professional as you think they should be. They can even do some smart things but be completely ignorant in others.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> the internet is full of these types of download sites.

meh.

dude really shouldn't have doxxed him though. we dont even know if the guy in the whois is really the guy behind the site, since you can put anything in there.

</comment><comment><USER39> Whoever doing the slideplayer website is doing a damn good SEO.

I see more slideplayer links on my Google search everyday than I see SlideShare.

I always wondered why slideplayer which is a crappy ad galore website has more content than SlideShare. Very interesting post.

</comment><comment><USER40> From the article

> an empire that makes a million dollar a year by illegally hosting 24.3 > million files copied from other sites

That's quite an interesting stat: that 24.3 carrots can be thrown on the web, made hard to download, and a dollar can be earned.

</comment><comment><USER41> The site is nice. I can search "psychology" view 400 pdfs. Click on one, view the pdf at the top of the browser and with the transcription below. All text of the transcription is google translated when using chrome. It makes me think about how it must be when obtaining financial freedom and just dumping money on viewing whatever you want to read. Except I haven't found a good translator for pdfs, so this transcription is nice on the site. Also most if not all of the Pdfs are not complete and makes me think this site is beneficial to the source publishers.

</comment><comment><USER42> YouTube was full of pirated content when it started too. I don't really see what he's doing wrong.

<comment><USER43> YouTube was full of pirated content when I looked at it this morning...

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> I wonder if this article ended up improving search ranking and revenues for the creator. Another form of automated seo generation I see is youtube users that scrape images and 3rd party news articles then convert them into a video with a slide show and overlayed text to speech. Curious what their ad revenue looks like. I assume a bot does all the work and creates thousands of videos using that approach per day.

</comment><comment><USER45> > His platform is full of PDF files that are copied from other sites and re- > hosted. This is illegal

Isn't 'illegal' a bit strong term for that?

<comment><USER46> No. An action can be (civilly) illegal without being a crime (i.e. criminally illegal), but it's still illegal nonetheless.

<comment><USER47> Also, in the US at least, commercial copyright infringement can be criminally illegal.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> But wait, earning this money and storing on AdSense account is tricky and there's no such thing like buy bitcoin with adsense balance, right? To be able to withdraw that amount the owner is expected to provide tax information and so on..

<comment><USER12> This is the real question. He could do it legitimately, as google doesn't really care where your income comes from. Hence the implication of google in this story as a party.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> IANAL but it seem a good idea to put a copyright notice on all documents. One can hope a site like this doesn't scrape docs with copyright notices, but if they do it anyway wouldn't you have a better case to sue for damages.

</comment><comment><USER50> The most annoying thing is traffic is comming from google.

Lately google search results are full of such low quality results, computer generated text, etc.

Same applies also to YT - videos with 2x speed, inverted colors etc.

<comment><USER51> >Same applies also to YT - videos with 2x speed, inverted colors etc.

What is this? Can you provide some links to these kind of videos. Thank you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> All the visitor data is based on faulty data - there is no connection between the numbers his sources report and reality. If you have your own modestly popular website, go check and see what those sites report for you. Those numbers are totally made up.

That of course also means, that the revenue estimate is absolute speculation.

Even better: The original question "where did these files come from?" is not even answered.

</comment><comment><USER53> Clickbait garbage: _According to Alexa the site is ranked as the 209,334 most visited site in the world, and the 3,945 most popular site in The Netherlands._

<comment><USER54> I was asking myself if the intention is to state that it's one of the website nobody knows most visited one (in the list of website nobody knows) or just pure clickbait.

As the first possibility is impossible to nkow (if nobody knows about them...), I agree with you and vote clickbait !

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Mirror (March '18): [https://web.archive.org/web/20180328023025/https://sijmen.ru...](https://web.archive.org/web/20180328023025/https://sijmen.ruwhof.net/weblog/1623-one- of-the-worlds-most-visited-websites-that-nobody-is-aware-of)

</comment><comment><USER56> Ready, set, go! Let's see how many scrapers HN readers will build now to try to copy this "business" model.

<comment><USER57> There's more to it then scraping. I would love a deep dive on how he/she was able to get page rank for the sites. Usually these people employ black hat SEO that works for while, but eventually fails when Google updates their ranking algorithm. I always wondered if there are sites that could game the system indefinably. Exactly the kind of info you don't announce on black hat SEO forums.

<comment><USER58> Change your UserAgent to one of Google Bots, and start hitting the pages hosting a PDF. Probably some hints there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> The article does not provide evidence that the users are fake (may well be true, but presumption of innocence applies). If they are not fake, and reports of copyright violation to the platform are duly considered, then it would appear to comply with DMCA in much the same way as Youtube or Facebook do - <USER2> I wrong?

<comment><USER60> If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and acts like a duck, then it's probably a duck. But you still need an ornithologist to put that duck in jail. Or something like that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> > one of the world's most visited sites

> According to Alexa the site is ranked as the 209,334 most visited site in > the world

Clickbait much? I think to be considered "one of the world's most visited" it should at least be in the top 1,000

</comment><comment><USER62> Is this some kind of political prep piece for passing legislation in Europe against google, internet archive, and other search engines indexing public content?

<comment><USER63> No, it's a takedown of an ad farm site posing as a document hosting service.

<comment><USER12> So what are two essential differences from google?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> I love how we are kvetching about the legality of rehosting/profiteering/copyright etc and not a single concern for the cancer that ads truly are...

I understand the economic lubricant that ads provide to keep many things connected and operating, but its such a one way flow that ads are a syphon more that they are a grout.

</comment><comment><USER65> This is a fascinating investigation!

</comment><comment><USER66> The guy would do the same, but he cannot even dream of that income.

Report loaded with envy have no place on my list.

Let the Russian live.</comment>


Women in STEM college programs under attack for male discrimination - <AUTHOR> https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-08-20/women-only-science-programs-discrimination-complaints <comment><USER2> I took my daughter to a Women in Bio event and someone pointed out that the biology pipeline is pretty much 80% female from the PhD level on down. Someone asked how long they were going to keep running the program and, of course, the women didn't have an answer. Who would? It's a nice job.

<comment><USER3> It winnows out post-PHd (fewer women proceed to postdoc and professor jobs). Most people would describe this as a pipeline problem, or possibly a rational reaction to the poor economics of being a professor (super competitive hard work for low pay, mainly for ego, not remuneration).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> According to data from the Department of Education on college degrees by gender, the US college degree gap favoring women started back in 1978, when for the first time ever, more women than men earned Associate's degrees. Five years later in 1982, women earned more bachelor's degrees than men for the first time, and women have increased their share of bachelor's degrees in every year since then. In another five years by 1987, women earned the majority of master's degrees for the first time. Finally, within another decade, more women than men earned doctor's degrees by 2006, and female domination of college degrees at every level was complete. For the current graduating class of 2013, the Department of Education estimates that women will earn 61.6% of all associate's degrees this year, 56.7% of all bachelor's degrees, 59.9% of all master's degrees, and 51.6% of all doctor's degrees. Overall, 140 women will graduate with a college degree at some level this year for every 100 men. The article is from AEI Ideas and is summarized by Carnegie Foundation..

</comment><comment><USER5> I have noticed that many coding bootcamps offer scholarships for women. In other words, they charge men more for the same program. The laws against sex discrimination apply to discrimination against either sex, and it is bothersome that many schools and government officials selectively ignore those laws.

<comment><USER6> There is a fine line to walk between outreach and including marginalized groups, and discrimination. There's many great groups out there that don't discriminate to this effect, but it's not surprising that some have swung the pendulum too far and should be reined in.

It is bothersome, but in many cases it's not policy/law experts who make these programs, but small committees made up of 3 or so people who put out these scholarships (I serve on an alumni board which creates/grants scholarships.) There are definitely non experts who make these programs, and not much oversight.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I... don't know how I feel about any of this. But I feel like we are missing critical information from the article.

For example:

> In California, for instance, 11 colleges and universities reviewed offered > 117 scholarships for women and four for men

At first glance that seems drastic, but I am curious about the breakdown of the students within STEM during this time. Did these scholarships cause a closer to 50/50 breakdown or did it swing the other way (more woman then men).

Ultimately more diversity (not just sex) is incredibly important for the industry, but I struggle with finding any information that correlates these programs with the graduating diversity.

</comment><comment><USER8> I am okay with this, provided that we provide men-only workshops for men who want to get into nursing or teaching. Fair's fair, and fair's fair's fair too.

<comment><USER9> > we provide men-only workshops for men who want to get into nursing or > teaching.

We do. Why do people think this is some kind of killer point? It is made in _every single thread_ like this. It's beyond fucking tedious.

<comment><USER8> I couldn't find evidence to substantiate the point, and the article doesn't have any evidence either. Do you have any evidence?

It's not a good point in and of itself, but it's what the point implies about our emotional predisposition towards correlating sex and occupation. "Beyond fucking tedious" would be a wonderful summary of my feelings towards any Title IX violations.</comment></comment></comment>