Show HN: My Resume 2.0

wouldn't recommend it too much though, doesn't work on Aurora.

Personally I prefer CSS3 rounded corners because they do a better job of decoupling design, functionality and content (which in a perfect world would each fit completely into css, js and html respectively).

Most developers I know followed suit with Google after they dropped support for ie7 in Google Apps back in 2011: http://googleenterprise.blogspot.ca/2011/06/our-plans-to-sup...

EDIT: Looks like rounded corners only got added to ie9 so Google's ie7 stuff is irrelevant, my guess: a degraded experience on ie8 is generally taken as acceptable.

Flip the problem around: If your interviewer asked you for your MBTI type, would you think that was a good sign? Is that the kind of company that you want to work for, the kind that spends valuable interview time quizzing you about being an INTP? Let me venture to guess that the answer is "no". So why provide such detail?

(If the answer is "but I would never want to work for someone who doesn't know, and care, that I identify as an INTP", then I withdraw my observation. Good luck to you.)

My more general advice is: A resume isn't a dossier that summarizes one's entire life. You're not trying to adopt a child. You're trying to score a six-month gig. Focus, focus, focus.

If you want to be scientific, then a more accurate statement is:

The MBTI test, may have weak validity and precision across all it's dichotomies.

Albeit even this matter seems to be contended.

"CPP Inc., the publisher of the MBTI instrument, calls it "the world's most widely used personality assessment",with as many as two million assessments administered annually. The CPP and other proponents state that the indicator meets or exceeds the reliability of other psychological instruments and cite reports of individual behavior. Some studies have found strong support for construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability, although variation was observed. However, some academic psychologists have criticized the MBTI instrument, claiming that it "lacks convincing validity data". Some studies have shown the statistical validity and reliability to be low. The use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as a predictor of job success has not been supported in studies,[15][16] and its use for this purpose is expressly discouraged in the Manual.[17]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator

Also, if you're going to cite scientific studies to rebut someone else's point, it goes much further to making your case when you actually dig up references or links to them.

Cerebral Blood Flow and Personality: A Positron Emission Tomography Study

Debra L. Johnson, Ph.D.; John S. Wiebe,et al (1990), The American Journal of Psychiatry, VOL. 156, No. 2

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/156/2/252

I'll try dig up the other.

Putting your Myers-Briggs personality type in your CV suggests to me that you probably believe in horoscopes, too. At the very least, you think it's relevant somehow and reflects positively on you (or why would you include it?). It's twee, self-indulgent, and pseudo-science - I want more from my developers.

This poster is not saying, "everyone processes information the exact same way." Rather the poster is saying, "The Meyer Briggs type inventory (as currently administered) is extremely flawed. Therefore, putting your type on your resume is akin to putting your horoscope."

In that regard, the original commenter is correct - the description of INTP is not useful as the test itself is fundamentally flawed. While there is a whole lot of science that says, "We are all different," MBTI doesn't do a very good job of quantifying these differences.

As an answer to "putting your MBTI result on your CV like it's relevant and you think it offers some kind of insight is bad", it's a little weird.

To the former part: horoscopes are also anecdotally accurate, and hence the comparison. Good horoscopes and other forms of cold reading are specifically designed to offer people given situations they can relate to: "sometimes you feel like you're the life and soul of the party, but it's interesting, because you represent a contradiction - there are times when really you just want to be alone" (source: I just made that up)... Compare and contrast to: "As an INTP, your primary mode of living is focused internally, where you deal with things rationally and logically. Your secondary mode is external, where you take things in primarily via your intuition." (source: first line of first result for INTP on Google) You mean ... INTPs are sometimes rational and logic, and sometimes intuitive? ;-)

To the latter part: the model is a big part of the problem. It polarizes personality traits that are necessarily context-dependent, mood-influenced, and exist on a scale in to binary Yes/No. If you're not Introverted, you're Extraverted. Not: "you're in the middle, and occasionally tend to one or the other" - simply: "you are x".

Your response is not helpful.

Smart and humble (may even too much so ;)

FWIW I thought the design is great, because it comes across authentic and interesting, without being a riot of colors.

Sure it could be tightened up slightly, but for a personal website, you did a great job.

As for Chris, your site looks a bit crappy to me, and perhaps I'd think twice about using that as a reference on the slickness-o-meter. ;) PS your points may well be valid though.

Education is (we hope) the rigorous, dedicated, examined and measured study of some subject. On Peter's resume, he mentions that he is an expert Perl programmer. I have no way to measure this without giving him a coding question. However, if he had he has a such-and-such GPA in the CS program at Stanford, then I have some way of measuring his expertise in the curriculum there (BTW - I go so far as to review curricula of various programs when it comes time of the year to do college grad interviews)

I fully admit that not all people need degrees. It's like saying that everyone in the factory must have a mechanical engineering degree. They don't need it... but if they do, I'd like to know quickly.

It also is not saying that someone cannot learn these things on their own. It's also not saying that someone without that study can be smarter and more capable than someone with those years of study. Both happen, a lot. And also a lot of dropouts I've known are more capable than their graduating counterparts. [OT: all of this is why I've been advocating apprenticeships out of high school for some time now, especially in games, which I used to work on.]

Back to the original question, going to the extreme end of the spectrum, would you take a Ph.D. seriously on someone's resume, or not? I do. Even years later, it means they dedicated years of time to the study of that subject.

Regarding my first link, I didn't know it was based on a template and I doubt many recruiters will know as well. Just thought it's one example of an easy to scan resume.

I assume the layout breaks on my setup because I have set the default browser font size to 18px and you're using em's (which are relative to the base font) to define all your font sizes.

Using relative font sizing isn't necessarily bad, but you should make sure that the whole layout is flexible enough. For example, you have set a static pixel height for the speech bubble and "full stack" containers. With a slightly different font setup that can cause the text to overflow (as can be seen in the screenshot above).

Great work this far, I'll bet you can make this a lot better by reading all the feedback in these comments.

For 2 and 5, I'm guessing it's the same issue that juriga mentioned, as I also have my default font size a little larger. I see the same effect as in juriga's screenshot at the top, and in Firefox I also see a lot of overlapping text in the area alongside the full stack graphic. My defaults are font size 18px, monospace 16px, minimum 10px; maybe that will help you to reproduce the problem.

As for the graphic itself and the accompanying text, as with much of the document, I think the idea could probably work but I'm not wild about the current execution. I won't repeat things others have already said in detail, but FWIW I agree with the people who have suggested that the graphics lack a common visual style and the text sizes lack a clear hierarchy.

I figured the industry experience covered some of this

Yes and no. If it's me, and maybe I've got past the initial scan and now I'm looking for more details to prepare for an interview, I'd like at least a rough idea of your level with any relevant skills you're claiming. That means, broadly speaking, how much experience in total and how recently you used that skill.

A list of buzzwords and a list of projects but no matching between them doesn't tell me which are your relatively strong skills. Unfortunately, I'm going to assume by default that none of them are particularly strong, simply because in my experience most people who list lots of skills on a CV/resume but don't highlight their particular strengths among those skills usually aren't very strong at anything.

If you do have relatively strong areas, particularly those that are relevant to specific job, then failing to highlight them means at best you're missing a chance to direct the interview in a way that is going to make you look good. At worst, you're going to get asked about your weaker skills and if you get caught out on the technical questions/programming test/whatever the interviewers are going to assume your other skills are all of that level.

If by 'real people' you mean recruiters, that's not my primary target audience, I have an utterly boring, scannable MS-Word document for them if needed.

I guess in that case my question is: who is your primary target audience for this document? If it's technical/management guys who are going to be conducting an interview once you're past the recruiters, I'd still say scannability is essential. It's totally unfair that people who are going to make decisions that could have a major effect on your life aren't necessarily going to read the whole document you've spent so much time and care preparing, but in the real world, that's often going to be the case, so you might as well play by the same rules as everyone else!

I think we tend to agree given that you prefer 'concise coding' which I'll take to mean DRY and 'straightforward' rather than 'clever'.

But by 'picked over', I literally meant 'changed to meet changing requirements' rather than 'read for comprehension'. In that sense, the fact that one guy on the team considers the code he writes to be 'clean' is rather meaningless when many hands might work in that pathway. Composable approaches tend to be more resilient to regressions, well, in my experience anyway, YMMV.

I guess my problem with 'clean code' is that it's too open to interpretation. What do you specifically do that makes your code better than the other guys?

I think the same about your site. It's good, but you would take more of it by applying some css and javascript magic to all the images that include text (and then, exclude the text from the image).

It keeps 'serious' companies from contacting me, improving my accuracy on finding a position I can handle without headaches.

I would prefer not to put that there, as FCE is not that much of an achievement.