Fashion (f)arts and digital colonialism via RLHF (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback)

Who made LinkedIn the way it is? Seriously, who came up with these liniar profile flows, and how do we go around this?

I was sitting at a roundtable last week, all women, all fields, all badasses who've changed the world many times over, started unicorns, wrote books, built communities, ignited revolutions.

Some—many—had also made humans. From scratch. 🚼

I asked: "How goes it, ladykins? Were you overproductive again this week?"

All started with their jobs but ended up listing 5-10 buckets of productivity.

A few have multiple streams of income; some are heavily involved in local politics; all carry ongoing, high-touch, high-skill buckets that madly affect their surroundings but would never fit anywhere on their LI profile, because—while super impactful and value-adding and all—they're either unpaid labor, or they don't fit with the rest of their career landscape.

So, who was it?

Who decided that the framework for building a representative career profile needs to prioritize single focus, liniarity, continuity, and volume vs. quality of relationships?

Some of the most productive, impactful, innovative, experienced, cross-disciplinary, highly skilled, deep thinkers we celebrate are trying to build LI profiles and end up not being able to record most of what they do. Where exactly are they supposed to put the 3 (might as well be 5, if you're Shamala Hinrichsen or Erica Kochi or Sonia Katyal) parallel lives they’re actually running?

And why aren't recruiters concerned? Isn't this LinkedInfication of CVs the same averaging that's happening to GenAI content where everything starts sounding the same, looking the same, quoting itself ad infinitum?