<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Career on hippotion</title><link>https://blog.hippotion.com/tags/career/</link><description>Recent content in Career on hippotion</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://blog.hippotion.com/tags/career/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Mind the gap: I pointed monitoring at my own skill set</title><link>https://blog.hippotion.com/posts/mind-the-gap-skill-radar/</link><pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.hippotion.com/posts/mind-the-gap-skill-radar/</guid><description>A rejection isn&amp;rsquo;t actionable data. So an n8n workflow now extracts skill demand from live job listings, diffs it against what I can prove, and renders the gap as a dashboard — deployed like everything else here: via git push.</description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A while back I applied for a senior platform role at n8n and didn&rsquo;t land it. Fair enough — but
&ldquo;fair enough&rdquo; isn&rsquo;t actionable. Rejections come with no logs, no metrics, no trace. For someone
who runs thirty-odd services with full observability, having <em>vibes</em> as the only instrumentation
on my own career felt architecturally embarrassing.</p>
<p>So I built <strong>mind-the-gap</strong>: a pipeline that measures what the market demands, diffs it against
what I can prove, and renders the gap as a private dashboard on my cluster. The job hunt is now a
monitored system. This post is about the non-obvious decisions.</p>
<h2 id="demand-an-llm-reads-job-listings-so-i-dont-have-to">Demand: an LLM reads job listings so I don&rsquo;t have to</h2>
<p>I already had <a href="/posts/ats-job-poller/">a job poller</a> — an n8n workflow that polls the public ATS
APIs (Greenhouse / Lever / Ashby) of ~33 companies plus a broad remote-jobs feed every six hours.
A sibling workflow now re-fetches the same boards and, for every listing that passes the
role+location gate, asks a small hosted LLM (Llama-3.1-8B) for a structured extraction:</p>
<div class="highlight"><pre tabindex="0" class="chroma"><code class="language-json" data-lang="json"><span class="line"><span class="cl"><span class="p">{</span><span class="nt">&#34;seniority&#34;</span><span class="p">:</span> <span class="s2">&#34;senior&#34;</span><span class="p">,</span> <span class="nt">&#34;skills&#34;</span><span class="p">:</span> <span class="p">[{</span><span class="nt">&#34;name&#34;</span><span class="p">:</span> <span class="s2">&#34;kubernetes&#34;</span><span class="p">,</span> <span class="nt">&#34;importance&#34;</span><span class="p">:</span> <span class="s2">&#34;must&#34;</span><span class="p">},</span> <span class="err">...</span><span class="p">]}</span>
</span></span></code></pre></div><p>One row per <em>(job, skill)</em> lands in an n8n Data Table. Decisions that mattered:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>One LLM call per job, not one batch.</strong> Free-tier inference times out on batches; per-job calls
are slower but fail independently. A lesson the poller already paid for.</li>
<li><strong>Insert doubles as the processed-marker.</strong> A job whose extraction fails to parse produces no
rows — so it&rsquo;s retried next run, for free. No status column, no second table.</li>
<li><strong>Canonicalization in code, not in the prompt.</strong> The model says &ldquo;K8s&rdquo;, &ldquo;k3s&rdquo;, &ldquo;EKS&rdquo; on
different days regardless of instructions. A dumb alias map (<code>k8s→kubernetes</code>, <code>eks→aws</code>)
beats prompt engineering for consistency.</li>
<li><strong>8B is good enough — with a guard.</strong> It occasionally echoed the seniority enum back literally
(<code>&quot;junior|mid|senior|staff|lead|unspecified&quot;</code>). The fix is one line of validation, not a bigger
model.</li>
</ul>
<h2 id="supply-no-artifact-no-credit">Supply: no artifact, no credit</h2>
<p>The other side of the diff is a skills registry — markdown in my knowledge vault, with a
machine-parseable YAML block. Every skill has a state, and the rule that keeps the whole thing
honest is brutal: <strong>a skill counts as <code>proven</code> only if an artifact exists</strong> — a public repo, a
blog post, documented production experience. Otherwise it&rsquo;s <code>claimed</code>, and claimed earns half
credit.</p>
<p>That rule immediately produced the most useful insight of the project: <strong>&ldquo;invisible skill&rdquo; is a
real category.</strong> Python turned out to be the market&rsquo;s #5 ask. I use it constantly — and could
point to nothing public that shows it. The cheapest score increase isn&rsquo;t learning something new;
it&rsquo;s a weekend making an existing skill visible. No gut-feeling gap analysis would have ranked
&ldquo;write about what you already do&rdquo; above &ldquo;learn the shiny thing.&rdquo;</p>
<h2 id="the-score-distinct-companies-not-mentions">The score: distinct companies, not mentions</h2>
<p>First naive aggregation: Canonical&rsquo;s listings mention Ubuntu <em>nine times, all marked must-have</em> —
suddenly Ubuntu looks like the hottest skill in Europe. Employer skew is the noise floor of small
samples. The fix: demand weight = <strong>distinct companies naming the skill</strong>, not total mentions.
One enthusiastic employer can&rsquo;t move the radar.</p>
<p>Two more scoring rules I&rsquo;d defend in review:</p>
<ul>
<li>Skills named by fewer than two companies don&rsquo;t count at all — single-listing noise stays out.</li>
<li>Demand the registry hasn&rsquo;t classified yet shows up as &ldquo;unreviewed&rdquo; and <strong>counts fully against
the score</strong>. An unreviewed market signal is a gap until proven otherwise; the dashboard nags me
to triage it.</li>
</ul>
<h2 id="rendering-the-page-is-a-git-commit">Rendering: the page is a git commit</h2>
<p>The dashboard is a single static HTML file, and the pipeline that produces it never touches the
cluster. <code>render.js</code> lives in this repo as the single source of truth; a nightly n8n workflow
fetches it raw from GitLab, <code>eval()</code>s it against the Data Table rows and the registry, and — only
if the result differs from what&rsquo;s committed (timestamps stripped, or every night is a &ldquo;change&rdquo;) —
PUTs the new <code>index.html</code> back via the GitLab API.</p>
<p>Serving is the same pattern as this blog: nginx plus a git-pull sidecar, deployed by Argo CD,
behind the cluster&rsquo;s OAuth middleware. The renderer has no kubeconfig, no SSH, no cluster access
of any kind. <strong>GitLab stays the only source of truth — even for a page that rewrites itself
nightly.</strong> If the workflow goes rogue, the worst it can do is a reviewable commit.</p>
<h2 id="day-one-verdict">Day-one verdict</h2>
<p>First run: 2,297 postings fetched, 25 in scope, 257 skill rows. Coverage score: <strong>63%</strong>.
Kubernetes and AWS tied at the top of demand — which means the AWS gap-closing project already in
flight stopped being a hunch and became the measured top of the market. Go is the only top-ten
demand with zero supply. The dashboard doesn&rsquo;t get anyone a job; it just makes sure every learning
Saturday is pointed where the data says, not where the hype does.</p>
<p>The job board rejected me. The data didn&rsquo;t.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Workflows, render.js, and setup: <a href="https://github.com/janos-gyorgy/mind-the-gap">github.com/janos-gyorgy/mind-the-gap</a>.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded></item></channel></rss>