zlacker

[return to "Ask HN: Who is hiring? (October 2023)"]
1. dokein+6L[view] [source] 2023-10-02 17:57:22
>>whoish+(OP)
SmarterDx | 180 - 230K + equity + benefits | Remote first (but U.S. only due to data confidentiality) | Full time We are an early stage health tech company using AI to improve hospital revenue cycle (making healthcare costs lower and allowing doctors to focus on patient care). The team is small but high functioning (MD + data scientist combos, former ASF board member, Google and Amazon engineers, Stanford LLM researchers, etc.) and initially scaled the company to $1MM+ in contracted revenue without raising capital.

We have been backed by top investors including Floodgate (Lyft, Twitch, Twitter), Bessemer, and are currently on pace to 30X in revenue over a two-year time period.

Plus we have 4 full years of runway.

Who we are looking for:

- Data scientists

- Security engineers

Be part of the journey as we hone our PMF and build to scale! For more, see: https://smarterdx.com/positions.html

If interested email us at hiring at smarterdx dot com

◧◩
2. d4mi3n+Z41[view] [source] 2023-10-02 19:27:26
>>dokein+6L
dokein, SmarterDx seems like an interesting company but I think your SecEng job req needs a it of work: https://smarterdx.com/careers.html?gh_jid=4074835007

To somebody working in security, you're more or less asking for a combination IT helpdesk, system administrator, network engineer, and compliance specialist.

I've worked at a number of startups and understand that the nature of the job requires folks to wear a lot of hats, but security engineers are in high demand and you'll likely have more luck if you can focus the job req a bit more on the work you need.

If the work really is that diverse, you may have better luck hiring a reputable security consultancy that has all of those specialists on hand.

◧◩◪
3. dokein+IR3[view] [source] 2023-10-03 16:15:50
>>d4mi3n+Z41
We appreciate your feedback! We will experimentally see what type of candidates we can attract and update our process from there. I may be overly optimistic, but am hopeful this will attract the "T-shaped" candidate who's great at one area but is willing to roll up their sleeves in others.
◧◩◪◨
4. Kalium+bi4[view] [source] 2023-10-03 18:12:45
>>dokein+IR3
This reads like your standard issue security-team-in-a-box JD. You might find the T-shaped candidate of your dreams, but anyone capable of delivering the combination of cloud admin/netadmin/IT/SOC II/HIPAA/software arch/devops is going to know they're a substitute for a team. They'll expect to be paid significantly above what you're offering because they're going to be doing the job of a director and a team of six on an engineer's authority. This doesn't even touch on policy or IR, but they'll inevitably wind up in there too.

Speaking as a security professional who is the T-shaped person you want, this JD is bad news. It reads less as the expression of a hopeful young company and more of a giant red flag warning that this company does not understand security or take it seriously enough. You may want to rethink it if you wish your company to have a reputation as taking the security of your customers' data seriously.

The advice to consider a consultancy is sound and well worth careful consideration.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. jivetu+Br5[view] [source] 2023-10-04 01:55:31
>>Kalium+bi4
I'm gonna go ahead and disagree.

This is an early stage startup, and they are very clear in describing that. I also like the clarity in their business model. And the conciseness. In 2 sentences they've told me everything I need to know. The founding team is also exceptionally on point. What I read into all this is that they are good to great at execution, at communication, and very well versed in the problem space. There aren't all that many medical doctor, strong compsci, startup founders.

The money on offer is very much on par with this kind of position at this size of company. I have to believe that the equity will also be respectable. Surely, they will find out soon enough.

I also think it's admirable that a company of this size isn't just winging it with security. I don't work in the space, but having been adjacent I can tell you that even in the healthcare startup space, few are treating security properly. (Hence the HIPAA in a box startups! Some occasionally advertised here on HN. I see far more ads for such startups than actual medical data processors hiring for security internally.)

I very much understand where the cynical take is coming from, but I think it's unfair. Security should be a core competency of such a company and they are trying to make it so. That's to be applauded not scorned.

[go to top]