Ask HN: Are YC startups *actually* hiring?

[logotype]

Having applied to 20-30 YC startups without any meaningful replies and I’m wondering, are YC startups actually hiring? Having worked in finance for a decade and other high pressure jobs I don’t consider myself a spring chicken.

Edit: I now run a fintech startup https://fixparser.dev and we do look for a technical/business co-founder, feel free to reach out.

[TheGamerUncle]

I would like to assume that I am a good candidate I usually get calls back from even LinkedIn posts or even indeed, but after well applying to more than two hundred offerings on the who is hiring posts in this place, and only having had been called twice. I can assure you that the ones here usually are not hiring and at best just want a rooster of possible replacements for their current employees. Most notable offender is mixrank, I know more than twenty people that have applied to no avail, even people with more than 22 years of experience and very fancy titles.

[heurist]

Not a YC startup, but jobs I've posted recently had over a thousand applicants in the first few weeks. I post multiple places, including HN. There's a huge culling process to find the 20-30 most applicable candidates, then to narrow down from there to the 1-2 that fit best.

The best way to stand out (for me) is a real application not written with AI. Everyone uses AI now and it all sounds the same. Express your honest enthusiasm for joining the company/mission in the cover letter (maybe 20% of applicants submit a cover letter, and a smaller fraction of that was written by real people, and smaller fraction of that gives authentic enthusiastic vibes). Use your real voice in your writing. I give the AI applicants a chance if their resume makes sense, but it's a minefield.

[aimazon]

Some companies are just very selective, i.e: they're hiring the right people not the best candidate. Most of us get jobs because companies need to fill a role and we're the best candidate of a bad bunch... most of us (whether we have 22 years and a fancy title or not) would not get a job at a company that hires carefully because we're probably not a good fit for their very niche view of what a good hire is.

[serial_dev]

These are two separate categories.

Firstly, there are the monthly "Who is hiring" posts. There, basically anyone can post their company and their positions. They don't need to be YC companies.

And secondly, there are the promoted "Company ABC hiring a Software Engineer (YC '23)" (or similar). There, commenting is not allowed, and the listing will stay on HN for a set amount of time.

I believe the question in this post talks about the latter.

But it's certainly interesting to see in this thread, that basically both of these groups of companies don't reach out to candidates...

[tennisflyi]

Same experience - people are getting hired, just not me

[themanmaran]

As a YC company that is currently hiring, yes! And all of the YC companies I know are also struggling to find engineers. But the job listings (HN, WorkAtAStartup) practically never bring in good candidates.

A few big problems:

1. AI Spam. I categorized the inbound we got the other day from a job post. Out of 172 daily applicants, we got 22 that looked reasonably like a person, and 150 that were primarily AI generated messages. Which are pretty easy to spot because they're 500 words of tech jargon and rehashing the job description.

2. Purely automated applications. There are a lot of "Apply to 1000 jobs with AI" startups out there that just spam job boards [1][2][3].

3. Qualifications. There is a shocking number of engineers applying to work at an AI company who have never made a single API request to OpenAI. After three years of hearing about AI every day if you've never tested a single inference API then why are you applying to an AI startup.

The signal to noise ratio is so bad that it's better to just do outbound. At this point the job listing is mostly there so we can share it with candidates that we reach out to.

[1]https://lazyapply.com/

[2]https://aiapply.co/

[3]https://www.reddit.com/r/GetEmployed/comments/1eo8uyp/i_used...

[drillsteps5]

> 1. AI Spam. I categorized the inbound we got the other day from a job post. Out of 172 daily applicants, we got 22 that looked reasonably like a person, and 150 that were primarily AI generated messages. Which are pretty easy to spot because they're 500 words of tech jargon and rehashing the job description.

This is what it takes to get through the filters/recruiter search. In majority of the organizations the first line of defense is the recruiter who has a limited knowledge of the job responsibilities, technologies involved, etc. They employ various search techniques in their ATS (lately enhanced by the various LLM tools) and whatever resumes come up in the keyword search will end up in the pile presented to the hiring manager. This is especially true now when volume of resumes is in hundreds, you can't just go through all of them manually. So the only way to get through the first stage is to create resumes to fit the LLM/keyword search...

EDIT: I've been seeing more and more of these disclaimers when I submit an application: "We use Machine Learning for an initial comparison of resumes against the education, experience, and skills requirements of the job description." Check here to out out of this analysis.

So candidates tweak resumes to match the requirements (likely) with the same LLM that will be checking the resume match to the same requirements. Why is this surprising?

[tennisflyi]

> 1. AI Spam. I categorized the inbound we got the other day from a job post. Out of 172 daily applicants, we got 22 that looked reasonably like a person, and 150 that were primarily AI generated messages. Which are pretty easy to spot because they're 500 words of tech jargon and rehashing the job description.

Is that not the ideal answer? Those that get to move forward are the one's that just happen to write a message that hits a non-descriptive sweet spot? A fucking Magic 8 Ball

[nedwin]

Adding to this: we mostly focus on outbound, mostly using WorkAtAStartup or LinkedIn as a source.

[doctorpangloss]

The unspoken problem is that most people want way too much fucking money.

[no_wizard]

Interesting to me that 'working with AI' is using OpenAI's API.

Thats really working with someone elses AI, no?

FWIW I have used it quite a bit, but its not really the same thing as developing AI

(nevermind my usual rant that we shouldn't call any of this AI, but I digress)

[synicalx]

> After three years of hearing about AI every day if you've never tested a single inference API then why are you applying to an AI startup.

Devil's advocate; why would I have made an API request if my employer has never used that service? Maybe that lack of interest on their part is why I'm trying to leave and get a job in a field that's of interest to me.

[AznHisoka]

It begs the question: why not just post your job in your website and nowhere else (ie LinkedIn/Indeed)? That reduces the spam AND gives you a link to point people to.

I hear these complaints all the time from companies. To me if you’re leaving your jobs up at aggregators like LinkedIn, you have no right to complain (not singling you out btw, just a general thought)

[WD-42]

The irony of an AI company’s hiring woes due to too much AI.

[rors]

I have a PhD from one of the best universities in the world in Machine Translation, I was training feed forward networks in 2014, built models in TensorFlow in 2016, founded a generative AI startup in 2019 and signed deals with huge consumer goods companies, debugged distributed training jobs on a cluster with thousands of A100s, and wrote PyTorch training pipelines for a financial ML trading signal that made money.

Yet, I am unqualified to join an AI startup because I’ve never made an API request to OpenAI

[kdamica]

The reality is that the vast majority of startup hires are referrals. For hiring managers, having someone you trust tell you that they've worked with a candidate and vouch for them is invaluable, especially when the company is at a stage that you don't have good performance oversight. The cost of a bad hire is immense.

My advice: never do a cold application. Find ways to hustle to get a warm intro.

[z3c0]

This is likely what's going on. Public pools are often the very last stop on the search for candidates. The precedence is almost always

1) internal hires (obviously not as possible at a start-up)

2) referrals

3) direct engagement from a recruiter

4) talent pools curated by online services like LinkedIn or Indeed

5) forum pools, like those here in HN

6) applications from the Careers page

Almost all my jobs have come from referrals or directly from recruiters. I've gotten calls back from four-and-beyond, but have never made it through the process, despite being overqualified in those cases. On the flipside, I've been underqualified for jobs I got via referral. The power of having someone inside can't be overstated.

[caminante]

> the vast majority of startup hires are referrals.

> Find ways to hustle to get a warm intro.

OP's process is actually that of a spring chicken by not realizing this reality.

I still don't understand why people, especially "experienced hires," expect more from passive applications.

[fraaancis]

Now that I think about it, I never once got a job from a cold application. It was always on either an employee recommendation or having met a family member.

[bambax]

Yeah ok sure, this is common sense. But then what's really the point of advertising open positions? The only certain result for companies who do this, is they'll be inundated with pointless random candidacies...?

[scarface_74]

Hypothetical candidate: “Hi, my name is John and I’m a ‘full stack developer’ interested in working at your company”

Me: “Okay submit your resume to our job board and someone will get back to you”.

Doing a “warm introduction” isn’t enough.

[ryandrake]

It would be cool if the monthly Who's Hiring threads asked companies to optionally disclose useful information like "How long have you had this job open?" or "When was the last time your [company | team] hired someone, and how long did the process take from first posting to the employee's first day on the job?" Better yet, a response SLO for getting back to candidates (this will never happen).

[Pedro_Ribeiro]

I believe HN is a high quality forum that enforces high quality standards, there is no reason this shouldn't be a thing. Companies that advertise here should be held accountable.

[jjice]

I work for a small YC startup and we have recently wanted to hire another engineer. Our CTO posted a listing on WorkAtAStartup and within two or so days, got over 200 applicants. Apparently, WorkAtAStartup (which I've used successfully in the past) allows you to bulk send applications.

He went through and found that almost all the applications he was able to go through were absolute nonsense.

He then screened some people before a technical interview with the rest of the team and found over half of them either had no clue how to really write any code or were completely lying about any experience they've had.

We then had five interviews set up for the following week. None of them were a fit. We have a pretty straight forward set of real world examples for our programming questions and no one got them. Keep in mind, all the other engineers on the team had gone through these questions without issue in the past, and we're not particularly amazing engineers. The "trickiest" of them is essentially performing an in memory group by given to arrays of data that have relations to each other. These were all full open internet as well.

We decided to pause hiring for the next quarter. I think the main issue was the absolute flood of applicants that had no ability to fill the role, and filtering through that with limited man-hours while features still need to be shipped is really difficult.

Years ago, when I'd be part of engineering hiring efforts, we had a recruiter who would handle screenings, so I don't know if it's always been like this and we need to get better at screening, or if it's notably worse now.

[ceroxylon]

It is a complicated scene right now. Bots are taking over on both ends, both in creating and interpreting resumes. Companies can have ulterior motives for posting job ads in many directions, including just scraping data.

My latest job search made me want to create a startup that addresses this, by vetting both posters and users. The largest hurdle is that adding money to the scenario opens a whole new can of worms for scammers.

[serial_dev]

It's crazy, now candidates apply to everything they see with crap, fake, or AI generated resumes, and companies filter most of the candidates out with APS automation, AI, even if you carefully considered a position and spent time on their application....

Candidates generate a lot of crap, companies filter out a lot of crap and more.

[awkward]

In my career I've split time between startups, fintech, and consulting. Last year I've had a few interviews with VC funded startups that went to second and third rounds, where I would be told outright that developers who worked at larger companies weren't as "Velocity Focused" as what they were looking for.

I think there's some active memes in the startup community about not hiring people from finance specifically.

[logotype]

interesting! I haven’t heard about this, thanks for sharing.

[tslocum]

I've seen a YC startup post for the same back-end job for a year now. I admit that I did not apply, but it doesn't look that unappealing.

[HFrank]

Companies need many backend engineers as hey scale. Logically, for a general backend role, it would be the same backend role advertised continuously.

[jagged-chisel]

> … developers who worked at larger companies weren't as "Velocity Focused" as what they were looking for.

From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42857294

I hear bullshit excuses like this often. “Not enough experience with $[unusual product]” (‘enough’ experience is acquired in about a week); “Not a cultural fit” (oh the many things this could mask - not old enough, too old, wrong gender, wrong cultural group - all of which would be illegal to admit); “we … uh … well, we moved on to other candidates” - at least you didn’t ghost me, but this one feels like cover for the previous one (though that one is cover for legal issues…)

I’ve aced technical screenings, made it to the final interview, all sounds positive, then I get some bullshit response. In one interview, there were three dev leads on the call and one unrelated manager who ran the call (and completely ran over the other three), was clueless about the technology he was asking about, and when I disagreed about something (the other three suddenly went from yes-men to silent), this guy decided I wasn’t worthy of hiring.

How can anyone possibly solve the social issues around hiring? I have a (non-starter) idea: some amount of accountability to the people they turn down late in the process.

[scarface_74]

@burgerrito posted a link to a similar submission three months ago where one commenter said for one job they got over 1000 applications.

It’s almost impossible to stand out and rise above the noise these days if you are just randomly submitting your application to a job board.

When I mentioned this before, someone asked me should they reach out to the company directly. That doesn’t help either unless you have a special set of skills or experience that would make you stand out.

Neither “I am a full stack developer” or “I worked for a FAANG” set you apart.

[linebeck]

It’s likely they know someone they’ve effectively already offered the job to, but equal opportunity laws require a job posting to be made. So while they are technically “hiring”, the job posting is fairly meaningless.

[burgerrito]

Related:

Ask HN: Who is pretending to be hiring? <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41714672>

[caminante]

It is related, but tells the same anecdotes, including people complaining (e.g., hurt ego about not getting shortlisted after completing an internship 2+ years earlier).

[steve_adams_86]

Not a direct answer, but months ago I was applying to YC startups that were actively posting opportunities. I had great references from past YC startups, what I'd consider a good resume, a proven track record of actually building stuff. Not a single company was interested. This was true outside of YC companies too, though. It was surreal. I started to think I must be a fraud or something.

[rvz]

Here is the truth: They really are not.

Why? They don't have the money nor will they risk it on people who they do not know.

The best way to get "hired" by them is to fiercely compete against them to the point where they wave the white flag and buy you out.

[CoderJoshDK]

When I was ready to move on, to a new opportunity, I spent most of my effort in the HN thread and work for a startup (owned by YC.) And while most applications resulted in no response, that is on par with any other platform. That said, I did hear back from multiple companies! I made it to late stage interview with 3 companies but stopped once I took an offer from one of them. And this was all in the span of 1 month.

As a data point, yes, some companies do hire here. Maybe not all. But I had a great experience through YC.

I think in general, the hiring market is a mess (on both sides) and HN suffers from similar issues.

[0x0000000]

Wow, that edit is something. Post something inflammatory that will garner engagement, then turn it into your own "I'm hiring" post once it's on the front page.

Quality hack.

[scarface_74]

And then it’s for a “technical cofounder”. I bet the pay is peanuts

[logotype]

:) it's all part of the game

[chrisoconnell]

In the past, I have applied to many YC startups, and have a pretty high response rate. Being that the job board is pretty prominent in the tech world, and engineering jobs are highly competitive, it is likely that a smaller startup does not have the resources to reply to every applicant.

This being said, I've been self employed for several years, so this may have changed since ~ 2021, but I don't think it's likely.

Also, the landscape has changed, and some job posting may have been made during more optimistic moments, and they may just be stale, rather than fake.

I have referred many people to "WorkAtAStartup" in recent years who have had quite a bit of success. While it's unfortunate that you are not having the best of luck, definitely be optimistic and continue to try! There are many great companies that recruit through the YC boards, and I recommend using WorkAtAStartup to have the best chances of response, even more so than their direct job listings.

[mjasher]

Sorry you've had that experience. My 2 cents is that unless they've done a "big" (> 5 million) seed or series A they probably don't have the money or appetite for much hiring. So target later stage if you aren't already.

[bobthecowboy]

I've applied to a couple of these. If I remember correctly PostHog and Enveritas both posted here and for both I went past the initial screening step, but that's where it ended for me.

I also participated in the hiring side for the previous startup I worked at - SoftIron - and we did actually hire someone we found through a post I made here on the monthly Hiring thread. He was a good candidate, but eventually everyone got laid off anyway. I actually felt bad about that - I think we were only around a year after hiring him.

On that note, since I was participating in the hiring, I will say that we had a shocking amount of low effort and AI-written responses to the posting.

[gentlesoulcarp]

As an applicant, the sign up box forces everyone into narrow roles. It’s a radio button, so you can’t be good at “product” and “dev ops”, for example. It’s realistic for people to be good at multiple things.

Last I checked, that radio category is account-wide, so if you do “frontend”, that’s all your account can do. This makes it difficult to apply to multiple kinds of roles through the interface and it makes it harder for founders to find people who can wear multiple hats. Most of them could probably use a versatile person at their stage.

[tptacek]

The smaller the company, the less likely the hiring process is a well-oiled machine, from responses to inbounds to true-ing up the JDs currently advertised on the site; compounding that, smaller companies get fewer inbound applicants and can end up holding out for a unicorn fit for a role for a long time. I wouldn't read much into no-response from a startup (totally reasonable to be irritated about it, but it's always a numbers game regardless, so you might not want to be hanging on a response from any one company).