brianjcohen

Confido Legal | Security Engineer (Senior Software Engineer – Security) | Remote (US) | Full-time

Confido Legal is a fintech platform that helps legal tech companies and law firms embed payments and finance features into their products. Security and trust are foundational to our mission.

We’re hiring a senior software engineer to join our core engineering team and own security across the platform. This is not a standalone security department role. You’ll remain an active contributor to the product—writing code, reviewing PRs, shaping architecture—while serving as the team’s point person on security.

You’ll lead PCI DSS Level 1 and SOC 2 compliance, drive secure-by-default architecture, harden our AWS infrastructure, reduce vulnerability noise, and embed security into every stage of our product lifecycle. You’ll also participate in customer security reviews and incident response alongside engineering leadership.

Stack: TypeScript, React, Next.js, GraphQL, AWS (Pulumi IaC), Docker, ECS.

We’re a small, high-ownership engineering team where engineers lead domains (security, underwriting, growth) while continuing to build product daily. If you’ve “seen this movie before” securing real SaaS systems and want meaningful ownership without leaving engineering, we’d love to talk.

$175k–$225k. Fully remote (US).

Full Job Posting: https://confidolegal.com/about

Apply: https://confidolegal.com/security-engineer?hsCtaAttrib=31427...

It appears that MMT is meant to be a macroeconomic theory. I'm not here to defend it. But I would wager that an MMT advocate would claim to possess evidence that in the aggregate, a jobs guarantee would create more value than it would destroy because the pattern you describe does not apply to most people.

Again, I am not here to defend this theory. In fact, I have witnessed your anecdote myself and agree with the premise, at least on a micro scale.

MMT says that the only constraint on spending is inflation, but also turns around and says that you can always print more money. That’s a contradiction.

The article follows that up by saying:

> As long as there are enough workers and equipment to meet growing demand without igniting inflation, the government can spend what it needs to maintain employment

and later on:

> To stabilize employment, MMT would add a federally funded, locally administered job guarantee. Government would employ more people in slumps than in booms.

So I think the idea is that MMT recognizes that inflation would indeed occur if you kept printing money without a demand for that money, which they say will be supplied by government-sponsored full employment.

What I don't understand is: is there a situation in which full employment has already been achieved and the government just keeps printing money for new initiatives, and we're back to inflation?

The flip side of this is: currently, most engineering fields require you to have some kind of professional certification (eg. a PE) from an industry "guild", eg. the ASCE. Software engineers don't really have a functional equivalent. We demand that professional engineers build our bridges, but we'll pretty much let anyone build our software. At some point, changing that may be the responsible thing to do.

Washington DC is running its own exchange. Apps like this that use data.healthcare.gov as their backing will only work for states that are on the Federal exchange.

I wrote the same thing, with a much crappier user interface, last week. Mine includes Idaho and New Mexico as well: http://healthcare.brianjcohen.com

My notes on that page explain why this is really not a great dataset. These aren't really price quotes, they're averages they've generated for various age ranges. And since deductibles, coinsurance rates, and copays aren't included, there's really no way to compare them on a level playing field (although this is a problem that healthcare.gov has as well).