Leaving work for childcare is currently a valid reason to go on unemployment. They should try to work this out with one of their employers. They could each go down to 50% time and pay and be supplemented by unemployment currently. There is a lot of flexibility they aren't taking advantage of and then complaining about how hard it is.
Yeah, that's a huge issue. The ability for the local talent to share their expertise with each other is important too. I agree, but there are solutions to the problem. More meetups and groups have been started in the area, Lexington, and some more rural areas too.
I don't know what the exact cause is, but I got the impression the reason 50 were admitted was that there was a limit to the scale of the program, not that everyone else was unqualified. The article mentioned they are admitting 90 the next year and were continuing to expand.
Very true. UK, U of L, and many other schools in the state produce solid devs. And you're right a lot of the better grads leave for better jobs. But I wouldn't agree that there are no "good" jobs here. The salary is lower, but you probably come out ahead in CoL terms. There have been some startups doing well recently in Lexington and from what I understand Louisville is only doing better. The place I work, Badger Technologies, is doing some pretty awesome things and has some open positions.
This article in the Herald Leader explains and give some numbers to what you're saying https://www.kentucky.com/news/business/article181564581.html Supposedly some of the reason the group was pushed by some larger employers in the area that were hearing potential employees were turning down offers because if the job didn't turn out well in the long run there weren't many alternatives.
I had 400 level EE classes with a couple guys who came up through community colleges. They weren't always prepared for the classes. It was ironic because it wasn't they didn't understand the previous material, but because they hadn't dealt with poor instructors and didn't have the relationships of the previous 3 years studying with the same people.
It was possible at the same university to walk into a lab and start working on joint projects with NASA, the NSA or local industry, where other local universities and community colleges don't offer as much in that regard. On the other hand those professors running the labs didn't really seem to care where the students came from, whether they were in high school or the community college up the road if they were willing to work.
I've invested and mined crypto before, but this is worrying to me. There are enough payday loan offices and gas stations minting money off lottery tickets in Kentucky. The consensus is people keep going to them because it allows them to buy hope, they aren't concerned with the odds, just the feeling they can strike it rich is enough to get someone to buy a scratcher.
The quote from the article “What crypto allows is for the masses to be venture capitalists,” seems sensationalist to me, not to mention inaccurate. Aimed more at selling a lifestyle than educating consumers.
If someone thinks an incredibly volatile and aggressive asset is a replacement for a pension they have probably have gross misconceptions about what they are investing in. Letting someone that ignorant of what they're doing buy in like that is completely irresponsible. I really hope they are being responsible in educating their investors and haven't just found a new way to fleece Kentuckians.
I think a lot of work has been undertaken for a ROS1->2 bridge. It should be feasible to use this to have ROS on a micro and bridge to an existing ROS 1 code base.
I think a lot of the difficulty is in the build system being federated. This makes it complex as it supports multiple build other systems for other ROS packages. I haven't looked into it much yet, but I'm curious about ROS 2 also supporting ROS on smaller micros now. I think this would make the build system more complex.
Modifying the how the devel space is handled seems like an improvement and making it more modular seems like it should help though.
I think the last paragraph in the article is key, the most interesting and tiring arguments are the ones where both parties believe the other is arguing from the gut and have retroactively reasoned while they are being perfectly rational. Being able to see when you might be doing this as well often makes the discussion much less adversarial.
I spent a good amount of time working with Brillo when Google was first pushing it. The thing I liked most about working with it was the system they had for OTA updates. Even in beta they had support for staged rollouts with some analytics on the rollout. There was lockin with the solution as updates used Google's cloud and was signed by both your and their key, but it was a really robust system considering how new it was.
I really hope the project gets more attention. Not only was the firmware update system nice, but having the promis of having the core OS managed and only having to worry about your application was nice as well.
I would really like to talk to some VC's, unfortunately I'm based in the Midwest, it might as well be the majove as far as funding goes or so I understand. So I'm trying to get a sizable MVP and traction before spending time talking to people. No one will talk to you unless you already have the product launched with users here. Where I'm at the Ben and Jerry's model almost makes more sense because by the time you can get funding you almost don't need it anymore.
On the flip side, where I'm located the 120k from yc seed money would be a year's runway for me and a cofounder or two. That and there is more talent here than people think, or at least more good devs looking for work than hiring.
If anyone has some contacts or VCs want to get in contact with me take my username at Gmail to talk.
Yes and they vary drastically. Federal courts use the same jury pool for two years, while a local court could be as little as two weeks.
Attorneys/secretaries/paralegals already do this by hand. More than scraping I'm hoping to do something useful with what they already scrape manually. By giving them a platform that make it easy to share their notes and info about jurors I should be able to start using this information.
Even so, I do have some benefit to having defense attorneys use it. I'll get more data on jurors.
Having people pay what they will or can isn't a new idea. If the defense can't pay an individual license may be cheap, while an office license could be exorbitant if the DA will pay through the nose.
The main point of the last post is that I gain nothing if they don't use it, but if anyone is paying for it I still gain from other free users.
As I mentioned the I think system is suboptimal, I think this can improve it though. I'm not a jerk who would screw the Justice system for a buck, I really do think this can improve things. I don't think the possibility that it might hurt is reason enough not to try.
I replied to PJ via email earlier because I was timed out on responses, but for anyone wondering about this:
My MVP and what would likely become a free version is an app that allows for the sharing of information about jurors and taking notes about jurors during selection. The level of trust required for this is low, just don't delete their info and your good. But while using the free version I imagine that if you had a juror the attorney rated favorably and you had evidence they were an undeniable liability and you showed this to the attorney it would prove the paid tools worth and hopefully encourage them to pay to research the other potential jurors after seeing my tool prevent such a blunder.
Even if it had a low conversion rate the free version still makes sense, more users means more data to draw conclusions to give to those that are paying.
Like I said though, with courtrooms being adversarial one side is incentivized to use any useful tool against the other. If the defense can't afford it and therefore doesn't use it, it becomes less likely the prosecution will use it then too. Maybe to counteract this I have to subsidize the cost of those using it for defense.
It is far to early to say for certain, but in order to generate better juror recommendations data is needed, I want as many people using it as possible to get data.
1. I agree. I think this app could be useful to the consultants too by making their jobs easier. I think I would still see a sale, just from a consultant not the attorney. I think two separate markets would be those who can't afford or it doesnt make sense to hire consultants and the consultants themselves.
2. The biogdaphic/demographic data is all from forms and attorneys would have no reason to lie to their own device they are using to reference juror information from. I think most of the information would be reliable.
3. The defense cab use it too ;). But seriously, the juror selection process is designed for each attorney to be able to get rid of anyone they think is biased against then with the hope that by both attorneys doing this those left create a fair hury. Is this optimal? No. Would my tool make a suboptimal solution better? Yes I believe it will.
I think it is the programmer optimization drive in us that makes this seem crappy that it isn't being completely overhauled since it isn't optimal, but my solution does help.
You're right, I left off a zero, 8 million people report for jury duty a year. Each potential juror is often researched by more than 4 attorneys. At $25 per juror researched you end up around a billion dollars. $25 per juror is what many attorneys pay for a criminal record check already, so this is a pricing model they are familiar with and I think if the product provides as much information as I believe it can the value could meet or exceed the value of a criminal check. A criminal record might be more indicative of a bad juror, but so few people have them compared to the number of people with other data sources I think the expected value of information evens out.
And this is just the States, there are other countries that use similar systems for jury selection.
I agree I won't make that until there is a mature product, but the question was addressable market, not expected year 1 revenue.
The mvp I'm working on now allows the sharing of information about jurors. This should allow me to gather data on how jurors vote tat can be marketed while still making profit off the sharing app alone.