This looks cool! I've been bullish on Latin America since remote became more popular. It's natural that people in the US would want to hire someone in more similar timezone and culture than people on the other side of the world.
There are great people everywhere, but in my view, it's been much harder to source good people from Latam than it is from Eastern Europe or South Asia.
Would love to hear more about your experience finding people in Latam vs Eastern Europe or South Asia.
In my experience the real risk with remote teams isn't really technical, it's possible to find great people everywhere. The real risk is human: communication, courage, culture, yes even timezones. And you mentioned that Latam overlaps more in culture!
It's a matter of time before smart folks in South Asia and Easter Europe move to Latin America to get higher salaries as they get into more US-friendly timezones.
That being said there's a lot of amazing developers in India that are open to working US-work hours for max collaboration
That's because the rails didn't really exist for hiring the kind of talent modern startups needed until recently. We've had about 10 developers in LATAM for 3-4 years and it's been a game changer for my companies.
It really does look better than DALL-E, at least from the images on the site. Hard to believe how quickly progress is being made to lucid dreaming while awake.
This was a super interesting and digestible read. I especially liked the angle of how public policy influences trends in fintech. I'd love to learn more from examples over the past few decades.
Framer Motion is very high level, declarative API. It works out when to fire animations based on state and gesture changes. It also has a very advanced layout animations engine.
This is more of a classic JS library like Greensock or Popmotion where you say when you want to fire animations. I do want to move into declarative animations too but this is just the first release.
There's no way the federal shutdown lasts too much longer. The heat is on and too many people feel the hurt now, especially in a place like New York. If I were a betting man, I'd say 3-4 days max.
I think you are probably right, but I think it will end because the admin will declare a border emergency to try and get funding. The senate will then pass a clean bill and the emergency bill will get stuck in the courts. Right now this is only going on because of the admin wanting to save face.
> Right now this is only going on because of the admin wanting to save face.
To be fair, the administration has made several concessions (steel instead of concrete barrier, a multi step funding proposal, DACA extension, etc), while the Democratic leadership has been unwilling to compromise on increased funding for border security. It is on both sides that this shutdown has gone on so long.
I get where you are coming from, but I don't really see how deciding to build the wall out of steel is a compromise, when it was not anything the Democrats wanted. The DACA extension really gets them nothing as DACA deportations are on hold indefinitely any way due to the courts. There is already a surplus of border security funds that went unused in the prior year so an increase again is not a concession for the Democrats.
The shutdown began under a government where all 3 branches were under Republican control when the Admin. refused a bill that had already cleared both houses, the Senate via unanimous consensus. So the shutdown is absolutely the direct result of the Admin. In regards to its continuation, were the Democrats to yield this would set a precedent that a shutdown can be used to force negotiation at gunpoint with real people used as hostages.
I really don't see how this is anything except an attempt for the Admin. to save face over a failed campaign promise to build a wall that would be paid for by another nation. The senate Republicans refusal to approve the same bill they unanimously voted for is the reason the shutdown continues.
If the airports remain shut down, the economic cost will quickly balloon to multiples of the $5.7B requested for the wall. It's literally a rounding error in the budget.
That's one of the things that I find most infuriating. When it comes time to defund something like public broadcasting, it's all supposedly about the cost. When it's time to build a wall, it's a tiny fraction of the budget. We have such whacked priorities.
The 2013 government shutdown cost 0.1%-0.2% of the annualized GDP growth rate per week [1]. If I'm understanding correctly and doing my math right, with a GDP of about 20t $usd and a 3.5% growth rate, that's a 350b-700b $usd reduction in GDP.
It’s not about this line item, it’s about the executive branch ursurping the power of the purse by holding federal workers and huge sectors of our economy ransom. Trump was on national tv saying he’s intentionally doing this for a pet project.
Nobody actually cares about the $5.7 billion dollars, it's chump change for the government. This is all about appearance. The Democrats will lose face if they sign off on a budget which allows him to build his wall, and Trump will lose face if he fails to start building it (presumably in time for the next election).
(It's also notable that neither party, politically, has a good reason to end it. Trump will have a hard time holding onto even his strongest supporters come reelection if he can't start the wall, the most tangible and physical representation of his promises to his base, and the longer the shutdown persists, the better Democrats will do in Congress next election, the shutdown is a political godsend.)
I don't think the democrats should cave because this is a terrible precedent that far outstrips "appearance". It feels like a perversion of checks and balances where, because on side doesn't get what they want, they shut down the entire government until the other side caves. I won't be a fan of future presidents shutting down the government every time they can't come to a bipartisan agreement.
Sure, but it also means that your position is that our government should be shut down and people should be unable to feed their families to prevent giving the opposition a mostly meaningless amount of money to build a useless thing that pales in comparison to how much we've blown on the F-35 (literally like 1% of the cost), a largely useless airplane.
Which is to say, one party is certainly responsible for picking this fight, but both parties are responsible for not ending it.
Is your point that one side should cave because the numbers are meaningless? If so, I don't agree - they aren't meaningless. No one should be able to hold the American people hostage in order to get what they want - it not democratic. You shouldn't be allowed to undermine democracy by using threatening Americans as hostage - fullstop. Your suggestion is to just cave whenever one side threatens a shutdown is unacceptable
They are acting like children. If your son relentlessly bullied your other baby and in order for your baby to stop crying your son said "give me $5" (a meaningless amount to most adults) - the solution wouldn't be to give him $5 and teach him that whenever he wants money he just has to threaten throw the baby down the stairs.
The Democrats have the CR on their side: Continuing Resolution. The Democrats are asking for a simple, clean CR (the proposition to keep the old budget for just 3 or 4 weeks while we debate longer)
If the clean CR fails, then its a terrible future ahead. In 2018, when Democrats were in the opposite situation (they were denying the CR), it was on the onus of the Republicans to push for the CR.
--------
The only reason why the CR is agreed upon in the past, is because both sides recognize the harm that a shutdown would cause. Unfortunately, one side is willing to shutdown the government and avoid the CR this time.
As another commentor noted, this is a matter of precedence for the Democrats.
Trump has refused to accept continuing resolution proposals unless they include a down payment on the wall [1] - these proposals continue prior funding while the budget is discussed, alleviating the shutdown.
I think the initial use case of this will be with everyone’s videos in rectangles floating in space. People are already comfortable with video. It’s much more natural to glance at a shared workspace and then up at them, than it is in a current call where their video gets covered by another window on your screen.
>as more and more money is transferred to the people
Where do you think this money came from in the first place? You think the value of bitcoin was driven up by the 1%? Or magically created by gnomes like fractional reserve lending?
If we want to be philosophical then answer is very simple. The money comes from people who want to buy bitcoins.
Then we can ask why people want to buy bitcoins and the answer get a bit more complex but usefully branches into two areas. People want to either speculate (gamble) that the coins will increase in value because they think others also think that the value will increase and thus it will, or they want to buy the bitcoins because it enables them to buy objects for which bitcoins serves as value tokens.
Which in turn leads us to ask about the nature of value tokens. Why do we use them, the history, intrinsic values, and so on.
If we want to be non-philosophical then most the value of bitcoin has come from unsophisticated retail investors that haven't spent half as much time thinking about the 'store of value' as you have in this post and just want to make amazing profits like they've seen others make in a short time period.
As far as I know the value of Bitcoin doesn't match the funds invested. So while the money comes from people wanting to buy Bitcoin, the value comes from "the market". But of course then you also have to consider where these Bitcoin comes from. The previous is only strictly true if the person making the donation is a miner or investor. It could also come from selling drugs, hacking or exit scamming.
This is a great effort that will open the doors to many people who haven't even thought they were able to attend this type of school. If only more universities did things like this, you'd start to hopefully see more equality of access to opportunities rather than the traditional "good high school grades->good undergraduate degree" wheel that many don't necessarily fall into for one reason or another.
There are great people everywhere, but in my view, it's been much harder to source good people from Latam than it is from Eastern Europe or South Asia.