Readit NewsWhen I read resumes, accomplishments meant next to nothing to me. I was looking for capabilities.
Your EC2 example is probably an exception to what I'm about to say because EC2 is very well known and you can quantify the difference you made in real dollars. But, 99% of the time I have no frame of reference and therefore no way to evaluate claimed accomplishments on a resume.
Oh, you managed accounts totaling $24MM in accrued receivables annually? Sounds impressive, but what if every one of your peers were managing $30–40MM and you were well known to be a slacker? Etc.
It's much more useful to me to know what classes of problem you can solve and which tools / techniques / technologies you're proficient with toward solving them. Descriptive statistics do very little for me.
If people are going to lie on their resume there isn't a whole lot of anything you can do to fix that at the resume evaluation level. So many resumes have 100x skills where they say they know some language because they happen to walk by a room where someone might have been looking at the wikipedia page describing someone who might have used the language once accidentally.
If you can't relate the impact / accomplishment of the candidate for your job to your company,then that just speaks to a low quality resume. It should be obvious to any reviewer why what you did is relevant to their interest.
The reason why impact matters is that in some sense it should be theoretically reproducible. "Saved 100s of engineering hours by fixing some nonsense" which if true should speak to someone who can ostensibly save time while also understand the meaning of their work.
- Assuming tractors don't exist - "Would people go through the effort to ship a tractor to their farm, learn how to use it, and either pay you to repair it or figure it out themselves ..while also paying you per field plowed."
Like, it seems like an obvious 'yes' but this is obviously my framing, not theirs, and maybe I am completely off base and what I am offering to them is truly a truck with a plow and not a tractor that they think will constantly get stuck in the mud.
The project is a bit rough because of its clean room requirement where there needs to be substantial build / testing to ensure a near zero contamination rate.
I could build a POC or show some video of how the product would work. What would you want to do with this?
Automating Clean-room plant propagation using robots
There are about 2-3+ Billion plants cloned in laboratory conditions per year which are all done by hand. I am in the process of trying to develop a MVP to automate this task while also getting customer conversations to get early adopters.
What I am struggling with is that I don't know if I should focus on developing the MVP which will cost 20k-40k & 4-6 months to develop or put in place a pilot program to get customers willing to buy the machine / pay up front before I start developing. Hardware startups are rough usually because their MVP takes so long to develop.
I am currently bootstrapping while I am pushing for more conversations trying to do both at once. I could personally finance the venture, but it seems like a poor move to just take on all the risk personally? I have am setting up conversations with a few VCs, but that is a month out.
I'm working on this full time at the moment. I have a couple people who I have talked to who could be co-founders but nothing has materialized yet. So I am just all over the place at this stage in the process.
I spoke to 4-5 potential customers and 2-3 of which are 'interested' in what I have but seem only interested in the 'validation' stage which only comes up after the huge personal investment on my end.
He did get a new Nylon FDM machine and a few other things, but he isn't so much a software design person. Mr. Savage has a huge bias towards using their hands to solve their problems and I wouldn't take his work style as a referendum on the utility of these other tools.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWXcnVTY3pk
Foam Core is still cool tho
That's a weird take. How would you know what I'm curious about? Pardon the strawman, but I'm not interested in handwavy explanations which tend to border on bigotry ("$category simply isn't interested in $topic"). I suspect the fundamental reasons are myriad and complex, but that doesn't mean $field wouldn't benefit from more diversity.
> It's impossible to change these distributions without understanding the underlying causes for how they got that way.
Maybe, maybe not. The ratio is certainly a lot less skewed now than when I was a student over 20 years ago. My understanding (or lack thereof) certainly didn't have an impact, but throughout my career I have always tried to be supportive of people who are in some way different from me. Heterogeneity is a good thing. Monocultures result in weakness.
The worst thing about the one I have is that it's 96 lbs and heavy to move. When you move it out of the way to sit down it is a real task. What you want is something you can setup easily and use and just put it away. Heck. I'm considering to upgrade.
I am also considering to get a new one that goes up to 8 mph where this is locked at 4... Maybe there is safety concerns but we'll see. (8 mph?...maybe I should get a real treadmil already.)
1000 steps takes about 10 minutes.
15K steps takes about 150 minutes.
150 min by 52 weeks in a year is 130 hours a year.
130 hours a year from say age 30 to age 80 is 6500 hours walking.
And so that gains you 3 years, which is 26280 hours, or 17520 awake hours.
So you are gaining about 17520-6500=11020 hours of life to use for things other than walking which is more like just under 2 years in days counting only awake hours.
Now of course it's certainly possible to do things you enjoy while you walk or perhaps things you would have done otherwise while not walking.
For instance I suppose a treadmill desk and using it to walk when you would have just been sitting instead.