I'm scratching my head at the "Personal Support-Raising" section. It sounds like you're asking your workers to fund their own salary. How does that work?
It's a good question, and I'm happy to provide more detail about the Personal Support-Raising requirement. Almost all of Prayvine's users raise their own financial support in order to do their mission/humanitarian work. Typically, this means that they ask their friends, family and faith community to partner with them by providing financial, emotional, and spiritual support for their work.
In order to build a better product for our users, I believe that it's important to deeply understand the challenges that they face, including support raising and having to be accountable to and communicate well with a team of donors and partners.
I do not expect the person in this role to raise 100% of their salary. I anticipate about 1 month of focused fundraising per year, and Prayvine would provide whatever amount of compensation is not covered by this fundraising. Because Prayvine is a non-profit organization, donations are tax-deductible and are subject to IRS laws governing donor intent (e.g. donations given to support this role cannot be used for any other purposes).
I know that this is an unusual requirement for an engineering role, and that the fundraising hurdle can seem daunting or strange. My hope is that for the right person, the ability to make a significant global, humanitarian, and spiritual impact is compelling and attractive enough to outweigh these challenges. I know that it has been for me.
I'm happy to answer other questions about this, or other aspects of the role. Please feel free to contact me directly at jobs@prayvine.org.
The combined requirements of govt purchasing must carry the mark and major US surveillance tech manufacturers like Amazon are leading the rollout, makes this seem less like a cybersecurity concern and more of a protectionist carve out.
You mean get stuck in a legal battle which takes years where Amazon denies responsibility and pushes everything to the original vendor, who for some reason went out of business 15 minutes before the suit was filed?
At least as early as August 2023. Less than three quarters of the way through his presidency. Something that started at least 17 months ago can hardly be considered "last minute".
EDIT:
Found the answer for you since you can't be bothered (previously saw the date in some other doc reading about this):
> When was the U.S. Cyber Trust Mark program created?
>> In August 2023, the FCC sought public comment on how to create the Cyber Trust Mark program. In March 2024, based on public input, we adopted rules establishing the framework for the program.
The most common case is probably complex search queries. It's really nice not having to flatten your data just to get network level caching.
In my case, building an RPC library with REST semantics, it's important to me to not place any restrictions on how developers pass their data to the backend. So removing that arbitrary flattening requirement is a big win. The json-qs specification does it in a way that balances readability and compactness.
I love responses like this because they highlight how allowing broken systems to persist can so thoroughly warp their purpose. Did anyone go to law school and specialize in immigration because they felt called to be "the modern equivalent of the overseer on the plantation?" Probably not.
But if you want to sample the kind of vitriol that somebody living with the precarity of a H-1B "employer controls your life" environment, here's a paragraph of it to chew on.
My personal favorite is the immediate follow up this conversation generates ( 'well, if you don't like the job, change it' ) while cynically omitting how we got here and that changing it is either near impossible or being actively hindered. You see it all the time. One would think the population would get better at pattern recognition after being stung once or twice.
Ah yes, those poor immigration attorneys just trying to get through life one day at a time on their six figure income, having to endure the unimaginable agony of reading the occasional snarky internet comment. Let me play you a song on the world's smallest violin while thousands of migrant workers get deported every time Elon Musk has to pay child support.
As someone who actually had to build on Gemini, it was so indefensibly broken that I couldn't believe Google really went to production with it. Model performance changes from day to day and production is completely unstable as Google will randomly decide to tweak things like safety filtering with no notice. It's also just plain buggy, as the agent scaffolding on top of Gemini will randomly fail or break their own internal parsing, generating garbage output for API consumers.
Trying to build an actual product on top of it was an exercise in futility. Docs are flatly wrong, supposed features are vaporware (discovery engine querying, anybody?), and support is nonexistent. The only thing Google came back with was throwing more vendors at us and promising that bug fixes were "coming soon".
With all the funded engagements and credits they've handed out, it's at the point where Google is paying us to use Gemini and it's _still_ not worth the money.
This +999; I couldn't believe how inconsistent and wrong the docs were. Not only that, but once I got something successfully integrated, it worked for a few weeks then the API was changed, so I was back to square one. I gave it a half-hearted try to fix it but ultimately said 'never again'! Their offering would have to be overwhelmingly better than Anthropic and OpenAI for me to consider using Gemini again.
I had hopes of Google able to compete with Claude and OpenAI. But I don’t think that’s the case. Unless they come out with a product that’s 10x better in the next year or so I think they lost the AI race.
Khan Academy is limited to learning by boring examples (IMHO) in lecture format and does not virally engage a learner with play. It's analogous to a free virtual classroom.
out of curiosity: is there a specific reason to use robinraju/release-downloader@v1 over actions/download-artifact@v4 here at your 'Download previous DB' step in build_db.yml?
It's used to download the previous day's database from the release for computing the diff. actions/download-artifact would only work for artifacts created during the current run, i.e., today's database.
