Hi Nate: I'm somewhat in the same boat. To get my business moving, I will need a CTO partner to drive the ship forward. Getting a minimum-viable-product built though, is all on me. Which I'd gone-out, assuming I could find friends to help me out with. Nope. No time, summer taveling, and everyone's loaded-up with paying work.
I'm a UX'er by trade, a self-taught mechanic/builder by hobby, and languages are my achilles heel with learning. So, I've taken A LOT of flack for many years, for not learning how to code, beyond my basic understanding of how things all fit together, need to support each other, and being able to edit other peoples HTML/CSS.
As a solo-founder however, it's all on me to deliver. Advisors and investors have (as gently as possible) told me that.
https://generalassemb.ly/ is expensive, but it's done a great job in a classroom setting, teaching app frameworks basics to n00bs. When I have the money and the bandwidth, I'm looking forward to taking it. Then there's also https://www.hackerschool.com/about, which is a paid retreat, so expensive on many levels.
I was really impressed with the codeacademy.com experience, and it filled-in many blanks for me that made me feel competent in CSS and HTML, for the first time ever. Using Javascript with JQuery is going to be a much more daunting challenge, because its entire mental model I still don't grok.
But, I'm trying, anyway. I managed to get one critical JQuery piece to work, and the other—I gave-up on but am coding the page, anyway with a static stand-in. I figure that once I've gotten all of the HTML and CSS and what of the JQuery I could do, done, at that point it will be easier to get friends to help me patch the holes. If not, then I will just pay a freelance Javascript person, to spend a day patching holes (and I honestly don't see what holes there will be, taking a day). Remember: Minimum Viable Product, doesn't' need to be fancy. :)
From, a gal who's gone-in kicking and screaming with every bit of learning code... but will probably be a more well rounded CEO, for it.
If Aviary owns any patents in the photo-editing realm, those alone were worth the acquisition to Adobe. Aviary has active partnerships with Yahoo! Mail and others, as their primary built-in photo-editing default utility. The second part of the win for Adobe, is they can now slather the Adobe brand, all over where the Aviary brand is now prominent, in those partnerships. That's what matters to the money folks.
Care about gender inequality in Tech? This is relevant to the bigger-picture that yep, we're a part of. That we're better poised to change (cough), than our lame-duck Senate. The "we", being all of us in Tech.
She's a WOMAN, not a girl. Sorry—no intent in being PC, but as a female in the biz, it's just profoundly abrasive to read "girl" all over the place.
In a social context, a woman cam be a "girl." In business, she's a woman. Always. Period. This is a business matter, where personal stuff got inappropriately smeared-in to the business, which is the premise of the lawsuit.
Guys: We don't call you boys at work. Woman, please please please.
This is obviously kind of delicate, but as someone who has referred to young-ish women as girls before, I'll at least attempt to explain my confusion.
Men are often called "guys" - and the connotation to me is just a more informal way of saying "men".
What is the female equivalent of "guy"? Is it chick? Chick certainly doesn't seem right and (to me) kind of has different meaning associated with it as compared to any extra meaning "guy" has when compared to "man".
"Woman" usually seems very formal to me in the same way that "Man" does. So...what do I use instead? Sometimes I do use girl in its place because it seems less formal but (I thought) not offensive.
If someone says "do you know who John Doe is" in a work context, I will probably say something like "oh he's a guy working on XYZ"
If someone asks "do you know who Jane Doe is" in a work context, I will sometimes say "oh she's a girl working on XYZ". I admit there is some extra thought process in choosing the pronoun:
---1. Who am I speaking to?
---2. How old is the person they are referring to?
IDK. Kind of just a brain dump, but just wanted to explain where I come from. But I'll internalize the fact that this may actually be irritating to the women I'm referring to. And that was never my intent.
Edit: I just realized that even in your comment you used "Guys" and not "Men". Basically case in point as to the 'conflict'. Why didn't you type Men? it just feels kinda formal, right? But maybe I should just bite the bullet and go the formal route if my attempt to be less formal just ends up being offensive...
