A founder who built the tool he needed
John Lilly is the founder of Carpe, an opportunity matching platform still in early development. When Peekwire asked him when someone first came to Carpe after the usual advice about finding work that fits their situation had failed, his answer was direct.
"That someone was actually me."
Lilly is disabled and uses a wheelchair. He said his physical limitations make traditional employment extremely difficult, and that the standard guidance — search job boards, apply for remote positions, find flexible work — turned out to be far more complicated in practice than it sounds.
"I spent countless hours searching through job listings, research studies, freelance platforms, user testing opportunities, and other ways to earn money online."
What he found was fragmentation. Opportunities were scattered across many different sites, and even promising listings often fell apart on closer inspection. "Even when something looked promising, I'd often discover I didn't meet a specific requirement or that the position wasn't as accessible or flexible as advertised."
That experience became the basis for Carpe. Lilly describes the platform as an attempt to do the searching and sorting on behalf of users, rather than leaving them to dig through opportunities that may never have been suitable. He is candid that the product is not finished, but says he is building it from the perspective of someone who genuinely needs it.
What existing search results leave out
The second question asked what keeps coming up for people searching for opportunities they can realistically do — things that the pages already ranking for that search tend to omit.
Lilly's answer centers on a distinction between availability and fit. "Most platforms focus on what opportunities are available rather than whether someone can realistically take advantage of them."
A remote job, he points out, is not automatically an accessible job. Physical limitations, experience requirements, education requirements, geographic restrictions, scheduling conflicts, and equipment requirements are often not obvious from a listing. Each one can quietly disqualify a candidate who looked like a match on the surface.
He also argues that the search landscape over-indexes on full-time employment. Not everyone is looking for a traditional job. Some people need flexible ways to supplement income through paid research studies, freelance projects, product testing, or grants. Those categories are legitimate earning paths, but they rarely appear alongside job listings in a single place.
That is why Lilly says Carpe is designed to look beyond traditional job postings. "I want it to bring different types of earning opportunities together and help people understand which ones match their individual circumstances."
The stated goal is not simply to surface more listings. It is to reduce the time spent searching so users can spend more time pursuing opportunities they actually have a chance of qualifying for — a meaningful difference for anyone whose time and energy are already constrained.
The question people ask in the wrong order
The third question was about sequencing: what do people decide too quickly, or in the wrong order, when trying to find work or programs that fit their limits?
Lilly's answer is a reframing of the first question a searcher asks. "People often start by asking, 'What jobs are available?' when they should be asking, 'What opportunities can I realistically do, qualify for, and sustain?'"
He speaks from experience. It is easy to see an interesting opportunity, invest time in an application, and only later discover a requirement you cannot meet. For people already dealing with limited resources, disabilities, or financial difficulty, that wasted effort compounds.
He also thinks searchers dismiss smaller opportunities too quickly because they do not resemble traditional employment. A single paid research study or a handful of freelance tasks will not replace a full-time income, but several legitimate opportunities combined can make a real difference. That logic — assembling income from multiple smaller sources rather than forcing a single full-time role to fit — is central to how he describes Carpe's purpose.
"Instead of forcing people into a one-size-fits-all employment model, I want to help them discover possibilities that fit their actual lives."
Practical takeaways for anyone searching now
Several concrete points emerge from Lilly's answers for people navigating this space, whether they face barriers or not.
- Screen for fit before you apply. Requirements around accessibility, scheduling, equipment, and credentials are often buried. Checking them first saves the effort of an application that was never viable.
- Look beyond job boards. Research studies, freelance platforms, testing opportunities, and grant programs are separate ecosystems. Searching only one category misses options that may suit your circumstances better.
- Do not dismiss small opportunities. Multiple modest income streams can add up in ways a single rejected application cannot.
- Start from your constraints, not the market. Asking what you can realistically do, qualify for, and sustain produces a shorter and more useful list than asking what exists.
Lilly is clear that Carpe remains in development and that he is still working toward making it genuinely useful, particularly for people who face barriers to traditional employment. His closing thought frames the broader principle behind the project.
"I believe opportunities should adapt to people's circumstances, not the other way around."
For readers exploring opportunity matching platforms, that principle is a useful lens. The question worth asking of any platform is not how many listings it holds, but whether it helps you find the ones you can actually pursue.