Ask HN: Would you find optional Python static type checking useful?

I'm currently working on a static type checking tool for Python (code is on [github](https://github.com/jruberg/pyty), though it's still at a very rudimentary stage) as an undergraduate thesis project. The goal is to run the tool separately (like Pylint) to verify whether your code typechecks (or how it fails to).

I'm curious how useful enthusiastic Python users would find this. According to Guido's [blog](http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=85551) [posts](http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=86641), optional static typing was often requested, at least 7 years ago. Today, in the startup world, it seems like Python is always touted for the flexibility dynamic typing provides, so I'm curious what the current demand is (if any) among the HN crowd.