MattLaroche
Both medical systems that we had children with (in SF) do not do in-home followups, at least not for us. We had to go back the day after discharge for both of our children (for bilirubin draws). Would be nice so soon postpartum to have in-home visits.
For our first child, for the first 24 hours or so postpartum, my wife and child both needed something checked every couple hours.
Our overnight nurse said something like "I'll be doing your wife's checks at midnight and 2am, and your baby's at 1am and 3am". When I asked if my wife and child could be checked in the same entries, it turned out they could. I was surprised the hospital didn't do it by default that way for less time sensitive checks.
Companies I am familiar with continue vesting through the full length of their paid parental leave.
Part of what we're not talking about here (in this whole thread) is the cost of child care. Child care in SF is over $1700 a month, and hard to find for 3 month olds, which is why a lot of parents quit after leave.
I reckon we'll get a lot more parents staying in the workforce if the government helped more with childcare across all income ranges. Childcare comes at a lower income time of life, often when around when people have recently purchased a home.
We're also likely to have fewer parents drop out of the workforce if they can get their infants to 6+ months with a parent. Childcare is easier to find for 6 month olds than 3 month olds.
It's then up to the candidate to accept it or not.
It'd be entirely shitty of a company to say "here are our policies" and then reject a candidate who would exercise those policies.
6-20 weeks is the range I saw. Twitter at 20, Square (and I think Facebook) at 16, Google at 12, and most at 6.
I'm totally onboard with it being government funded instead of employer funded. I think tying it to salary (and what people pay in) makes sense, as many people are less likely to take it if it's significantly under their normal income.
I've heard of moms before who would rather tell the truth that they're not coming back after leave, but there's little upside and a lot of risk.
But it only pays 60% of income, for 6 weeks, and up to a level under the salary of most in product-engineering-design in tech. Most tech companies true up salary above the PFL levels for those 6 weeks (and potentially pay 100% for more weeks), and in SF, truing up to 100% for those 6 weeks is required for companies above a certain size.
But our focus in interviews isn't CS textbook experience. It's the types of things you actually need to know to do the job.
* Making hedge funds richer didn't actually feel like changing the world.
* I never really clicked on the codebase, didn't understand what was going on in the code, and didn't contribute much. (I don't think the code was easy to understand, and my mentor wasn't much help)
* I wasn't interested in making Palantir my full life, and there was a lot of pressure to have work be life. One of the leaders in my group basically said "yeah, I don't spend time with my pre-Palantir friends anymore."
* I also didn't click with my coworkers. I was about 27, and felt like an old guy. There were a bunch of other things socially that didn't work out. Strong culture that I didn't jive with.
* I got the signal that my 9-7 schedule wasn't enough.
The Government group may have been a better fit for me, I'm not sure.
Their pitches of "We only hire the best and brightest" and "Our work truly changes the world" sold me on them.
> Finally, this list is written for those who, like me, try to err on the side of being maximally-inclusive. Many of these things are common in our culture, and while I try to model good behavior, I don’t correct others’ usage unless they ask. I consider this an application of the robustness principle.
The author addressed the issue from the point of view of "Someone asked what things might marginalize, but not obviously so to the majority in the field", but many people have viewed the post as a line that others shouldn't cross. That's decidedly not the tone put forward.
My original curiosity was from that of someone who wants to promote "cooperation, equality and respect" - and, to me, part of doing that is asking for, and being open to, what minor things I might be doing to marginalize others.
So perhaps you're right - in the long run, maybe if organizations promote respect without talking about little things people do wrong, we'll get further on equality. But I do see value in talking about little things that are systemically unequal, and I think we'll get to a better place faster by talking about even the little things.
Check out strava.com/routes, as others have said in the thread. It doesn't have your feature requests, but it does point to point routing based on popularity.
The poster wasn't hand-wringing and complaining "There shouldn't be Bitcoin articles on HN", but instead took initiative and created his or her own filter to have a HN article list closer to what he or she wanted.
Properly geared, bikes aren't hard to get up hills - they're just slow.
Living closer together is great, but cycling infrastructure matters too to get people onto bikes.
(Disclosure - I know Ian, the author of the article, and a few Artillery employees)
I'd rather pay a clear delivery fee and not feel that I'm paying extra for every item than have free delivery but a mark -up on every item. I know that financially it might come out to the same thing, but psychologically I get annoyed that they charge me $4.99 when Trader Joe's charges $3.99.
I'm hoping they hit the scale where they can take some of their margin from the store (Trader Joe's specifically). Instacart Plus is a step in the right direction there.
For example, let's say your options are a 2 hour train that runs hourly, and an hour long ride that departs every other hour.
* Fast train: best case, 1 hour. Worst case, 2:59. Average case - about 2 hours. * Slow train: best case, 2 hours. Worst case: 2:59. Average case - about 2.5 hours.
Of course this is one example - but there are definitely cases where increased speed is strictly better than increased frequency. (Unless being on the train is better than whatever you could be doing waiting for the train)