Sorry for missing this, I don't check HN every day!
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.
90% of moms not coming back is an exaggeration for the bay area.
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.
What they should do is say "These are our parental leave policies" (which will be at least legal minimum) and go from there. (Ideally, these should be reasonable leave time government policies and paid by the government, but let's assume we're not going to fix that soon)
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.
I just switched jobs in San Francisco, and part of my search was parental leave. I did not see any companies in the 6-12 month paid parental leave range.
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'm glad CA's PFL program exists, and by American standards, it's very good.
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.
Howdy, author here! When someone is getting ready to come onsite, we give the more detailed information about what the onsite will look like, as this varies team by team. Our iOS and Android interviews both do 90 minutes of pair programming. Roles that we're not hiring many people for typically do not have pair programming interviews.
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.
Your final paragraph is interesting, given the author's point here:
> 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.
I'm the person whose tweet is at the top of the linked article.
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.
"What I would love to see is: Given two points on the map - what is the most common path between them based on multi-path tracks of others..."
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.
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.