Kaiser in Oakland is without exaggeration the best medical care I’ve ever experienced. Aligning incentives between the care provider and the insurer, vertically integrating care and putting it all on a walkable campus (even with a pharmacy!!) was such an efficient and pleasant process.
I was never healthier. The other Kaisers in Oregon aren’t geographically collocated so there’s less of an effect and they’re far away from me so I don’t use them anymore, sadly
I visited their clinics for my daughter several times when she was a toddler for ear aches and other ailments— I found the experience refreshing: instant online booking, no BS registration and online communication with staff was seamless. Very sad to see them go so abruptly.
Up until this morning when I was told they were gone, I had no idea they were YC or otherwise VC funded. Just came here to pour one out for a genuinely helpful and pleasant medical company.
We had basically the same experience with Kaiser Permanente in the SF Bay Area.
Currently, there’s a doctor shortage problem (supposedly, they can’t hire, or there aren’t enough positions, depending on who you ask), which has caused issues with the quality of care (according to the doctors that went on strike over this, and personal experience).
It’s unclear what the root cause or solution is.
Anyway, you can get the experience you described, and it’s great until you hit an understaffed corner case health problem.
Modulo things like compliance where all changes must be traced back to an auditable review, abandoning the assumption that Pull Requests are necessary to keep the default branch working is an experiment everyone should try.
Having worked on projects where pairing replaced PRs it's virtually unheard of in many shops to trust individuals to this level. But it works just fine in many circumstances because for larger changes you eventually end up using PRs as something more than a rubber stamp.
I have heard the same as well.
These days, I am thinking about how AI code gen can be affecting this. When AI is writing code, you can't assume yourself to be the pair programmer, because your speed is not even close to the AI's. You are basically reviewing the code that AI has written.
So should people be thinking about pair-reviewing AI code so that they get the benefits of pair programming along with the speed of AI?
If the post were C++ focused instead of Rust would it make the same, more or less sense?
A systems language with a high cognitive barrier to entry, compile times and less than a decade of wide adoption can’t reasonably be expected to compete with something like Rails in terms of approachability
Shoutout to the GCP apologists: your faith in the face of overwhelming evidence contradicting the stability of the offering will be remembered heroically by history
Damn, not much has changed since I last looked at the project nearly 15 years ago when evaluating it against other management packages in an academic computing center. So frustrating to have all of the words words words and not a single shot of it in action, ya know, like you’d see it when in use.
I don't find the visualizations shown on websites terribly convincing, so I kind of get it. Yes, you need to kick the tires to understand if it is useful.
I was never healthier. The other Kaisers in Oregon aren’t geographically collocated so there’s less of an effect and they’re far away from me so I don’t use them anymore, sadly