What was the diagnosis process like? I'm in my early 30s and have been putting off trying to get an ADHD diagnosis (and medication) even though the symptoms clearly resonate, because I'm concerned that I'll be dismissed as just seeking pills. In college I tried to get diagnosed and was dismissed as lazy and just seeking a prescription. Did you have to deal with any of that skepticism?
In the United States, there are controlled substances, and federal law requires that a psychiatrist write a new prescription every month, with no automatic refills.
However, it is heavily streamlined. My university medical center and on campus pharmacy had me in and out with a week supply of adderall in about two hours. There were weekly followups for about four weeks, then monthly followups every three months, and then it was just five mins with a psychiatrist for minor adjustments thereafter. After graduation, most psychiatrists will do monthly followups over the phone, and may only require you to come in a few times a year.
I have however heard it can be much harder if they suspect that you are unstable or "drug seeking". But if you don't appear to be a risk, and you can clearly explain your situation, then they will usually offer you a week supply and you report if it helps you. I think a big factor is just what your life situation is.
Private psychiatrists are much more likely to help you. Make an appointment with an "ADHD specialist". As long as you don't have any red flags, they are likely to give you a test prescription"
If you can afford it, go to a specialist (ie Seattle's Hallowell Todaro ADHD Center). It will probably be more expensive and might take longer to get evaluated, but you'll be taken seriously and it's easier to advocate for yourself and your medication when the medical providers don't automatically jump to "pill seeking".
I'm not sure about my current provider, but the place that diagnosed me would let patients complete evaluations at a slower pace if they couldn't afford everything right away.
Also, before I switched to a specialist after moving, I tried asking my GP for my RX and they went straight to "pill seeking", however, they would still allow me to get my script if I came in every month for a drug test.
I was lucky that I was living in Australia at the time where adult ADHD seems to be taken more serious by shrinks than in most other parts of the world. I also splurged and saw the shrink privately.
So the diagnosis process was mostly answering lots of questions and filling out some questionnaires.
I would highly highly recommend ETL as service, after adopting it recently. It substantially changes your relationship with your data sources in a really positive way. And frankly, ETL for common data sources is code that you just don't need to write.
I would say that you should pilot with a few ETL vendors. We currently use Fivetran, they're fine but we've had enough burps that I cannot cold recommend them over other vendors. I cannot for the life of me remember the details, but I think we went with them over Stitch for pricing reasons.
I'm Fivetran's CEO and I just want you to know, whatever "burps" you experienced, these things keep me up at night and the whole team is always striving to make the pipeline "just work". The whole vision of our product is that you should be able to plug in and get a perfect mirror image of all your data sources in your data warehouse. Anytime we fall short of that it drives us crazy.
Do you have a forum or suggestions tool at all? Fivetran has been amazing for our new datawarehouse and we're very pleased with the service, but there are a few little (non-bug) things that would have made it even easier.
If people can't get off their asses to stop working with a company that has worked with organizations responsible for thousands of deaths, I don't think support of Gab is going to drive anyone's payment platform decisions.
The inefficiency you speak of is not inefficiency of code review, but rather the inefficiency of reaching a shared, deep agreement on what your code should look like and how it should work. Code review is just a place that it pops up.
Thinking of it as inspection alone is a disservice to the cultural value of code review. You want a process that can teach a team member to contribute with lesser inspection? Code review.
I've typically found that with a new team or team member, initially there are a lot of patches returned for modification. After 3-9 months, it tends towards 80% of patches being one-shot LGTMs, the remaining 20% having spec issues or substantive style issues (ie. this module structure will bite us in the butt because...)
This idea of communicating shared knowledge also points at more efficient ways to do that, if CR is a bottleneck:
- Technical onboarding - Google does a great job of this. Taking time to explain how to work with your technologies, and what the expected code style is.
- Linting + style guides - Arguing over style is dumb.
This is great as long as you've got a culture which tends towards trusting LGTM's. That's not inevitable; you can just as easily get to a point of escalating nit-pickery.
However, even if you get to a point where most PR's get waved through, it's still inefficient in the sense that finished code ends up sitting around in a queue, waiting for its LGTMs before it can go to production. That can add days of delay, for no added value in the majority of cases.
Completely disagree. I catch bugs, and have my bugs caught, at least a few times a month.
Beyond the "this will likely deadlock without a timeout", "this does not clean up after itself on exception", "if the cache is not hot, this operation you assume is 1 sec will take 1 min" type thing — one of the strongest points of code review is having a conversation about "this code is hard to understand" and turning code that's correct if you think about it really hard into obviously correct code.
It takes a reasonably strong reviewer to get there though, and that's not always possible.
Why was this article hidden from the front page? A similar satellite journalism article from the BBC about a killing in west Africa was allowed on the front page a few weeks ago.
> Why was this article hidden from the front page? A similar satellite journalism article from the BBC about a killing in west Africa was allowed on the front page a few weeks ago.
Because it's about China, and information about Chinese human rights abuses is apparently considered "nationalistic flamebait."
HN moderation has nothing to do with what YC is doing in China, as anyone can see by looking back through the many years' worth of comments I've posted. The macro political climate has changed; HN moderation hasn't. The standards are a flatline, to the point of janitorial tedium.
The origin of those shared commands isn't from readline, but rather from emacs key bindings that made it into both readline and MacOS: https://jblevins.org/log/kbd
Any particular sites/webapps you like as examples of hierarchical design? I am a tech lead and struggle to come up with anything better than Material Design's nav drawers with sub-items, or equivalent.
Not the OP, but one thing that springs to mind when talking UIs and web/native is the use of breadcrumbs online. For example, if seeing a list of all other notes in the same folder isn't a key use case, an alternative could be to hide that list but make it visible when activating the list's parent. This reduces the noise so the individual note can be focussed on.
Having said that, I suspect the use cases of notes are quite varied, so a one-size-fits-all approach might not be straightforward.
I build internal tools in my organization. Most of our developers are on MacOS and use Chrome day to day. Most of our users are on Windows. Whenever a browser specific issue comes up, we do our best to address it, but our first response is typically "go install Chrome". Chrome adoption is 97% internally, 2.5% Safari, and the remaining 0.5% is Edge. We have a 0% internal Firefox usage rate.
Draw from that what you may, but I bet that dynamic is happening in other places.
