Normally though, induction happens because there is some problem or because the pregnancy has gone past the due date, and in these cases your risk of a c-section is already elevated.
Makes sense. As mentioned in the comments, there are different ways of inducing labor. I was referring to usage of pitocin or similar too early in the process, instead of gradually inducing the labor with other medications. We had success with just misoprostol during our labor, but the process was quite long.
I don’t think c-section after successful induction is common. There are some number of failed inductions (i.e. nothing happens) which result in c-section. Bear in mind that this is generally done - like the original induction - because “giving enough time” after 42 weeks costs lives.
This review finds the rate is actually lower after induction, contrary to popular claims:
I was hoping to get a more in-depth analysis of the 2-sided network effects of the scooter space. I'm having a hard time understanding the defensibility of these companies against each other. Habit doesn't seem to be enough to win the market. Exclusive contracts or leveraging regulations could be options but they don't feel strong enough either.
If it's not a winner takes all market and multiple players can coexist at the same time, then I don't understand the investment decision from the VC firms to value them so high so early. It feels like Uber/Lyft can easily get into this market and provide a better experience overall.
You could jointly train a NN to parse the sentence and tackle the NLP task you have at the same time, or instead of just using the tokens you could use a parser to add more features too.
They went into it thinking there was a network effect. (There isn't.)
Worse for the scooter startups is that they can go far enough to cause loss, but can't go so far as to link up two essentially different geographic zones. Thus no demand side market balancing like Uber and Lyft. They're limited to small cities in the sunshine.
The people driving around and getting paid big bucks to recharge them are using...... cars.
Which is why the only play for the scooter companies is to be acquired by Uber or Lyft. Which is unfortunate because there is no original technology in these scooters. Xaiomi will sell the m365 to whoever wants to buy one. When two Chinese companies are selling the scooters, their price will halve or more, and anyone who finds himself using a scooter daily will buy one...... for $200.
I would think that Dara is on a Boeing Business Jet with Lei Jun right now toasting their exclusive deal on the next million commodity scooters at a bargain basement price.
Why can't the scooter companies design locking docks that also allow the scooters to be charged while locked in them? The locking docks is obviously already solved; modifying the scoots to lock the batteries in and charge them while locked seems pretty simple (I mean, we've had dock and charge tech for all sorts of things for many decades...).
Seems like a relatively simple problem to solve (sure, still a few months of dev time with several months of manufacturing lag, but you'll do it if it's central to your business).
The problem with docks is not technical, but that people don't want to be forced to leave them at a particular place.
Also, you would need to pay some sort of rent on those docks, connect them to electricity and all that. You could use that money instead to just buy more scooters.
I think they're imagining that there will be geographic network effects - "my city is full of CompanyX scooters, so I'll use their app". I don't know though, seems a bit dubious.
Also I seriously doubt they are anywhere near to making even a vague profit. They're charging maybe 3x as much per ride compared to bikes, but the scooters must be easily 10x more expensive and they have to pay people to charge them.
Bird's chargers are freelancers that get $5 per scooter charged. Given the price of renting them it seems like they have thin margins even before you account for the capital costs of buying and replacing the things, plus theft and destruction.
I suspect that $5 might start shrinking if they stick around. It seems just a touch generous currently. I guess it depends how many bored kids with bikes are available and willing to do the work.
one difference i've already noticed between limebike scooters and bird is in the scooters themselves.
limebike scooters' bells are on a flimsy spring so most of the time theyre broken. the bell is pretty useful for alerting walkers ahead of you of your presence without having to yell.
the bird scooters are also able to 'chirp' to help locate them - i've heard limebikes do the same but i have not been able to find that feature in their app.
overall i dont think this is an issue of a winner take all market - uber and lyft seem to live in harmony and i take whichever is cheaper. for scooters, i'd just take whichever one is closer, there is no brand loyalty or much differentiation but there's room for multiple players atm.
Uber and Lyft are different than scooter services because they leverage the network affects by the availability of drivers and wait times. Scooters could race to cover more districts and provide high availability but this can easily be commoditized. Also, cities have limits on the number of total deployed scooters within a city.
If the scooter companies can get bought by Uber or Lyft, these ride sharing services could also take on the responsibility of distributing these scooters across the city and make them highly available. That would compliment their ride sharing service tho.
I think the main difference between the two is, IAP aims to replace VPN requirements for Enterprises. It only integrates with Google accounts and it seems to go hand in hand with GSuite. So they are more B2B oriented. We hide our staging servers behind IAP for instance.
Amazon's solution seems to integrate with a few other identity providers and gives the developers the tools to do authorization after authentication is done. It seems to position this more like a B2B2C. Although it feels like it already subsumes Google's IAP by doing so.
This is my understanding by reading the article on Amazon, I haven't actually used it.
Thanks for leaving a comment, really appreciate it. The idea of creating a comparison between PDFs rendered with different solutions is genius. Definitely gonna add this.
Puppeteer would indeed come close in rendering quality. Improvements of using my solution over puppeteer are:
1) I tweaked Chrome headless to have the fonts available to ensure that typography renders as it should. Even emojis work!
2) you don't need to worry about installing and maintaining puppeteer and Chrome headless into your own infra
3) I didn't really make this very clear on my landing page so far, but I'll provide support to clients that have issues getting a certain document to render exactly like they want.
4) Not really a benefit yet since I wanted to launch with the MVP but soon I'll offer several options in the API that puppeteer itself doesn't offer such as multi-document PDFs, automated clickable terms of content for longer documents, etc.
I wonder what they mean by Google experts. Will there be an actual human being or some hybrid solution at the end of the line? Not that it matters to me as long as it's efficient.
With Google Duplex I'm sure we're heading towards a future where a computer is going to be answering all our customer support calls without us knowing about it.
Google Duplex was a cool demo but those intents were quite well defined. There is a handful of form slots they are aiming to fill where they can enumerate all the entry points to a conversation as well as misinterpretations. I do agree that this is the direction we are going, however since Google Expert is a broad term tackling a much bigger search space, I'd expect it to work differently.
