I've tried quite a few things and the most useful thing for me has been https://www.headspace.com/ . It's "daily" guided meditation (that after not too long is barely guided). The narrator's voice is really good, not too hippie, very calming. Everything is pleasant and well-designed.
Just to clarify: I think you're saying that the best societal answer is what you suggest. I agree (as I agree with eitally).
The best if-you're-pregnant-right-now solution, though, is different, since currently very few hospitals allow birth in their physical location without a hospital physician.
The calculus in that case is probably a tradeoff of unlikely but very bad outcomes (death by homebirth) vs quite likely somewhat-bad outcomes (unnecessary Caesarean, unnecessary rushing, etc., by hospital), I'd think.
Our son was delivered at a hospital by a midwife that was part of a team of 2 midwives (CPNP/CNM) and 2 doctors (OB/GYN). If things got beyond her capability she could call in the doctors for backup. Our daughter was delivered by one of the doctors due to him being on call.
So, nurse midwifes do deliver in hospitals. I actually think they are not allowed to do home births or they can lose their license.
Really good stuff, really nicely done, I love it. And good pre-Christmas launch timing :)
Small issue: I grabbed an .m4a, uploaded it, and the screen just sat there. Console errors and whatnot. Didn't take a rocket scientist to guess that .mp3 might work better (it did). So I'm all good, but just reporting it.
Thanks for pointing this out. Right now, we're supporting wav and mp3, but I'll be adding a couple things in the very near future - greater support for various file formats, and better error handling for the ones we don't support.
Fullscreen is an improvement I would like to add soon. It wasn't working well during development because I actually run it with two video players - with the hidden one loading the next video so that the cutover is quick.
The videos are shown at their highest-possible resolution in the window now, though, so at least we aren't missing out on any quality (though it would be great if Instagram allowed users to upload higher resolution source videos).
Some notes about the data, and in particular differences between how it's presented here and its raw form via Yelp:
1. Businesses can be in multiple neighborhoods in the original dataset. In this version businesses can only be in one (the more common of the neighborhoods the business was listed in). There's some nice presentation and analysis advantages to this.
2. We dropped categories with less than 50 businesses in them because of some limitations of Statwing (it slowed us down a lot without much benefit, for reasons I'm happy to explain but are pretty boring.
3. Instead of taking the number of stars typically presented on a business (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, etc.), we grabbed an average from Yelp's dataset of reviews for each of these businesses, so you end up having businesses with ratings like 1.37 or 3.22. There's spikes at 1, 1.5, 2, etc. because of businesses with very few reviews, so filtering to only include businesses with >25 reviews is pretty handy.
> 3. Instead of taking the number of stars typically presented on a business (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, etc.), we grabbed an average from Yelp's dataset of reviews for each of these businesses, so you end up having businesses with ratings like 1.37 or 3.22.
I don't believe that derivation is equivalent.
From my own tabulation of the data:
# of reviews in Yelp's reviews dataset: 1,125,458 reviews
# sum reviews among all reviews for businesses in Yelp's business dataset: 1,236,445 reviews
So the aggregate will fail to account for about 10% of the rating data.
An even larger issue is probably that the way Yelp calculates ratings for a business isn't a straight average, it involves a notion of a prior expectation. I'd go into more detail here but I'm struggling to find the (I think official?) URL talking about this.