Sort of along the lines of sleeping as a group, I theorize that some of the (modern) human datapoints are due to the gradual isolation of humanity combined with the sleeplessness that comes with the first few years of child rearing.
Historically, child rearing was supported by a tribe of people. Nowadays, we have isolated ourselves to the point of one or two parents and maybe a grandparent or two. Babies can take years to get to consistently sleep through the night. So we have taught ourselves to be more “self sufficient” and just deal with it.
Or maybe I just think this because my 6 month old woke up four times last night and I’m losing my mind.
You can probably borrow it for free at your local library, you certainly don’t need to own it.
It’s easy to follow, both of our kids were well sleep trained at 5 months. I’ve foisted it on three different friends who were struggling and they all turned it around within a week.
YMMV, all kids are different, but empirically this method seems to work best of the approaches I’ve seen tried.
This is #2 and our 3 year old sleeps through the night almost every night now!
We’ve been disruptive to the little one’s sleep so far due to some home renovations causing a lack of consistency for just about her whole life. I’m confident we will figure it out eventually.
I experienced something like this for a short time just trying to take care of some very young motherless kittens who needed feeding every 4 hours. I quickly got to the point where I was engaging in reckless self medicating to get through it. It really cemented my long-ago decision not to have children, while increasing my respect for those who do.
It’s self inflicted by weird British notions of how children should be reared. We had no difficulties whatsoever or sleep lost, my wife would just lay next to our baby with her shirt off and if the baby got hungry she’d eat. My wife wouldn’t even wake up. Westerners bring these tortures upon themselves.
It's probably the onset of modernism - they decided everything in life had to be lived according to logical rules they made up in their heads, rather than just doing whatever folk knowledge your parents passed on that had no rationale. The advantage is this often does work, but the disadvantage is you end up with Victorian parenting, doctors who wouldn't wash their hands because you can't explain why they should, having to eat corn flakes, world wars, etc.
We coslept and as long as you aren’t drinking alcohol or taking ambien or anything that’d impair your ability to respond to your child you won’t wake up and will feed ad libitum. We slept great with our first. Our second has a physical disability and wakes up screaming a few times a night for unknown reasons that at three she can’t elucidate but at least the first was easy. Then the hard part is getting them out of your bed when they’re older.
I agree. I think the article takes a simplistic view of the use cases in an effort to make the post consumable but in doing so, misses some of the point behind the syntax.
Thanks for reporting this.
We use an embedded typeform for our signup page which looks to be ok but you can also go directly to the form here (https://koko-ai.typeform.com/to/xB0X2Grc).
For the Python docs, our language bindings are open sourced and we’ve been maintaining their documentation directly on the repo to ensure it is up to date without having to copy data across. Was the documentation confusing on the github readme?
I just clicked the “next page” link and it looked to start loading a new content in the same style as the one I was on, and then redirected to GitHub. Was just a little jarring UX.
Github is far from just a git repository. It's a ticket tracking system, a discussion system, a release binaries host, a CI/CD component and a pastebin. The linux kernel has no CI/CD, no binaries, it doesn't even have a centralized server (only a copy of Linus' tree) and does everything through mailing lists.
Well, if you want all of those things in one place, then that means github, practically by definition. But the example of the kernel shows that open source can carry on, on a massive scale, with no need for that.
GitLab also has all of these features, and it had many of them before GitHub, like built-in CI/CD. But for some reason I'm being downvoted for suggesting it on HN, curious why.
As a maintainer for an open source repo that is "owned" by a big corporation I feel this but on both ends. I empathize with reporters and I would love to be able to help them all (when sufficiently detailed reports come in) but the reality is that simply ingesting the issue and queueing for prioritization still means it'll likely sit for many months before someone gets to it. I suppose my point is that whether you're running an open source repo for a personal project or for a corporation, the problems persist.
I wish more people saw documentation and source code as a gift rather than cause for free, on-demand support.
Maybe whenever you navigate to the repo of an open-source project, GitHub should have a fancy animation of a gift box opening. "Ta-da! This project is open-source and FREE for you to use AS-IS, without any guarantees!" Then they can play it three more times whenever you try to open an issue.
If only it was that simple. But obviously the corporation has an incentive in open source as most do. There is pressure to present as open but internally the priority is not on reported issues, unless they are security related or something is broken.
Of course! It's the way users can alert us to issues and provide feedback. That's why I feel stuck in the middle -- overwhelmed from the incoming issues and unable to move the needle by myself or with whatever support were allocated from corporate.
My experience is clearly different from the author's, who seems to have complaints about solo project maintenance. I just wanted to share my perspective.
