Absolutely. I can break it down with some key points that come to mind.
Making the jump:
I had been working in a call center for 4 years and had not had any growth whatsoever. I was broke, lost, and felt trapped at my job. I would look at job posting but didn’t have any of the skills mentioned and thought I would have to go to college to get a decent position. I didn’t have the money to go back to school so I tried something else. I e-mailed 30-40 tech companies, asking if they had any internships to get my foot in the door. Two companies replied back. First company was a desktop support position and the second company was a marketing internship. That second company was a coding bootcamp. I took the unpaid internship at the bootcamp. I realized I didn’t enjoy marketing right away but stuck with it cause it was better than a call center. During my time there, I became friends with some of the engineering instructors and that’s when I was introduced to programming. They told me what to focus on, study, and build. So when I wasn’t at work or the internship, I was reading and building.
Focus:
I had been Deejaying for 18 years and so I always felt that I had to stick with music cause it was a big part of my life. However, I knew it would interfere with my current goal. I couldn’t do both. I’m kind of an all in or hell no type of person, which isn’t always great but that’s what it is. So I packed up my turntables and decided to go all in on programming. This was essential for me.
Holding myself back:
After 4 months of studying, I got hired as a contractor at a small agency. That’s when I realized that I was trapped at the call center job because of myself. It was a powerful realization that opened up my mind from there on. I thought I had to have a certificate or piece of paper to have decent career. I do want to go to school for CS for fun!
Problem solving:
Building software showed me how to problem solve. I didn’t have a framework or direction that I would go to before I started this profession. Being able to break problems into smaller pieces and identify how those pieces relate to each other was game changing. I was a late bloomer with all this but better late than never
Money:
Money changed a lot of things. I would be lying if that wasn’t a big part of all this. My mom, sister, and I would live in homeless shelters and motel rooms, paid by churches growing up. We never went hungry or anything but things still sucked. So when I got my first paycheck as a programmer, I couldn’t even describe the feeling. I didn't have to worry about bills or rent anymore.
This became long but I wanted to give an honest answer as to how it changed my life.
This was my favorite MPC out of all of them I owed/used. I loved the way my drums/samples sounded vs the 1000/2500 family I had later on. I had to sell it cause our condo at the time was too small for all my equipment. It made me really happy to see this on HN.
Thx! I tried to keep things pretty simple technology wise. I use Vue/vuex for the frontend and node/express/sequelize for the backend
The architecture is a bit more unique local-first approach (everything is saved and loaded from a localstorage cache and can be immediately interacted with, Then the slower-to-retrieve source of truth version of your data from the server is transparently swapped in for the cached data when it's ready)
I'm in no way supporting the outrageouslu peurile post, but do you think an argument can be made that children seem to take more effort from their parents than needed? The reasons could be still external, but I'm still curious if you can do a good job as a parent without fully dedicating your time.
Full disclosure: am an armchair childless philosopher
A first time parent typically has no prior experience with being a parent, so it'd be pretty surprising if it didn't take more time than "needed". With the second child they have a better idea of what to do and can be more efficient, but hopefully have to split their time between two kids.
the affirmation than a children take up all your time is exceedingly simple to be shown false:
if a children takes 100% of your time no exceptions, what twins' parent would do?
it's clear that there's some psychological mechanism at play that transform single child parents into helicopter parents at a great conversation rate, to the point they have to oversee every minute of their children's lives without even realising that's happening
having multiple children quickly teaches you that yes, children can survive some time on their own, but multiple children is a rare sight these days
The issue is that with very young children, you ALWAYS have to be supervising them (if they aren’t sleeping)... you can do other things a bit, but you always have to keep one eye on them. It is impossible to do real focus work.
With two kids (or more), you can watch them both at the same time. It isn’t like you are always actively doing something for the kids, it is just you are always watching.
Yes. Even though our 17-month old has run of the place in a safe space, it only takes 5-10 minutes of no attention for him to come running up and trying to pull me somewhere. As above, this makes any sort of focus impossible.
The amount of time that having an additional child takes isn't linear. If you have multiple children of a similar age (which is the most common scenario); you can entertain, feed, etc. them at the same time.
it still takes more time than one children. even if it's ten minutes for things that can't be parallel like changing nappies, it contradict the claim that one children takes all of one's time
it's simple hard logic, wouldn't have expected to have to explain it or getting downvoted for it on hacker news.
When you have one child you give them all your attention. When you have two you divide it.
When you have one, maybe it take 5 minutes to change a nappy, then you play for 10 minutes after. When you have two, you then have 10 minutes of nappy changing time, then only 5 minutes to play. The time is reallocated, not added to.
Well it's good that you are finding that your experience of parenting is giving you the balance that you need. Not everyone's child or experience is the same.
but that's the whole point of the goddamn argument: giving the child 100% of oneself is a _choice_ not a fact of life. own the choice, instead of complaining that there' no time for anything else.
I'm sorry but this last comment of yours made me literally laugh out loud.
So, not being a parent yourself, you claim that not only is becoming a parent a choice when it is most certainly NOT (rape, faith, the reasons are myriad) but you also claim to know better than parents just how much time/attention raising a child takes.
Your entire 'argument' in this thread is nothing but what you think/imagine vs. reality
>you claim that not only is becoming a parent a choice when it is most certainly NOT
never claimed that. I claimed that time allocation to parenting is a choice. and that's irrefutable idk why it's even a topic up to discussion, but I can see why you might just be trying to misinterpret my position as a easy way out.
> not being a parent yourself
another topic change, and another wrong assumption.
There can be other reasons why parents can have time,they don't have to be POS, may be they organise their time differently or say live in a low COL location and work fewer hours or some such combination.
