Initially, they likely didn’t think they had a choice. The root that had cross-signed them was expiring. (And I wonder if anyone else was willing to cross-sign them.) It turns out that root expirations are handled differently (i.e. ignored) on some platforms, including the relevant old Android.
I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. I know jacquesm is a very well-respected poster, but unless he's got diabetes himself, he's providing his opinion with absolutely no real-world-experience vs someone who has been managing diabetes with keto for two decades.
Even if keto "isn't for everybody" (and KetoType1 should have put a disclaimer), I'd certainly much rather take advice from someone with skin in the game.
By this reason any doctor that doesn't have the disease they help curing should be disqualified as well. Maybe think a bit longer and realize that expertise can be gained in more ways than experience alone.
I've posted a pretty good link below from a respected source if you don't believe what I wrote and whether or not I have diabetes type 1 is not relevant.
Of course you're not immediately "disqualified" from providing meaningful information if you don't have skin in the game. However, the current state of pretty much any science-related-to-food is woefully inadequate (remember the food pyramid? and how fat was evil and going to kill you? And don't even get me started on carcinogens and meat). At this present moment in time, people who are actually trying and living on keto (, in particular those with diabetes) are actually on the bleeding edge of food science.
I personally have friends who manage Type 1 & 2 diabetes with little-to-no insulin on Keto, and I'd hate to see people being turned away from at least researching a lifestyle that could significantly benefit them because a well-respected member of the community said it was "dangerous" (and often, deferring to doctors can be not helpful for reasons mentioned above - I wish people would at least research for themselves).
And I spent the better part of a month deeply embedded in safety materials regarding diabetes type 1. It's simple: if you start experimenting like that without guidance from your doctor then that's asking for trouble. Giving medical advice with such a high chance of risks materializing for the takers of such advice is irresponsible to put it mildly. You can't just dump blanket statements like that in a forum and expect a positive outcome.
Telling people to research a lifestyle is completely different than providing ready made recipes paired with unqualified statements based on a sample of '1'.
That's true- I even stated that I thought KetoType1 should have put a disclaimer.
At the same time, I do encourage people to take charge of their own health, and to make calculated and appropriate risks. My primary concern was people only reading your name, the word "dangerous", and being put off from further research about keto in general because of that. Some physicians used to recommend rice- and grain-heavy diets for diabetes, so some healthy skepticism (EDIT: in the "trust, but verify" sense) is warranted, even towards one's doctor.
> some healthy skepticism (EDIT: in the "trust, but verify" sense) is warranted, even towards one's doctor.
That's fair, but for all you know OP is making stuff up, has been misdiagnosed and 50 other things that could be true that would make their well intentioned unqualified advice utterly irrelevant and dangerous to boot.
Just like you shouldn't take legal advice from ACs on the internet you shouldn't take medical advice from them either, especially when they're novelty accounts promoting diets that have been used to 'cure' everything from cancer to epilepsy, Alzheimers and TBC. Extreme skepticism is warranted there. As for your doctor: assuming they're a diabetes specialist: you should put your faith in them, and if you don't trust them then you should go find yourself another doctor, not start taking randos advice.
I'm sorry, but I can't help but be incredibly cynical and jaded about this, and from reading the comments, nobody seems to have the same sentiment. If this was titled "How I learned to play the piano in my 30s", I don't think anybody would bat an eye: learning an instrument is not like joining some secret cult, and anybody can develop basic music literacy over a year or two. I also do not doubt this man's proficiency, but 30 is not old outside of tech circles. This youth fetishization in tandem with the "everybody's dog should learn to code" meme I think is very short-sighted.
Tech is wildly lucrative, is in current demand, and is not physical labor. That reduces the barrier to entry to anybody who has a laptop and an Internet connection. Honestly how many people would be so eager to learn to code if you dropped down the average tech salary to 45,000 (matching other professions)? I think far less: people seem to learn to want to code to ride the high-pay wave, not for the actual love of code.
Again, let's compare to music. Anybody can go to a guitar store and buy a 200$ keyboard. But if I took a 14-week class and afterwards had the aught to call myself a "Music Ninja Rockstar" or some other such nonsense, and start applying to orchestras and bands, I would be called crazy.
Software has eaten the world, and it's here to stay. Increasing the general software literacy is no more different than saying we should teach everybody how to read (and a good thing). However, throwing each person in a bootcamp telling them "coding is wonderful! you can master it in 5 seconds and make 200k a year!" is no different than holding a similar bootcamp for any other vocation and then wondering why the average plumber can't actually fix your house, but can only use a plunger. I sincerely hope this trend stops. This mindset is broken, and the paradigm is highly unsustainable. Where will we be in 20 years?
> However, throwing each person in a bootcamp telling them "coding is wonderful! you can master it in 5 seconds
I am not sure if you read the article? The point is that age isn't a barrier but that becoming a software engineer is a lot harder than just going to a bootcamp and expecting a job to appear. This is about spending a year trying to find a job.
I have zero problem being compared to a plumber with a plunger! If something breaks in the middle of the night, I get paged, grab my mop and my tools, and fix it.
Why does it matter if the average plumber "can't fix your house"?
The pay is good because of supply and demand but I really do not know programmers who decided to get into it for money.
I'd go so far as to say most programmers working today are in it for the money. Despite the constant pressure to maintain the illusion otherwise, no one is passionate about making shitty CRUD apps enabling today's questionable business fad, and that takes up a large chunk of available work.
> The point is that age isn't a barrier but that becoming a software engineer is a lot harder than just going to a bootcamp and expecting a job to appear.
I know, but that's not generally what you'd see on a "learn X in Y days" sort of site. I'm more talking about the zeitgeist.
> Why does it matter if the average plumber "can't fix your house"?
"Fix your house" is more idiomatic for the entirety of plumber work. I suspect that you are more than a one-trick pony of development, but that takes years to master. A plumber that needs to fix a house needs to use and learn a myriad of tools that take years to master.
In mainland Europe, the salaries for programmers are much more in line with the rest of the workforce, and lower than that of engineers, on average.
There's much less of a craze to learn programming here.
Part of the reason for the job craze in the us for programmers it that there are increasingly fewer opportunities for unskilled or low skilled labor in the us, as compared to europe. we rarely have internship programs at high schools, and companies are often desperate to find skilled machinists. But also the fact that we pay so much to good devs - that pay is only because of the tremendous worker shortages.
I mean, really, so what? Yes, anybody coming out of a boot camp program is going to be pretty junior to start with and will only be able to do simple things without guidance. I'm not sure that makes them so different from new grads or interns (sure, let's make a few exceptions for genuinely skilled kids).
I've never liked that programmers in general seem to imply that there is only room for the very best that develop for love and not money. The world needs a lot of mediocre programmers banging out CRUD sites for at least the near future. And some of those mediocre developers will eventually turn into good/great devs, and the ones that hate it or give up will be pushed out.
No one tells the person going back to school for accounting that they really have to love accounting or they should find a new line of work.
I completely get that, but that's not what I'm saying - if we're just in the coding for money (which there is nothing wrong with), let's just be honest about it, like we would be about the accounting gig: "Yeah, I don't love it, but they pay's great".
Yeah, everyone should learn to code, but there is an impact of age. Not many 40 year old guitar players in current rock bands (not many current rock bands on the radio :-0). That first job is a true barrier to entry for new coders who don't come from an academic background. It's got to be harder for that older person to get a first job.
> But somehow, I still want to do it : the need for freedom is so big I can't give up :-)
Perhaps there is an alternative freedom? Instead of accumulating so much wealth you don't have to work (as per The American Dream), how about cutting consumption so low (and freeing ourselves from a lot of our first world "needs" like 24/7 entertainment) and trying something self-sustaining like subsistence farming?
I feel as if true "freedom" is closer to not relying on "the man" at all, as opposed to attempting to make him your slave.
subsistence farming is HARD. Much harder than sitting in a chair and writing code. It's not really freedom because all you time is spent simply surviving.
Also, it is not freedom because you are subject to the tyranny of the universe ruining your plans.
Your crops can fail because of any number of reasons. With true subsistence farming you could die through no fault of your own. You assume all risks for your own survival.
That seems to work short- and medium-term, but any time people face a financially significant event (marriage, children, parents' disability, spouse's disability, personal disability) they wish they had a larger savings cushion to rely on.
Most people's earnings peak between 25 and 45, one can always cut down their consumption and pick up subsistence farming at 50 with a fat corporate 401(k) and a paid-off house.
The usability issues compound when that page was created with 1.2MB of JS (and another 2MB of ads), and I have to see a loading spinning wheel when it could have been easily been static content.
...And then when the page loads, I accidentally click an ad instead of a link because the ad moved over the content that I was reading to offer me 10% of joining the exclusive mailing list.
This is literally the reason why I use ad block. I don't mind ads, but I can't stand webpages where the ad drops in an changes the whole layout. Congrats, you win 0 revenue from me!
Ditto - especially when I'm halfway through the first paragraph of an article and it slides it down offscreen, so I scroll down to keep reading, then the ad goes away and the place I was reading goes back up off screen. It's criminal.
Further, on my phone especially, I like to read articles while on the train. My trip has cell signal at every stop along the way, but not between stations. Before Apple allowed adblockers in Safari, I'd have about a 1/10 chance of actually getting the article to load before I lost signal. Now, it works great just about every time.
What compounds this problem is that nobody cares about anything regarding this until they're locked up themselves. And even then, since it's just one changed mind, it's hard to move the incredibly strong tide of the government.
How can we get the populous to care, but more than just a 30 second "oh that's not good" then resuming with their normal life?
If so, what would make them suggest such a plan in the first place?