No, but it has real-time measuring, not a 10 - minute+ delay. Also it's much finer grained in it's operation than the device.

A normal functioning pancreas won't ever put you into insulin shock either. Type 1 diabetics don't have a normally functioning pancreas, or they wouldn't be Type 1 diabetics, duh!

The pump can't add glucose. Your body has a limited store of glycogen in the liver that it can draw on, after which you need calories quickly.

Yes, there are methods of avoiding hypoglycemia when working out - but they're reactive, not anticipatory. Until they also include a sugar pump, forget it.

1. I would not do the same things second time around, wouldn't be doing full time university and full time work, I would quit the university, do full time not for 5 years as I did but for maybe 4, move onto the contracts then as I did at first, but not do contracts for 10, instead do it for 5 and start my own business 6 years sooner after getting just enough experience anyway.

2. I wouldn't bother buying and fixing and renting/selling properties as I did on the side, that diluted my effort and pulled me back from starting my own real business.

Basically if I could talk to myself 20 years ago, I would tell myself to skip college altogether, work right away (as I basically did anyway, but I did full time studies and full time job, which was unnecessarily difficult). I would make sure to explain to myself how to properly save money from much younger age and tell myself to start the business much earlier.

Even forgetting the security issue, going around with a pump and injection line connected all the time is a lot more of a pain in the ass than current methods. Also, it can't make judgements based on future activity - you might want less insulin than normal because you're about to embark an on 3-hour bike ride, which if you take your regular dose, will make you hypoglycemic, pass out, and wake up in an ambulance or the hospital (insulin efficiency increases with activity level, which is why you need less insulin when you're about to be active for any period of time).

You can't even get to the nearest star in one lifetime - how are you going to export the excess population to other planets? Humans are not semi-rational when it comes to devising schemes for division of wealth - just look at the US. Look how many people are STILL defending the over-breeding ignorant hypocritical Duggars, or anti-abortion and anti-contraceptive people.

And mating is not driven by status - otherwise rape wouldn't exist. And how many people engage in a one-night drunken hookup and the next morning go "Oh my $DIETY, I didn't really f*ck that, did I?"

Mating is driven by testosterone - just look at how many guys get caught literally f*cking the dog, or even screwing a porcupine.

And how do you expect the increasing number of people who won't have money from employment to pay for their health insurance? Countries that have public health care still finance it through taxation. Reducing working wages by working fewer hours doesn't pay the bills - ask all those people working just under the legal number of hours to be considered full-time.

They shouldn't have charged him with making death threats, but rather with criminal harassment or intimidation. Then it's the mental state of the recipient, not the person making the threats, that applies.

Fund a Basic income at zero cost, through the Fed. Indexation eliminates any potential inflation tax.

Businesses can decrease wages as much as they like, automate, outsource, etc. without worrying about harming the General Welfare. Why would unexpected, runaway inflation occur?

But as a hedge against potential price-gouging, index everything (incomes, savings, everything) to inflation so that purchasing power does not decrease.

Hold lots of challenges to stimulate individuals (on a basic income, or not) to innovate. Business can further reduce costs by crowdsourcing innovation. Again, why would inflation occur? Simply create the $6 trillion or so per year for a basic income.

That first "if" won't happen. Also, Star Trek was far from utopia - wars on interplanetary and interstellar scales are not an improvement. Additionally, it would require infinite energy and infinite speed (amount other things) to make anything resembling the federation viable - and we have neither, and won't be getting them in this universe.

You're forgetting what happens with a "manufacturer's strike." When there's no incentive to produce something, why bother, since there's no upside, just a potential downside.

You're mistaken. The state "takes care of it" via payroll taxes.

The summary is misleading; the act will probably pass on Tuesday, and the provisions will be restored. It's depressing how completely dishonest this story is.

Deficit spending is how the private sector thrives. Government can and should create money to provide for the General Welfare in the form of a Basic Income. You are still free not to opt in, and to conduct your finances as you see fit; but there is no reason to force everyone else to conform to your feudal economics.

Debt is a distraction. The country's had a debt since the very first administration, and conservatives have been predicting imminent doom and gloom every year. Except it hasn't happened, each generation's standard of living increases, grandkids are better off than their grandparents. Reagan proved deficits don't matter, after campaigning against Carter's $68 billion deficit then raising that by a factor of four.

The private sector thrives on debt and money creation. Government should too. If government spends money financed at zero cost through the Fed to improve the General Welfare, why would unexpected, runaway inflation occur? But as a hedge, index all incomes to inflation to eliminate any inflation tax. Indexation guarantees purchasing power does not decrease.

In conclusion, Rand Paul's economics are feudal, archaic. We can and should spend more on social services, such as a Basic Income.