Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:This will need better advances in CGM Technolog (Score 1) 75

by kwiecmmm (#47248711) Attached to: Artificial Pancreas Shows Promise In Diabetes Test

I currently have the CGM and I understand some of what you are saying but I believe things have improved a lot since then. Currently my CGM gives me a calibration within about 10-15% of my blood glucose. This is normally good enough to monitor trends and keep my blood glucose in the proper range without finger pricks. The one huge advantage of it is the fact that when I am hungry I can look at it and see if I am hungry because of low blood sugar or just being hungry.

About your complaints with the CGM, I have seen numbers jump to be about a 100 point difference, but this is normally followed by a calibration failure. This causes me to have to recheck my blood glucose (I agree this is annoying, but at least it recognizes it is off). Currently the sensor lasts 6 days (I can normally get it to go a 7th day before the battery dies). I still normally test my blood glucose 3-4 times a day, but that is better than my previous 8-12 times a day.

I think I do better with the CGM, but then again I am just happy not to have to go back to using constant needle injections and finger pricks.

Comment: WTF (Score 4, Insightful) 216

by kwiecmmm (#47248505) Attached to: US Agency Aims To Regulate Map Aids In Vehicles

So what if someone else in the car is looking at the directions while you are driving? Will their ability to look at directions be significantly hampered?

It is a good thing that these Congress people don't have any important things to worry about so they can focus on this ridiculous crap.

In the mean time my car might just drive on an interstate with failing bridges, or into a tunnel with ceiling tiles that could fall at any moment, but focusing on this is obviously the best thing for Congress to do.

Comment: Re:Warning: Snarky comment (Score 1) 75

by kwiecmmm (#47248431) Attached to: Artificial Pancreas Shows Promise In Diabetes Test

I completely agree. The problem is Type 1 is such a small section of diabetics (about 5% at the moment) that most people don't even think of this, and when you tell someone you are diabetic they automatically assume it is Type 2. If they actually put the time and effort into finding a cure for this it would probably cure or at least lead to better treatments for Type 2 as well, but that might actually cost drug companies money in the long run.

Comment: Re:This is what happens... (Score 2) 156

by kwiecmmm (#47131275) Attached to: Security Researchers Threatened With US Cybercrime Laws

As it should be. You have no right to hack systems that don't belong to you unless you are asked to do so by the owner.

And what happens if that system has some of your personal information from a previous order or interaction?

I guess we should just throw all of these "security researchers" in jail and anytime an internet vulnerability is announced everyone should just get new logins, new credit cards and just reinvent themselves online. That sounds like the best plan.

Comment: Re:We have an advertising bubble... (Score 2) 154

by kwiecmmm (#47058845) Attached to: Agree or Disagree: We are in another tech bubble.

There will come a time where a company demands users install software on their machines and send every single key tap, mouse click, and any other item they can get access to as individualized ad data. When this time comes (or perhaps earlier when users start revolting), the bubble will pop quite painfully.

The issue here is that most folks who use the internet don't realize how much data they give away from what they do online. People really need to understand how much data with or without identifying information (even though the lack of this doesn't really stop anything from identifying the originator of the information), they give up.

Hopefully this changes, but I don't see any push toward this anytime soon.

Comment: Re:Why send humans (Score 2) 307

by kwiecmmm (#46664035) Attached to: Should NASA Send Astronauts On Voluntary One-Way Missions?

I agree that robot missions are important, but I think it is more about a push to force humans to expand their knowledge into these areas. Our human space travel knowledge has not really expanded a lot in the last 40 years.

And the only way that we seem to force ourselves to consider the issues you discuss here is to push toward a long term goal like this. If the Russians hadn't launched Sputnik, I don't think our satellite technology, human space knowledge and all of the secondary technologies that were created along the way would be where they are at the moment.

The other fact here is that the earth has had 5 great extinctions in the past 650 million years. The next one could be 50 million years away or 100 years away, if we want to succeed as a species we need to understand that we need to move beyond just living on earth. And the sooner that we start that the better.

If I have not seen so far it is because I stood in giant's footsteps.