noodleman

Those are junior doctors on dirt pay. Consultants earn up to £95k a year.

I've had 4 consultants over the past 10 years. The first, who was forward thinking and kept up with the latest in the field, helped me acquire an insulin pump. Sadly, I had to transfer clinics when I moved across the country and have never had another consultant that helpful.

This was my experience when I was first diagnosed, too (minus closed loop - it was the early 90's). They put more effort in with children, as it's a dedicated team. Same as gestational diabetes care.

Expect to start having appointments cancelled and to go years without hearing from them once she is passed to the adult diabetes team.

Diabetes consultants can earn salaries up to £95k. Far from what junior doctors earn.

My diabetes consultant is on more than the national median income and only works part time in a low cost of living area of the UK. They are far from hard done by. Throwing money at them will not change what is effectively a systemic error in how they approach the disease.

The NHS is underfunded, but this isn't a problem of funding. The lack of a scientific approach to managing diabetes is strictly down to ineptitude.

I'm T1D and currently working on something like this because diabetes healthcare in the UK is effectively non-existent past diagnosis.

Managing the condition isn't too difficult after 30 years of it, but dealing with the politics of NHS diabetes care is astronomically more difficult than it was in any decade previously. In my experience, if you are not pregnant, or you aren't at risk of passing out in the next 15 minutes, they don't care. Whatever long term consequences you experience are another department's responsibility.

A trend I've seen is that younger diabetes nurses and doctors are extremely dependant on tech (CGMs, insulin pumps), but don't comprehend how they work or what the data means. They don't know what patterns to look for beyond a 24hr window and generally seem to think everything is a bolus ratio or basal problem, overlooking other settings such as correction factor, duration, etc.

Because they are tech illiterate, vendor lock-in is becoming an issue, as no health tech companies want you using another tool except the one they get paid for. So I find myself being swapped from platform to platform as they change my devices every year or so, each one being less workable than the last. Glooko only allows 6 months of historic data to be viewed, and only through their web UI. Abbot refused to let me download my data after I was forced off their platform to Glooko. I was happy on Tidepool, but it doesn't work with my current set of devices.

No, more funding will not fix this. Threats of criminal punishments for lazy medical professionals and unlimited fines for anti-competitive behaviour from diabetes tech manufacturers will.

It's hard not to prefer the ecosystem that is designed to make it as painful as it can be to switch to a competitor.

I'm all in on Linux at this point - it's been usable for a long time.

My comments not really about whether it works, as we know it does, it's about how we go about getting the word out there.

They've been at it for years. I'd genuinely be surprised if this cracked the top 10 worst things Microsoft have done to Windows users.

I think there would need to be a concerted effort at a grass-roots level, say from r/buildapc, to get new PC gamers onto an alternative for there to be a considerable shift away from Windows.

This is actually an interesting point. There's a tendency to assume that the core of a story is the same, even if the way it's told is different. I wonder how many generations of retellings it takes for us to notice significant differences.

I think a lot of people aren't necessarily happy because they're highly skilled at it, but because its a default state of being. If it was purely a skill then environmental or biological factors wouldn't play any role.

If anything, we learn to be unhappy. It's no secret how toxic academia can be - I would say the original commenter's personal observation that only 1% of people are happy is probably because many people around them are deeply unhappy.

I know I felt this way when I was in a different career. Once I moved out of that field, I was astounded to find out that people are actually not depressed most of the time. I won't lie, the improved financial situation that followed was a big factor - it's definitely easier to be happy when you're not poor!

So, I agree, a recalibration is in order. But that might involve removing yourself from certain social groups as much as it requires a thought pattern adjustment.

Probably not as absurd as you think. I reckon if you dropped an American in a random town in Scotland (or even a northern English town, for that matter), they would also need to use very broken English and hand gestures to communicate as well. Glaswegian or Geordie is near incomprehensible to RP speaking Brits, yet alone to an American who's only exposure to Scottish is Mel Gibson as William Wallace.

This is a good assessment. 1 and 2 are why the system won't change, but I don't think they were intentionally designed with that in mind. I think it's a hang over from academia, bearing in mind how many of the top engineers at FAANG are PhDs.

Well, that and how almost nobody who successfully finds employment after "grinding" leetcodes wants to remove the barriers for entry.

I think Leetcoders can't envisage a better way to assess someone than by subjecting them to the same kind of hoop-jumping you get made to do in university. They're not interviewing you for a job as there's no module on interviewing candidates on the CS curriculum, and don't have much professional experience outside of academics or software engineering. They're simulating a dissertation defence, because that's how they were assessed for their competence.

That's my charitable interpretation. If I'm being cynical, it's elitism - a way of making sure you're "one of us" (read: obnoxiously academic, Type-A personality, "logic over feelings").

I don't want to stereotype, but obnoxiously out of touch tech CEO is quickly becoming a theme.

I think he knows but assumes that people will forget about it over time. It's worked for him in the past.

Universally rejected by all cultures is false. For example, India's penal code makes exceptions for men who rape their wives.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marital_rape_laws_by_country

Lets not get into a debate over how legal abstractions cover up the reality of rape and sexual abuse, but keep in mind that rape is staggeringly underreported.

Your reasoning is speculation and your sources only really show evidence for your claim that religiosity is declining.

Another correlation with birthrate is wealth. Wealthy countries have more expensive costs associated with raising children, such as housing and childcare. Given that children can't effectively work for 15-20 years, they are a financial burden. In poor countries, children become another set of hands that can be put to use from only a few years old.

This is almost certainly a UK specific experience. The police here have a track record of treating people who report crimes with disdain.

I doubt in office staff are more valued by companies than remote staff. If the company is moderately large then you will not be any more visible than a remote worker.

I'd be surprised if we're not just figures on a spreadsheet to those high enough up.

It can pick up other strategically useful info than just photographs such as radio comms and relay it back to home via satelite.

Maybe I'm making it up, but I swear I've read somewhere that the answers are shit on purpose so you to go to their paid support.

Sounds Microsoftian enough to be plausible.

>At work, there's a box on an HR form where employees can choose between: disabled, not disabled, or prefer not to say

I've always assumed these things were just for statistics. I doubt much will change just from changing your answer.

That said, in the places I've worked (disclaimer: not US) it seems the vast majority of people are not just accepting of autism but are actively aware of how it affects people and are prepared to make adjustments to accommodate.

It wouldn't even be brought up in an interview in my current team, unless you wanted to discuss it. It wouldn't be held against you at all.

I think it might surprise you if you communicate the problems you're having. If someone in my team felt like their work environment was causing them to need to pull all nighters then we'd try to address it.

Is it a form of expression to walk around in semen encrusted sweatpants?

I'm not going to defend the other commenters point but I find your position strange.

Imagine a person covered in poo, ripped clothes leaving visible track marks from using intraveinous drugs.

I'm sure if you were forced to interact with that person, you'd not be happy, right? Does that make you shallow?

I'm not sure someone wearing pyjamas is the slippery slope the previous commenter thinks it is, but their point about preferring people who make themselves more presentable is valid.

This is horribly reductive.

Put aside the sample size of one for a moment. The fact you've only dealt with the police when genuinely committing crimes, and their response was proportional to the crime, is most likely down to your skin colour.

I half expected this to be an AI generated title.

500 yen is a small price to pay for being able to tell this story.

> informed opinion

> Twitter is no longer part of their identity, now Mastodon is

And this is why so many people are put off. The Mastodon die-hards are ready to defend Mastodon from any perceived insults. So that when people have genuine questions or issues, it's like you're insulting the users themselves.

It doesn't help that Mastodon fans heavily evangelise the tech, as if anyone other than tech bros care.

"What do you mean there's no good content on Mastodon? You blah blah blah decentralised blah blah blah fediverse..."

So back to Twitter/Reddit/Facebook people go, where you can get your dopamine fix within about 2 seconds.

> ...haven't you ever looked at the current tech industry and thought to yourself "something is not right here?"

Yes, but I've thought something has been wrong for near enough a decade. Like I said, I'm a layperson so I'm looking for a source that isn't other tech bros recycling each others' hot takes.

> Tech has been a massive game of shuffling around VC money to create the illusion of a massive part of the economy...

This is how I've understood how tech has operated. Spotify, Uber, etc.

I just don't have the subject knowledge to work out for myself whether you're another doomsayer or not. I appreciate the detailed comment (and I'm reading the sources) but I think it misses what I'm looking for.