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.
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).
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.
> 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.
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".
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?
> 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.
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.
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?
How is this different from/better than Stack Exchange's blackbox[0] which doesn't require a third-party service (just plain-ole gpg) and is written in bash?
P.S.: I think the image looks aesthetically pleasing, but why is it there? It's a scaled-down 1,600x680px image that costs me 140KB and doesn't add anything to the article; what's worse is that it's not even a nice banner image, it's just smack dab in the middle of the article.
> Medium is swimming in crap. Like reprints or links to other pages. Why? That’s for social media. Don’t repost things. Where’s the originality in that.
Reposting (or the principle behind sharing someone else's work you find interesting) is something that's been around since the web's inception, and is actually a great thing: Hacker News itself is a link aggregator which is essentially a centralized reposting system, ordered by interest (up/downvotes). Hyperlinking is all about sharing awesome content, and there are thousands of things I never would have known about if somebody didn't reblog it, retweet it, share it on fb, or crosspost it from a different subreddit.
Originality is cool, but I'll never know about your original work if a friend of a friend of a friend didn't share it all the way down that chain until it got to me.
If so, what would make them suggest such a plan in the first place?