It's a good overview! I find the notion of someone hacking my D-data somewhat amusing as there's no way it could possibly be intelligible to anyone. I remember when I met with the CGM nurse and saw the squiggly line and thought "what a freaking mess!" but the SalesNurse was like "wow, that's really good". A "civilian" would find it utterly unintelligible. I suppose an insurance nurse stooge could perhaps try to "bust" you but there's so much data.
The volume of data only serves to prove how tough it is. And I sort of have easybetes. If anything, the depiction of data presents powerful arguments for more data and I am pretty sure that studies have shown that more data can help achieve better results. I'd really like to see a study done of folks who are exceeding the treatment guidelines relatively safely, running A1Cs in the 5s without too many problems, etc. I don't think we can know for sure if there is any benefit to this but I kind of suspect there is. My own experience going from allovertheplace to smoother control started about 2008 (with slow but seemingly measurable improvement....) is a uselessly small sample size but I remember what I felt like then and I feel quite a bit better these days.
The AP is kind a bit of a conundrum for me. It seems they are not going to be "tuned" (?) to "normal" BG levels but "good" diabetes control of maybe 6.0 to 6.5 A1C? I know many D-Moms have maintained lower A1C successfully so perhaps if there's a "maternity setting", it would be useful for me but, even if it were less work, I'm not sure that I'd want to blow my A1C up 1-1.5%. I am also somewhat concerned that putting everything in the hands of the tool will erode senses and skills that I have honed through 31 years of hacking away at diabetes. It certainly hasn't always been pretty but I seem to do ok at it. I think that if we can see some sort of feedback from an AP, it might be possible to maintain senses but maybe, maybe not. It's a work in progress and I am looking forward to seeing it progress.