According to our new AI overlords, a short synopsis of potential risks of BPC 157 based on mechanistic and animal work to date (don't know human risks because there haven't been sufficient clinical studies):

* Possible pathologic angiogenesis (abnormal blood‑vessel growth), which theoretically could support tumor growth or inflammatory and autoimmune processes. * Modulation of nitric‑oxide pathways that, at high levels, might contribute to anemia, altered drug metabolism (CYP enzyme activity), and possibly neurodegenerative processes in theory. * Concerns that its pro‑healing, pro‑growth signalling (e.g., FAK–paxillin) could encourage cancer spread if malignant cells are already present; this remains theoretical, with no proof in humans. * Possible liver and kidney toxicity suggested in some commentary and extrapolated from preclinical work, but not well characterized in people. * Immune reactions or allergic responses, including fevers, rash, hives, muscle aches, or systemic inflammatory responses

These do not appear to be results that would appear overnight. It would be "nice" if the folks injecting random shit into their bodies also disclaimed any subsequent medical intervention as a result of said shit, but that I suspect that's unlikely.

Can you point to the clinical trials that demonstrate this?

> Doctors seem to be giving GLP peptides out like candy and those are injected.

There have been several _thousand_ clinical trials that have shown GLP-1s to be safe and effective.

Artemis costs about $4 billion per mission, with around $90 billion already spent. The war in Iran is costing the US about $1 billion per day, so (as of today), $35 billion spent.

The US debt is $39,000 billion ($39 trillion). So, combined, the entire Artemis program and war in Iran represent .32% of the US debt.

The Internet is a transport medium. It sounds like you are asking if it possible to (somehow) associate universal, intrinsic, and immutable attribution metadata with some or all (not sure what "viral" distinguishes in this context) Internet _content_ and have all receivers of that content accept the implications of that attribution metadata.

I think the failure of pretty much all the various digital rights management efforts applied on a MUCH smaller scale to infinitesimal subsets of content types that are now being schlepped across the Internet would suggest that no, there are no technical approaches that would realistically work.

And music, film, and television ownership/credit being tracked carefully? In certain law abiding environments, it's possible the owners/creators get a small fraction of what they believe they are entitled to, but in the majority of the world, not so much.

At least you're consistent.

Trying to access a human in support to understand wtf has been going on, perhaps unsurprisingly, has been a study in infuriation. Their AI support bot has been as useless as most other AI support bots.

Sending email to their support email address triggers the same AI support bot. It suggested waiting 24 hours and trying to access my account again. And then closed the issue after 4 hours.

Probably not related to the email delivery issue (I keep getting the link via, it just redirects to the create new account page), but perhaps indicative of something seriously broken and a lack of interest in actual support (even for paying customers).

I always use the ISO-3166 "user-assigned" 2-letter codes (AA, QM-QZ, XA-XZ, ZZ), with the theory being that ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency getting international consensus to move those codes back to regular country codes will take longer than the heat death of the universe, so using them for internal domains is probably safe.

An interesting assertion. I presume you are implying outsized influence over the US (or do you mean every other country?). I'm honestly curious: can you describe this structural design?

Yep. A couple of bad experiences with Uber/Lyft drivers put me off using them. Waymo is honestly more comfortable/less stressful for me. Similarly, I just read an article discussing parents making use of Waymo to schlep their kids to sportball practice/friend's house/wherever kids hang out these days, even though it is against Waymo's terms of service. The article indicated those parents didn't trust their kids to be in a car along with a strange human, but were ok with an automated system (and violating the ToS of that system).

> please explain how exactly our city landscapes, namely parking lots, will be revolutionized in any way, shape, or form other than zombie lots occupied Waymos

Today parking tends to be located near the shop/restaurant/office people want to go to. If people no longer need to park to go to where they want to go, parking (for charging) can relocate and be concentrated, thereby freeing up the parking spaces for other uses.

A "fabricated fact" (or "alternative fact" if you prefer) is an oxymoron. Actual truth, as opposed to a vibe or what people are basing their decisions on these days, is orthogonal to "the amount of energy, power and money that the person has." Deriving or identifying actual facts and truth is hard (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method) and always subject to change based on new data, so lots of people don't do it -- it's much easier to just make shit up and confirms biases.

You appear to be using unusual definitions of "fact" and "truth", more akin to "assertions" and "vibe". I'll stick with the traditional definitions.