Probably not effective, our gut is very good at splicing up proteins into constituent amino acids.
If you want specific proteins/peptides in your bloodstream*, for now the most reliable way is generally to inject them.
But yeah, it is very much not necessarily the case that our own bodies will produce the same proteins under similar exercise, or that the mouse proteins released would have the same effects in us as in them, or that proteins released under similar exercise would actually de-age us.
It's interesting to track down the mechanisms in mice (exercise induces protein release - how? - which then de-ages the mice - also, how?) but you have to reproduce the work entirely separately in humans. Not just because it might not work, but because it is very important (and neat!) to understand the biochemical mechanisms of human ageing and de-ageing, and that understanding of How Things Work is a big part of the long-term reward.
[*] I'm not advocating for injecting untested/unregulated proteins or peptides, only speaking of ROA, route of administration
> But at a moment's notice their allegiance can switch.
Is that true, though? I don't expect that the individual biases of officers or judges, or the institutional biases of the police or immigration departments, can switch at a moment's notice.
Rational people act according to the incentives they’re provided. If that incentive is “follow these new instructions/directives or you’ll lose your job” (or worse?) it takes an especially principled person to object.
Entities like the courts and law enforcement optimize for the retention of people who do what they're told and the turnover of those who have their own principals. And this is before you account for the fact that most people will do what they're told before they threaten their paycheck.
It's less true every day, now that Trump is busy filling the ranks of the bureaucracy with people who respond to the loyalty-test question "Who won the 2020 election?" with "Donald Trump."
Well, no, but you could have the very rude awakening that the in-group that you thought you were part of is suddenly now more narrowly defined than you had deluded yourself into believing. “I’m one of the good ones” quickly receives the response “there are no good ones” once the dominoes start to fall. The curse of reactionary politics is that it always crumbles under its own weight of an ever-narrowing definition of the in-group.
In terms of absolute number of incarcerated persons, though, the US is ahead of everyone else by a country mile. Depending on which inmate pools you include or exclude, the US holds 20-25% of all incarcerated persons in the world.
Of course. At this point further analysis must be qualitative then quantitative (why this and that, what properly describes the clusters etc.), but certainly some interpretation of your idea is defensible defining implicit subsets.
I would expect that the NSA-like orgs have access to the data about where we travel, your spending habits, your comments on Reddit or HN, etc., etc. Basically, a profile on each of us. It might not be a collated readable profile as such, just a vector in a big NN describing our risk potential, but, all the same.
Yeah, I remember reading that a study found that white and black youth used marijuana at roughly equal rates, but black youth were about 4x as likely to be arrested for it. Due to differences in the # of stops, then differences in searches, then differences in actual arrests, with white youth getting more lenient treatment at each step.
And then this just reinforces the idea: "well, look at the crime statistics, black kids are more crime-prone, right"
And to be clear, I was IN this. We got busted for pot YEARS ago, but again, we're white, middle class. We confirmed what we took, we confirmed it was all gone, and I never saw so much as a fine. Cops asked to look around my house, I said sure thing help yourselves, they looked through maybe 1/3 of my home, and then left. And I've never heard a thing about it since then.
The fact that this is the same kind of life event that can literally, without any hyperbole, cost a black person their life, fucks with me sometimes.
Ancedotes are personal stories, like "oh, my dad was down at the post office the other day, and he saw..."
This is not a personal story, not an anecdote. I'm reporting on a study that looked at incarceration rates for drug use vs the drug use itself.
Why is that important? Because the study itself is solid, and it shows that there is some sort of bias between police/policing and african-american communities.
Sure, maybe that bias doesn't show up in other areas like firearm-related crimes. Or: maybe it does, and we haven't yet figured out how. Or, maybe it plays an indirect role, further eroding the relationship between the AA communities and the police, gradually building up a mutual dynamic that subjects black people to an unhealthy chronic level of stress and despair and harassment while also "justifying" the prejudicial activities of the cops.
There are whole books written about this. But at a minimum, I can't imagine just brushing over a 4x higher arrest rate for the same level of crime. That's pretty damn big.
You're literally just describing a chicken-and-egg problem. Curious what your brain thinks is the reason African-American communities are policed more intensely. Surely every police organization in the United States is just racist.
So there is data on some policing in NYC. Because the police need to record stop and frisk encounters, it turns out that black populations get stopped and searched at 2-3 times the rate that other racial groups get stopped and frisked (whites got 10% of the encounters despite being something like 33% of the pop and black+latinos got 90% of the encounters). And it's not like the frisks turned up anything, with the vast majority (90%) of the frisks finding nothing. I believe there's similar data for police in other cities.
At the very least, this suggests that police in NYC and probably elsewhere were disproportionately singling out Black (and Latinos) for intrusive searches without evidence and on a pretextual basis.
I mean their officers keep getting caught posting racist shit, participating in racist chats, police unions regularly donate to republican politicians, and they murder black people so often that the phrase “driving/walking while black” is common slang for when the aforementioned African Americans get gunned down for every day misdemeanors.
So, every police institution? I’m sure there are exceptions, but there’s enough of a preponderance to safely assume it and the data bears that out.
> Surely every police organization in the United States is just racist.
Well, there's personal racism, meaning personal prejudice against a race. But then there's also institutional racism, like policies that turn out to be racist. Racist policies can be blatantly racist, like redlining, or they may indirectly turn out to be racist.
But yes, I think institutional racism is fairly common and very well-documented in the US.
> You're literally just describing a chicken-and-egg problem.
If you want to understand this more deeply, I highly recommend Ta-Nehisi Coates' book "Between the World and Me".
Yes, it's a chicken and egg problem, but our police and judicial institutions are actively sustaining/aggravating the problem.
most of the violent crimes are from people with prior crimes, but the prior crimes themselves weren't necessarily violent, but just enough to marginalize that person from ability to participate in society with steady jobs
such as the possession of now-legalized substances, and the possession stop itself was based on flimsy pretexts that could have been fought, but it made more sense to take a plea-deal for that person or they were not aware of how to not engage with police and damned themselves without a lawyer present
There are times where you want to check for existence before fetching a key-value pair, and there are times where you want to automatically throw an error if the value doesn't exist.
Both have valid use cases. It's weird to be sarcastic about it.
This is probably the boldest claim in the entire comments section, considering we're only in 2026.
Compare 1926 to 1999, and how technology advanced in that time. Radio wasn't widespread in 1926, nuclear fission hadn't been demonstrated, the idea of the semiconductor energy band gap, underlying the entirety of the modern computing industry, wasn't put forth until 1928. And yet, 20 years later we were purifying silicon, and 10 years after that (1954) the first silicon transistor was created and kicked off the semiconductor boom. 50 years later, we were in the Internet bubble.
We've got decades upon decades upon decades to come up with new ideas and implement them, even before the end of the century.
> Humans name their vehicles, so they're definitely going to name their $10k-$20k house bot
huh. I can only think of one friend I've ever known who named their car.
Anyways, not saying I necessarily disagree with the rest of what you say, but it's out there, for sure. We're a good distance away from an AI that can meaningfully act like a friend.
(Though who knows what AI will look like in even 10 years? I'm not ruling this out)
> at parties, and even at the dinner table all looking at their phones
This is very different from what I see.
At coffee shops and on trains, sure, people are working or on their phones. But at dinner and parties, at bars and climbing gym and dances, we're there to be there with each other.
Maybe a cultural difference between where you are and where I am?
Probably not effective, our gut is very good at splicing up proteins into constituent amino acids.
If you want specific proteins/peptides in your bloodstream*, for now the most reliable way is generally to inject them.
But yeah, it is very much not necessarily the case that our own bodies will produce the same proteins under similar exercise, or that the mouse proteins released would have the same effects in us as in them, or that proteins released under similar exercise would actually de-age us.
It's interesting to track down the mechanisms in mice (exercise induces protein release - how? - which then de-ages the mice - also, how?) but you have to reproduce the work entirely separately in humans. Not just because it might not work, but because it is very important (and neat!) to understand the biochemical mechanisms of human ageing and de-ageing, and that understanding of How Things Work is a big part of the long-term reward.
[*] I'm not advocating for injecting untested/unregulated proteins or peptides, only speaking of ROA, route of administration
reply