PR
Permian Resources Corporation
stock NYSE

They need a one or all of these:
Trump tarrif off SiC from China
CHIPS cash
Better operations for more production
Restructure debt
A PR campaign for US semis
Raise money by selling discounts on future product
Etc...
Wolfspeed will survive the question is who will be the owners. Current stock holders or bond bullies.

This must be some sort of PR. Hong Kong knows Crypto Bros respect LINK, so it wants to leverage that in promoting acceptability for their CBDC. 😂
!tip 1

Hello everyone. Is condominium still a good investment? The condominium is located Near NAIA 1 and plan ko sana for Airbnb.
I’m in my early 20s, still living with my parents kaya di masyadong magastos. Whole family kami nakatira overseas, we are PR here. We’re planning to live here for good but still open to have few investments sa Pinas. Thank you.

Anyone know why PR is tanking AH?

Seeing a string of PR releases plus some solid price action. Makes me hopeful for this

You piqued my curiosity and I looked up KLTO, Klotho Neuroscience, Inc.
That’s great that they were able to increase healthy aging in mice by 20%, but the PR doesn’t clarify what if any studies were done in humans and would require more due diligence on my part.
The part of the PR that I find worrisome is mention of “**using an andeno-associated virus serotyoe 9 delivery vector (AAV9)** that expressed the secreted KL protein isoform and efficiently increased the concentration of-KL in serum, resulting in a 20% increase in lifespan.”
That’s genetic engineering. It’s one thing in laboratory mice and a totally different thing in humans.
The really great news without having to wait years for human clinical trials is that Extending a healthy lifespan in humans can be done NOW by changes in lifestyle; eating habits to maintain a healthy blood sugar, along with regular exercise to maintain muscle mass which helps with maintaining bone density and healthy brain metabolism, all without waiting for human trials “**using an adeno-associated virus serotype 9 delivery vector (AAV9) that expressed the secreted KL protein isoform**.

This is the first news article that pops up when I search GameStop on Google. Seems like a shameless attempt at bad PR, and just before earnings week of all times. What kind of desperation must these shorts be feeling to pull this out of the bag? Tomorrow is going to be a good day!

yeah she seems to have a massive PR. I never fantasized her but internet wants to shove her down my pen*s

wtf really knows other than nobody is buying right now. The chart patterns tell me it's in a consolidation area right now, although slowly trending lower. CLOV needs some more positive PR and it needs to start showing positive revenue on upcoming ER's. I know it's trending in that direction, but that doesn't seem to be enough to get buyers to step in right now.

I remember my first FINRA complaint. Vanguard lied that they did not get my DRS request after not transferring for 2 months (even though the request was still in my sent box on their own internal messaging system). Then they took 2 weeks to do the transfer
Then they delayed their FINRA complaint response by an extra month and asked for an extension.
Then FINRA let them settle the complaint which was "you closed your account anyway... so bye"
moral learned: "FINRA works for them and FINRA's ombudsman is their PR agent"

I'm not really part of the Monero community and my understanding of all of this is very limited. I'm just a regular guy who ordered, ehm, dried herbs online years ago and found it curious that I'd need to pay in XMR. As of late, I don't really have a use for Monero, and honestly, I just occasionally buy a little XMR hoping that it will rise to the moon one day. I don't even have any net savings overall, I just live paycheck to paycheck, so it's not like I want to hide any wealth either.
I have sympathies for the project's ideals, i.e. I think it is good to have a way to anonymously store and save digital currency. But I'm not really here for ideological reasons. I just think Monero is one of the only cryptocurrency that has an actual use case, and it has proven useful for years now. It may not be great PR to be associated with darknet markets and ransomware, but if those guys trust Monero's technology, then I trust it too. I mean, I'd love to believe that the main demand for Monero is not from criminals but from noble donations to brave dissidents in authoritarian regimes fighting for human rights, but I highly doubt it.

Everyone knows Paul Graham's advice: "Do things that don't scale." But nobody talks about how to implement it in coding.
I've been building my AI podcast platform for 8 months, and I've developed a simple framework: every unscalable hack gets exactly 3 months to live. After that, it either proves its value and gets properly built, or it dies.
Here's the thing: as engineers, we're trained to build "scalable" solutions from day one. Design patterns, microservices, distributed systems - all that beautiful architecture that handles millions of users. But that's big company thinking.
At a startup, scalable code is often just expensive procrastination. You're optimizing for users who don't exist yet, solving problems you might never have. My 3-month rule forces me to write simple, direct, "bad" code that actually ships and teaches me what users really need.
**My Current Infrastructure Hacks and Why They're Actually Smart:**
**1. Everything Runs on One VM**
Database, web server, background jobs, Redis - all on a single $40/month VM. Zero redundancy. Manual backups to my local machine.
Here's why this is genius, not stupid: I've learned more about my actual resource needs in 2 months than any capacity planning doc would've taught me. Turns out my "AI-heavy" platform peaks at 4GB RAM. The elaborate Kubernetes setup I almost built? Would've been managing empty containers.
When it crashes (twice so far), I get real data about what actually breaks. Spoiler: It's never what I expected.
**2. Hardcoded Configuration Everywhere**
PRICE_TIER_1 = 9.99
PRICE_TIER_2 = 19.99
MAX_USERS = 100
AI_MODEL = "gpt-4"
No config files. No environment variables. Just constants scattered across files. Changing anything means redeploying.
The hidden superpower: I can grep my entire codebase for any config value in seconds. Every price change is tracked in git history. Every config update is code-reviewed (by me, looking at my own PR, but still).
Building a configuration service would take a week. I've changed these values exactly 3 times in 3 months. That's 15 minutes of redeployment vs 40 hours of engineering.
**3. SQLite in Production**
Yes, I'm running SQLite for a multi-user web app. My entire database is 47MB. It handles 50 concurrent users without breaking a sweat.
The learning: I discovered my access patterns are 95% reads, 5% writes. Perfect for SQLite. If I'd started with Postgres, I'd be optimizing connection pools and worrying about replication for a problem that doesn't exist. Now I know exactly what queries need optimization before I migrate.
**4. No CI/CD, Just Git Push to Production**
git push origin main && ssh server "cd app && git pull && ./restart.sh"
One command. 30 seconds. No pipelines, no staging, no feature flags.
Why this teaches more than any sophisticated deployment setup: Every deployment is intentional. I've accidentally trained myself to deploy small, focused changes because I know exactly what's going out. My "staging environment" is literally commenting out the production API keys and running locally.
**5. Global Variables for State Management**
active_connections = {}
user_sessions = {}
rate_limit_tracker = defaultdict(list)
Should these be in Redis? Absolutely. Are they? No. Server restart means everyone logs out.
The insight this gave me: Users don't actually stay connected for hours like I assumed. Average session is 7 minutes. The elaborate session management system I was planning? Complete overkill. Now I know I need simple JWT tokens, not a distributed session store.
**The Philosophy:**
Bad code that ships beats perfect code that doesn't. But more importantly, bad code that teaches beats good code that guesses.
Every "proper" solution encodes assumptions:
* Kubernetes assumes you need scale
* Microservices assume you need isolation
* Redis assumes you need persistence
* CI/CD assumes you need safety
At my stage, I don't need any of that. I need to learn what my 50 users actually do. And nothing teaches faster than code that breaks in interesting ways.
**The Mental Shift:**
I used to feel guilty about every shortcut. Now I see them as experiments with expiration dates. The code isn't bad - it's perfectly calibrated for learning mode.
In 3 months, I'll know exactly which hacks graduate to real solutions and which ones get deleted forever. That's not technical debt - that's technical education.

The numbers always get corrected down... has been like that for years.
Its just glorified political PR.

Alpha Tau Medical ($DRTS) is a small-cap biotech company with a potentially game-changing cancer treatment that’s flying way under the radar.
Their platform — Alpha DaRT — delivers Radium-224 directly inside tumors using precision oncology. No systemic side effects, no need for external radiation beams. Just localized, single-session, under an hour minimally invasive treatment with remarkable early results.
And here’s the kicker:
They’re not some preclinical moonshot. Alpha Tau is already deep into human trials, has FDA breakthrough designation, and is building their third manufacturing site in the U.S.
Here’s why I believe this might be one of the best risk/reward setups on the market right now:
⸻
🧬 The science is real — with 100% tumor response and a systemic immune response
Alpha DaRT inserts Radium-224 directly into tumors, where it emits high-energy alpha particles that cause irreparable DNA damage, killing cancer cells.
Unlike traditional radiation or chemo, this approach is precisely localized, leading to dramatically fewer side effects and practically no harm to healthy tissue.
But perhaps the most compelling piece?
The treatment seems to activate the body’s immune system, creating a systemic anti-tumor response. In some cases, distant metastases have shrunk after only treating the main tumor.
⸻
📈 Clinical pipeline and progress
Alpha Tau has already completed human trials across multiple tumor types, including:
• Skin cancers (SCC, BCC) — early results show 100% response rate, now advancing toward regulatory approval
• Head & neck tumors, breast cancer, glioblastoma (GBM), pancreatic cancer, lung cancer, prostate cancer and more — with trials in progress or approved
• Recently added to the FDA’s TAP (Total Product Lifecycle) Program for glioblastoma — one of the FDA’s most selective support tracks
• Submitted for regulatory approval (PMDA) in Japan, one of the largest oncology markets
And again — not theoretical. They’re treating real patients right now.
⸻
💰 The balance sheet is healthy — and commercial plans are underway
• $90M+ in cash following a recent $36.9M raise led by Oramed
• Burn rate supports operations into commercialization (per CFO comments and Q1 filing)
• 2 manufacturing facilities already built — a third and largest one under construction in New Hampshire
• Multiple trials advancing in parallel, including key Phase II/III milestones in 2025
⸻
📊 Potential upside
The current market cap? ~$250M–$280M depending on the day, while even one indication could be worth billions.
For example:
🧠 Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC)
- 1.8 million new cases per year in the U.S.
- Approximately 64,000 cases are advanced and not treatable effectively with current options.
- These are exactly the patients Alpha DaRT is designed to help.
At a treatment price of $50,000–$100,000:
64,000 patients × $50,000 = $3.2 billion annually.
64,000 × $100,000 = $6.4 billion annually.
From just one subset of one cancer, in one country.
🩺 Pancreatic Cancer
- 66,000 new cases annually (U.S.)
- Among the deadliest, with extremely limited options
At $50,000–$100,000 per treatment:
66,000 × $50,000 = $3.3 billion/year
66,000 × $100,000 = $6.6 billion/year
Again — just one cancer, in just one country
⸻
🔍 Why is it still under the radar?
I’ve put a lot of time into figuring this out, making sure I’m not missing anything that’s holding it back. What I found out is Alpha Tau isn’t really doing marketing, at least not for the stock.
Their PR is minimal. They rarely push the stock. Their CFO presentations focus on medicine, not valuation.
And that’s where I think the opportunity lies.
The fundamentals are there — but the retail story hasn’t gotten out yet.
⸻
⚠️ Not without risk
To be clear: this is biotech.
Regulatory delays, clinical surprises, slow adoption — all possible. Always do your own DD.
But after months of tracking $DRTS, I believe the risk/reward is unusually compelling, and that retail may be discovering it before Wall Street does.
⸻
TL;DR: Alpha Tau Medical ($DRTS) is a deeply undervalued biotech stock with a novel treatment showing 100% tumor response in skin cancers and broad potential in all other solid tumors. With FDA support, strong cash, real factories, and real patients — I believe it’s one of the best hidden gems in the market right now.
Ask me anything — happy to share sources, insights, and analysis.

Get your ERC PR ready to merge!

Historically, our PR team has been first rate.

This is nothing new. Any kind of protest or celebration it happens.
They are individuals and not PR reps.
If you think it LOOKS like an invasion then you either have low self esteem or are well regarded and belong here with us.

Kya din aa gye hain, Bhavesh Musk ko khud PR karni pad rhi hai reddit par

At the outset, I'm not claiming Mr.Mallya is innocent at all, he has made his fair share of mistakes and is an economic fugitive but not all the evil he has been portrayed my the media and let's understand that the media trial has been excessive not necessarily correct most of the times and most importantly what we should understand is the the how politics of the party has used this to create absolutely forced PR of their efforts withholding the fact that they can't do shit when it really matters. Not just this government but the largely the entire system is dysfunctional.
Now, he main point that we can draw from the podcast is the unnecessary media trial that happens when someone or something is in the limelight. The way the media houses operate is honestly detestable, the amount of media coverage lately is minmal for horrific acts that possibly deserve such public outlash, example being Revanna/ Kumaraswamy's nephew who has exploited several hundreds of women possibly while recording all of that. Crimes of the gravest possible nature such as murder don't attract the kind of attention from Indian Media because of possibilly political pressure and influence of business houses. The way media houses are behaving is just like the police, where favouritism or selective honesty is being applied. It's appalling a journalists go around shouting utter crap with hardly any evidence but that which grabs eyeballs and create narratives. It no more than a fantasy that they provide through their medium.
Theft or "Chori" is when you take something without permission and not having the intention to give it back. Here, in this case he has taken a loan which has been sanctioned by the bank, following the rules and regulations surely, and has given some form of securities as well as personal guarantees. Also there is large possibility that he intended to return it, else why would he give multiple settlement offers. It's because he wanted to return the borrowed money. Instead look at Anil Ambani's case where it's been a fraction has been recovered of what is owed. The fact that Mr.Mallya left India is because witch hunts still exist and this is by the incumbent government.
I believe we are living in a broken society where neither of the parties are worth their salt and every thing is just PR. There is possibly hardly emphasis on education which is why we are in this situation where the media is only about sensationalism, not just the media but also government actions, bollywood and so on.

> I've seen many frequent and long term contributors that dissent on this specific issue, let alone countless others for the past decade+, specifically have their criticisms and dissent ignored.
Let's be specific here, can you please cite some individuals and examples where their criticisms and dissent are ignored?
> There is a clique of maintainers and contributors who arbitrarily decide based on feel what will and will not get merged into Core.
Are you psychic, to be inside my head to know that things are decided arbitrarily and on feel? Or perhaps you're making assumptions, or even worse, making shit up.
> They dismiss criticisms, even from other long time contributors, from other developers in the ecosystem, from node runners regardless of technical merit and often with protectionist and paternal reasoning.
Dismissing criticism with reasoning, is, in general, how responding to criticism works. Either the criticism is accepted, or it is rejected. And rejecting generally means providing a reason for why it is being rejected. Would you rather that criticism was rejected without reason?
> For example LOT=True. Can't have user deciding their own activation methods or opting into flag days, they might hurt themselves!
Same as it is now, if you want to do something different, you are free to run other node software. It seems that Bitcoin Core contributors colletively don't like the idea of putting potential footguns into the software.
> Better avoid releasing any kind of details about patched security vulnerabilities too
As opposed to.... publishing details so that people can get exploited right away?
> What needs to happen is the governance model needs to shift to one in which the aggregate userbase are considered product owners and have a say in development direction, certainly their dissent must matter since they define the protocol your reference implementation is implementing!
That's a great philosophy and all, but what does that actually mean in practice? Implement every idea that every Tom, Dick, and Harry have?
Listening to the aggregate userbase is what we've been trying to do. It's why several of us have been participating in public discussions like this one.
Perhaps a different question to ask is why have there been no arguments from the aggregate userbase that have convinced any frequent contributors to change their position.
I also want to note that this PR was opened in response to criticism. It was opened because there was enough disagreement about the option removal.
Even then, making Bitcoin Core essentially the one node software falls into the trap of Bitcoin Core = Bitcoin. It categorically does not, and if some other node software comes along that implements things differently, then all the more power to them. In fact, Bitcoin Core has been moving somewhat explicitly in this direction with the kernel project. The whole point of that is to provide the consensus engine and let people build whatever other node stuff on top of it. While it currently contains the mempool implementation, you don't have to use it.
> What you call random people are often developers with over a decade experience contributing to this space.
Then they should be able to present that they are competent by not making demonstrably false statements. They should be able to present a convincing argument to the multiple frequent contributors and sway at least one of them into changing their opinion. Just as how many frequent contributors have over a decade of experience contributing to this space, and are likewise able to present convincing arguments to other contributors that their position is the better one.
> But when I volunteer my time it isn't a license to just do whatever the hell I think is best. I work in organizations and structures. Part of the organizational structure for the reference implementation of Bitcoin MUST be node runners. However stupid they are, objectively wrong they are, ignorant to the problem they are is totally irrelevant.
So if you volunteer your time with an organization that does something antithetical to your beliefs, you still sign off on it and are willing to be associated with that organization? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying - that we should implement the stupid, objectively wrong things that people say we should and be proud to put our names on it. I think that's utterly insane; I'd rather leave and dissociate myself from that organization than put my name on something I don't think is a good idea.
> You're building Bitcoin. It IS its node runners and the code they choose. They need a seat at the table. They deserve consideration.
Once again, Bitcoin Core is not Bitcoin. The seat at the table for node runners is to use a different node software that is in line with their beliefs.
And to be clear, I have, in the past, been a dissenter wanting a seat at the table with my own beliefs. Do you know what I did? I participated in the development, publishing, and running, of the Segsignal client that implemented a soft fork to get segwit activated. I didn't complain about Bitcoin Core not implementing that, or at UASF, or whatever. I did the option that is available to everyone else and chose a different software.
(cont'd in reply)