Is there a need to "fix" GR? (Was... )

Painius wrote,

Maybe physicists should "break" GR in
ways they know how to "fix" just to see if it might help them fix the
other broken
areas? Don't physics professors do this
all the time for their students?

The more adept one gets at fixing things
one knows how to fix, the better one may get at fixing things one does
_not_ know
how to fix?

There's all this talk about GR being "broken" and needing "fixing". But
i keep yammering (to no avail apparently), why does it need "fixing"?
What is "wrong" with GR's core tenets that are proven correct over and
over? Nothing is wrong or "broken" about GR. It 'works' just fine...
locally.

Does Newton need "fixing" just because relativity *builds upon* Newton
and stands on his shoulders? Newton's laws are used routinely within
their local scope. Relativity simply takes up where Newton leaves off.

Likewise, the Upgrade of GR takes up where the local, 'flat' version of
GR leaves off.

But the Upgrade requires violating the ultimate Taboo : replace the
"void" of space with the universe-filling Plenum of space. It requires
recognizig the spatial medium's self-evident properties of fluidity,
mobility, compressibility/ expandibility, and... *density gradients*.
The density-gradients thing is the nexus of GR's
Upgrade.