That's the fun part. You don't.
Randomgal
joined 2 years ago
You draft them and order them to invade another country.
Finally. All these years of Hearts of Iron are going to pay off big time.
Felon cryptobro 100% speed run.
Imagine being gay. Lol
Bro is having a paranoid episode. lol. Went from "Society has changed" to some incel-level shit real fast. XD
From the article:
The UCP’s plan focuses exclusively on addictions and offers nothing to address permanent supportive housing, treatment wait times and wraparound services...
I mean yeah... Without addressing housing issues, health appointment wait times and social services, people will not use less drugs. I 100% agree with that. But these have nothing to do with the way services for addictions are provided. What is a social worker supposed to do about your housing, if rent prices are through the roof? Notice how none of these articles have any experts taking about the services being provided or actual evidence of their effectiveness (or lack thereof). It's politically-aligned representatives, talking shit about the other side, without any rational arguments. They don't give a shit about addicts, lol. They give ea shit about arguing with the other side and "winning".
"Recovery model" is not the issue. Politicians are the issue.
You can lock someone in a room until their withdrawal passes...
No. You can't. That is not what "recovery model" or work with addictions in modern day Canada looks like. Nobody is getting locked anywhere, people die if you do that because you can't just stop cold turkey alcohol or opiates. Literally die.
Don't get me wrong. There's a lot of shit that needs to be fixed in mental health services, but ReCoVeRy MoDeL BaD is just a political slogan. So yeah. Maybe don't take your mental health education from the guys that just want to stoke hate so they can get your vote.
Tell me more. (Not sarcastic)
You dun fucked up son. xD
Hm... At some point a human will have to say "Yes, this response is correct." to whatever the machine outputs. The output then takes the bias of that human. (This is unavoidable, I'm just pointing it out.) If this is really not an effort in ideological propaganda, a solution could be for the bot to provide arguments, rather han conclusions. Instead of telling me a source is "Left" or "Biased", it could say: "I found this commentary/article/websites/video discussing this aource's political leaning (or quality): Link 1 Link 2 Link 3"
Here you reduce bias by presenting information, instead of conclusions, and then letting the reader come to their own conclusions based on this information. This not only is better at education, but also helps readers develop their critical thinking.
Instead of... You know, being told what to think about what by a bot.
Who are "these people"? Like... Really who are you taking about? The directors? Teachers? Janitors? Lol