LoL yeah. He also thinks they cause cancer.

I'd say towards Santa Clara (Nvidia) with a nod over your shoulder to Redmond (Microsoft). But stay tuned.

I'm not moving any goalposts. (You seem to be doing that, though.) My claim from the beginning is that some mental-health issues can be cured. And some can't. The existence of incurable mental-health issues does not refute my point.

The person I mentioned does indeed exist. This person took meds and got talk-therapy. Both appeared to help. This person is now free of symptoms, several years after stopping therapy and meds. Meds are often used in a way that supports therapy, rather than addressing a chronic condition. Therefore the patient may not need to take the meds indefinitely. I think this was the case here.

Thanks for this. That's one study, but I can accept that positive outcomes are not universal or guaranteed.

Nevertheless, positive outcomes happen. And that's why I claim mental-health issues can be cured, even if they aren't always cured.

I know this is only one data-point, but I am personally acquainted with someone who had a history of serious depression and anxiety. This person underwent talk-therapy and medication, and is fine today, no longer on meds, with no hint of a problem. Now, maybe the condition was self-limiting. However, this person had no progress until the treatment started, so I would conclude that the treatment did something to help cure the condition.

Not all mental-health conditions are chronic. They may be curable or self-limiting.

I wish you good luck with your challenges, whatever they are.

Depression and anxiety, for two. IANAP, perhaps a real one can comment further.

We don't know how to cure all mental-health problems. However, many can be treated successfully (e.g., with medications and/or talk therapy) to the point that relapse is unlikely. If that's not a cure, I don't know what is.

From TFS:

Well, this surprised me a little. I can imagine that part of the AI's training-data may have included content from conspiracy theorists, but don't the creators of ChatGPT try to filter that out?

On a contrasting note, YouTuber SciManDan recently debunked flat-earther David Weiss' "arguments" with ChatGPT about flat-earth evidence. Worth a look, but TL/DW: Weiss kept insisting on promoting nonsensical physics arguments about why an atmosphere can't exist beside a vacuum without a container, and ChatGPT politely but consistently pushed back with correct explanations that refuted his arguments. So far SciManDan has three installments covering Weiss' "discussion" with ChatGPT. He now posts daily, so perhaps there will be more soon.

Yep. Easy to miss. Have a nice day.

Before you accuse someone of not being able to read, you should check your own work. The woman mentioned at the top of TFS is Jessica Lindsey, who works at Concentrix. The woman mentioned in the last paragraph (quoted in your OP) is Sarah, a pseudonym, working not for Concentrix, but "in benefits fraud-prevention for the US government" -- not debt-collection.

I see nothing in TFS that says she works for a contractor. I can't read TFA because it's paywalled.

But so what if she did? The government hires contractors to do many things for which it doesn't want to create the infrastructure.

And how do you know she works in debt-collection? I don't see that in TFS either.

And she receives calls from people who think she's an AI. Debt-collection agencies typically call the debtor.

You may be onto something. I have yet to hear an AI laugh. Has anyone?

Undocumented immigrants don't need someone else's SSN. They can get their own, or get an ITIN.

They can also get driver's licenses in 19 states.

You tried to equate being an undocumented immigrant to robbing a bank. The latter can get you up to 20 years in the slammer. Do you think undocumented immigrants should receive the same punishment? All 11 million of them?

Nobody said they did. Strawman much?

Tellingly, the Trump administration asked SCOTUS to stop injunctions against its birthright-citizenship campaign, rather than rule on its constitutionality. The analysis I read from news sources indicate this was a deliberate strategy, aimed at slowing down court action on the matter. Ultimately I predict the Trump administration will lose on the birthright-citizenship issue, because the Constitution is quite clear. But in the meantime, they get to keep executing their campaign against it.