The conversation is about American politics, because American politicians are illegally sending these men to El Salvador.

I’m not a Dyson sphere. But what do either of these items have to do with our conversation?

deleted by creator

Is that your stance on immigration then? Clowns in wrong car? Because that’s a shit stance on immigration that is.

Have a read of the article old bean. They are being sent to El Salvador from the US, in violation of any number of US laws, including the big one, the Constitution of the USA.

But they’re innocent until there’s proof of guilt. Sending people to forced labour encampments because of their tattoos is just a different nazi move.

Did you catch the words “without proof”, and “without due process” in the OP? It would appear that these people pictured are innocent.

I don’t think that’s right. You might be thinking of sociopathy or borderline? Me and all my auties feel empathy.

You’re an actual nazi though, so your opinion means very little. Less than that even.

Being pro Jew is different to being anti Nazi. Jews are just one of a multitude of peoples who can be targeted as out groups for fascists. A perfect example is what’s happening in Israel. A genocide, perpetrated by Jews. It doesn’t matter who the targeted group is. What matters is nobody should be ganged up on in the way that Jews were by the Nazis. Not Arabs, not Muslims, not Christians. Not men not women not trans. Not blacks, not the left nor the right. Nobody should be treated like that. Ever. Again. So, so many Jews had to die senselessly to teach us that lesson. Best we learn it right.
You don’t have to target Jews to be a nazi.

You defended Musk’s sieg heil by posting a bunch of images of people waving didn’t you?
Fuck.
Off.
Nazi.

Well, I can only explain it to you. I can’t understand it for you.

It seems like you are trying to use statistical trickery to diminish the perception of the wealth gap. Whether this is intentional or not, it will elicit an emotional reaction, because spreading awareness of the wealth gap is arguably the most important work our society has to do. And your core argument, that is easier to understand on a log scale, is flawed. That leaves people with a passion for communicating this issue suspicious of your motives in an anonymous forum where billionaires can easily send people or bots to muddy the waters. We do not need your bad take here. It is actively damaging the cause.
The true nature of the wealth gap is that it is linear. Billionaires don’t work a thousand times harder than the working class, yet they are paid a thousand times more. They can buy 5000 of your dream car. They can but the entire street containing the house you’re desperately saving for, just to keep you out. If I had worked every day since Julius Caesar was in power, earning my annual wage EVERY DAY, I still wouldn’t be as rich as Elon Musk. And I’m a better human being than him. Recording these things linearly exposes the obscenity of the problem, and it also makes sense logically. On top of that is the best way to show people they’re being had.

It’s really not hard to tell the difference between millions and billions. There are multitudinous ways in which that can be achieved, even if you’re explaining to a toddler. Anyone who can understand the concept of a log scales can understand the difference between a million and a billion linearly. How many threads in this carpet? Around a million? Cool. And a billion would be what, an entire city? Cool. Easy.

Yes, log scales are important if you put aside personal wealth, but why would you want to put aside personal wealth when it’s what we’re discussing?

Bernie doesn’t say “eat the rich”, you’re saying that. Bernie makes specific statements about who to tax, and when and how.
He does pay his fair share. If the richest in the US paid tax like he does, there wouldn’t be a problem.

The very fact that there’s an order of magnitude difference is the point of the comparison. There shouldn’t be five orders of magnitude between any two people’s wealth; it’s obscene. Maintaining a linear comparison shows the true nature of the wealth gap.

You haven’t given me a source other than Slate.
And look, if you can’t see how that argument generalises to antivax acceptance then you are part of the problem frankly.
I’m going to stop here because you’re dug in, and starting to project ad hominems.

No, because down that road of argument lies the validation of antivax views.

There is plenty of evidence for consensus. Medical institutions and departments national and international all claim that brain maturity is not reached until the mid to late twenties. Google “prefrontal cortex development age”. There very much is a consensus, unless we are using different meanings for the word “consensus”. Or perhaps we’re not talking about the same fact that there’s consensus over. If course there’s no consensus on the exact age, and that’s all the articles were saying, but that has no bearing on the fact that development doesn’t peak and fall until the twenties.

I choose to believe the consensus. It’s getting tiring saying the same thing.

You’re sources are junk, I’m afraid. They are magazine articles written to excite readers rather than get at the truth. I’m finding it hard to explain this to you without sounding patronising so maybe you should educate yourself on the veracity of source types.

So your claim is that there’s no “fully developed”? That then does not support your original assertion that we shouldn’t go easier on people who are younger for making bad decisions. They remain significantly less developed than their mature counterparts, whether or not someone in their 40s still has the potential for development (of course they do). Neural plasticity doesn’t suddenly 'switch off, but it does appear to peak and fall quite quickly in the late twenties (of course, this is not an iron rule: everyone is different). I can source this claim with any number of studies if you like.

I’m sorry I feel I picked on you a bit, really I just wanted a dialogue. I’ve seen this notion going round that “our brains not being fully developed until after 25 has been debunked” and I’ve been meaning to read into it for a while to see if it’s true. I’m going to keep looking at it, but I don’t see any evidence that scientific understanding of prefrontal development has changed. I’m a scientist by education so I am perfectly capable of charging my mind if I believe there is evidence to do so. In fact I find that process thrilling and it’s literally one of the reasons I get out of bed in the morning. I’m not stubborn or dogmatic in the slightest. But I am hard to convince. Sorry about that.