Time to question bioengineering.

[Napoléon]

Speaking out my ass? Well that's a pleasant response.

Would you have preferred a more vitriolic one?

I was responding to something which someone asked an opinion for. I was giving it. I didn't think it was necessary to say that but hey, I'm sure I'll get over it

You stated you could see no use for it. I stated an obvious fact -- just because one cannot foresee a use, does not imply anything other than you have not seen a use. Are you going to be upset over a statement of fact?

If you truly believe that I am "making up bullshit", then counter it. Explain, elucidate your viewpoints. Or are you too chicken?

I never said that there weren't other uses, I said that I can't see any other uses. You are making out like I have implied that there is no use for controlling animals as though that is factual, when I clearly stated "I see", which would actually imply that it is only my opinion. And seen as that was what the person asked for I gave it. I never asserted anything as fact so it was pretty pointless for you to respond to my response to another person. I think you are being incredibly pedantic.

Really? I think exactly what I said is well within the bounds of proper discussion. You made a claim of usage -- the implication was that it had no use, except under a clause which you intentionally framed as mere "experimentation".

Again, I was actually responding to a question of opinion. Whenever someone asks "is it right or wrong" the answer is always going to be a subjective answer.
As it is I don't see any purpose which I could reasonably condone for controlling and manipulating other living beings. I maintain that I did not IMPLY anything. Maybe if you'd have took the time to read what I was responding to you may have understood the context of my post a little better.

But do tell, what is the purpose of using/controlling an insect? OTHER than experimentation?

Normally, I'd consult the research papers that were done -- they usually include a section on the usage, possibilities of such. Some things that would come immediately to mind would be in understanding neural structures better, how they operate and carry commands. The technology that you are referring to is not perfect -- in fact would be considered primitive in development due to the lack of understanding we have over the brain. That understanding is being rapidly built up, but as always, there are current limits and boundaries.

For real world use, a spy agency would no doubt consider controlling bugged (heh) insects to be an interesting idea. But I am just one dull man, with limited ideas, and as such can't be the answer to all your questions.

One thing I am quite confident in, is the possible purposes of controlling an insect is not nil.

Understanding neural structures better? And how would we do this by manually controlling another living creature? Other than experimentation.

As for 'real world use' sure there are plenty of reasons. But the fact is would you condone them? I wouldn't. If we found out we could somehow cure cancer by controlling chimps would you do it?
The bottom line is, is that it is taking advantage of another species for the advancement of your own. You may accept this as fine, but I personally wouldn't necessarily agree.

There would have to be seriously good reasons for me to come around to the idea to taking control of other living creatures. So far using them 'for spy purposes' isn't a good enough reason in my view.

Don't get me wrong though, no doubt shit like this will be done in the future.