That kind of math shouldn't really need explanation or defending, but the organic movement forbids the use of posilac, despite it being molecularly identical to the naturally occuring bovine somatotropin normally found in milk.
Molecularly identical means it's no different than what's naturally occurring pharmaceutically, but the effect of pharmaceuticals change with dosage. This is what is alarming to me about bovine growth hormone, that the concentrations are much higher than before.
The fact that tests have been done where rBST and purified 'normal' BST have been injected into human tissue and proved to be too dissimilar to interact with the receptors for human sotmatotropin seems not to faze anyone for some reason.
I've never heard that before, which is a good reason why that hasn't fazed me. If it's true that it doesn't interact with our bodies, than that resolves my concern. It'll take more than a slashdot post to convince me, but I'll keep an eye out. I'm just cautious around hormones, since my father worked with pharmaceutical hormones a lot, and I learned they can be fairly "general" even when using another species' hormones, but it's ultimately all about the chemistry that I don't know and might mean nothing happens.
So, good, it's not the beef hormones in McD's that's making kids mature faster and get fat, that's just the crap load of fat and calories in it.
Sub-theraputic use of antibiotics both prevents clinical, as well as sub-clinical infections and is primarily used in animals predisposed to infections due to stage of development (weaning comes first to mind)...None of the data coming out of the EU in the wake of their complete ban of sub-theraputic antibiotics has shown any reduction in the prevalence or distribution of antibiotic resistance genes.
Okay, but, I'm still not convinced that's a good idea. Why would not using antibiotics reduce the number of resistant strains once they're already "in the wild"? This behavior sounds like giving every kid Amoxacilin because they just turned 9 and kids that age might have strep throat. Like, worse than the shameful abuses in hospitals that I've seen with my own eyes. Sure most of the bugs only affect the animals themselves. Again, not sure why that makes it a good idea.
You seem to leave out the part about WHY the Spanish even wanted to attack the Americas. Or why the muslims attacked africa. Or why...
Yes, because as I said so did Jared Diamond. Because seriously, what difference does it make? They came to expand and find riches for Spain, to gain prominence over other European nations. Many notions have done this, others have instead been peaceful. Wars happen for any of a million reasons that all boil down to resources. The point is that natural history (plants and animals and terrain and weather and other things relating to where people lived), and thus human history, led these peoples to certain situations and certain advantages when they did go against each other.
There's also a piece in the book about just why there are so few differences among races. If we look at history, you see, we will find more races. Pygmees being the most recent disappearance (99%), but there are other genes disappearing too.
Yeah that's a population bottleneck, where humankind was reduced to maybe a few thousand or even fewer individuals during the last ice age.
Unless our current civilization falls in the next 200 or-so years, only a single race, and beyond that only a single culture will survive, because that's what always happens if 2 cultures come into contact.
That's some bullshit not supported by the book. I'm not saying what's going to happen vis-a-vis our culture, but Jared's conclusion is largely that human history is a matter of environment affecting societies instead of inherent human differences. It's most certainly not his point that to-the-death competition between cultures and single-race population bottlenecks are necessary or inevitable. Hell, much of the book covers the many advantages of stability, law, organization, peace, the sharing of ideas between disparate peoples, and so forth.
And this "does not have to be a violent evolution", which is true, it just has to be one that ends with the other guy dead. You know, natural selection.
Ha ha heh. It's funny, because as far as natural selection goes, the main thing Diamond argues for is that most humans alive today, those decscended from city-based cultures, are largely selected for the strength of their immune systems against communicable disease. "The other guy" could be the 3rd of Europe more vulnerable to the Black Death, rather than some other culture who you imagine you are superior to. The thing about natural selection is, it just means whoever survives, and it doesn't really follow or care about what any person thinks are "positive" traits. Your idea of strength and nature's is going to differ, wildly so depending on the circumstance.
Yeah, you're almost certainly right. Even if Big N was somehow involved in distribution (through Wii Ware for example) SCUMMVM probably wouldn't seriously have any beef with them anyway. Like most people using the GPL, they pretty much want either distribution (of their code, if you want to replace their code no problemo) to stop or GPL to be complied with.
Most humans are already predisposed towards the herbivore end, that's why we breed so many cows, rather than, say, bobcats.
Well, as spokesperson for the National Bobcat Meat Council, all I can say is that you're missing out!
For the consumer, bobcat is a wonderful choice. Bobcat is delicious, naturally lean, high in vitamins and minerals, and, let's face it, a completely awesome thing to say you are eating. Imagine you're in your backyard at your grill, talking to your competitive neighbor Bill over the fence. "Hey Bill, how's it going?" you say. "Oh not bad, just grilling up some pork sausage on my new 80,000 btu propane grill. How bout you?" Bill says. "Oh, not bad, slumming it with my measly 20,000 btu grill... making bobcat burgers!" Bill is stunned. "Oh wow! You are my king! I worship you!" he says in one of those awkward vaguely homo-erotic moments that seem to happen around Bill a little too often. But he is right -- bobcat is the burger of kings.
And for the rancher, bobcat presents many exciting opportunities as well. For one, wolves and other predators will not fuck with your livestock. You can even put your pig or goat pens -- needed to feed the bobcats -- in the middle of the bobcat pens and provide the ultimate in protection for your herbivore stock as well! Also, if you're tired of complacent cows and the tedious and unexciting process of herding them for slaughter, well, you're in for a thrill! Any wannabe cowboy brand a cow, but come at a bobcat with a glowing red brand and get ready to prove your mandhood! Compare scars with other bobcatboys and see who really has what it takes! I had one rancher tell me that they were thinking of getting out of the business due to the lack of physical danger, until I took him on a tour of a bobcat ranch and one of the feisty rascals hiding in a dark corner nearly took his face off. Well I had him signed up that very day to start his own bobcat ranch!
Okay... I'm not going to lie. Bobcat ranching is hell. They're mean, ornery, antisocial, dangerous, and have no compunction about going for the junk. The only thing that rancher signed was the out-of-court settlement with the National Bobcat Meat Council for his injuries. But seriously, I need to push these bobcat ranches or I'm going to lose my job. We'll even start you out with a bunch of free livestock! We're up to our fucking necks in bobcats, come on take some off our hands. They aren't even that tasty but god damn cut me some slack I'm trying to move product here. Eat some fucking bobcat already!
- Chris Burke, spokesperson, National Bobcat Meat Council. NBMC says: "Eat some fucking bobcat already!"(tm)
His thesis seems to be that history proceeded the way it did because of "accidents" in geography, climate and access to natural resources, rather than through inherent genetic, ethnic or cultural differences.
Yes, that's precisely the central thesis of the book. That's the answer to "Why were the Spanish able to destroy the massive empires in the Americas with only a handful of troops" which is posed in the first chapter.
I don't see how that's completely different than my take... seems the same to me. I'm just saying, at no point does he say that it was necessary for the Spanish to invade America, or that war itself is necessary. Just, it happens, and he is exploring why the outcome was the way it was.
They can demand it, but is an unknowing party subject to the license or simply required to cease distribution when informed? It would be difficult to legally force Nintendo to provide anything in this circumstance...
Even assuming that any of Nintendo's code would be involved (it's not obvious to me that this would be the case), you couldn't force them to do anything. If they don't comply with the terms of the GPL, then they are not licensed under the GPL, ergo they are guilty of copyright violations. It'd be their choice to comply with the GPL or accept the penalties for copyright violation, which would include having to cease distribution. You can't force a company to comply with a license agreement they never agreed to, you can only punish them for not having a license to begin with.
Pah. The scientific establishment has ONCE AGAIN proven that they are unwilling to consider new ideas. Now, where DID I put that perpetual motion machine...
*and just after the last scientist leaves the room, closing the door behind them with an angry scoff*
Oh here it is! It was behind the copy machine the whole time along with the free energy machine! Gawd I'm such a dunderhead sometimes!
Guys! Guys! I found it! Oh... they're all gone. Well I guess they just aren't interested in the best thing ever. Their loss!
*tosses the free energy machine into the basket on the perpetual motion machine, and effortlessly flies off into SPAAAAAAAAAAAACE!*
Oh, okay. They showed footage of the jet engine version too and I thought it had the same rocking problem. The documentary also claimed the problem was solved by the B-2's fly-by-wire system (which was partly a lead-in to discussing the F-117 for which fly-by-wire is essential). That's all I'm going off of, I'm no expert. And speaking of, why did the pusher propellers cause a rolling problem and not a yaw problem?
But one German tank could shoot down ten Russian ones.
This is simply false.
Not at all! One shot from the German Tiger and BAM! That Russian tank is on the ground!
Re:Another Example of German Technical Achievement
on
Hitler's Stealth Fighter
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Very darwinistic view of the world that man has. If he's right, the tactics in life are the same as in quake. Anything that moves and isn't obviously on your side, shoot it. Anything that doesn't move, shoot it anyway because it's probably thinking about moving and killing you as soon as you turn your back.
Why are you making this out to be his worldview? That these were the tactics of the majority of humans for the majority of history is just a matter, of, well, history. Wars between nations, strong tribes subjugating weak ones, nation-states subjugating non-centrally-organized peoples, this actually happened and none of the people doing it read Diamond's book.
In fact, I can't recall him ever discussing it in terms of tactics or intent. The question he asked and attempted to answer was not "why did the Spanish come to the Americas to crush the Inca, Aztec, and Mayan empires." The question he asked was "when they came to the Americas with this intent, why were they able to succeed so handily?"
I mean he does discuss the success of European countries in terms of them being sizable enough to take advantage of specialization, but small enough and with enough similarly-sized and hostile neighbors that they couldn't afford to eschew some technology or tactic for cultural reasons -- the kind of every-wary shoot-first-ask-later strategy you are talking about. I don't think he ever hypothesized that a nation-state's neighbors must be hostile, or that the nation-state must subjugate those weaker than itself. That's just the reality of the situation in Europe.
But I could be wrong. It's been a few years since I read it.
The f-117 isn't supersonic and it takes a computer to keep it stable.
Well the F-117 is kind of a special case, since it was (more or less) designed by a radar engineer first to be stealthy, then handed to the aerospace engineers to try to make the bastard fly. There's a big gap between the instability of the flying wings and the blatantly un-aerodynamic F-117.
Northrop eventually went on to use that knowledge to produce the B-2...... which uses a fly-by-wire system. But you're right, those are the planes from the documentary, thanks.
Not exactly. It is possible to build a flying wing type aircraft that is stable. They're generally not as easy to fly as more traditional designs, but it's possible.
Which, according to a documentary I saw where the U.S. actually built a 'flying wing' stealth prototype based on this very aircraft (in the 60s or 70s, can't remember exactly), translated to a plane that would in fact fly, but was constantly rolling back and forth because the skilled but human test pilot couldn't make the constant tiny adjustments needed, and thus was always overcompensating which lead to the oscillation behavior.
So it still took fly-by-wire systems to truly make the flying wing practical. Not to the same extent as say the F-117 or F-22 which are completely unstable and need the computer just to avoid crashing as soon as they take off. Enough though that I still doubt claims that the German stealth bomber would have changed the war if only it had reached production in time.
... if the company in question is still around to stand behind it. I get a laugh out of roofers that offer 50 year guarantee on roofs when they know full well they themselves are unlike to be around by then. A lot can happen in 30 years.
Oh, they'll probably be around in that time, but it won't be the same company. There's a lot of fraud in construction (or was, during the housing boom, not that I imagine it all went away), and it was pretty common for a roofer to set up shop, bang out some piss-poor work while promising the world, and then fold the "company" and reform under a different name before anyone could come to claim their warranty -- or bring the law to bear against the sonovabitch.
The problem with Clear is that they are not available at more than a couple of gates and terminals at any airport.
Huh. I'd never heard of them before, and on reading the summary my thought was that the biggest problem with Clear is that they are apparently pioneers in an industry that by all reason and logic should not exist.
I think he's just labeling every conflict in the region a 'civil war'. Eritrea vs Ethiopia is about as close to a state-vs-state conventional war as we're going to get in this era even if currently in an "irregular" phase.
For those following along at home, it's important to remember that "expectation of privacy" refers to a reasonable expectation that your privacy will be respected, not that your privacy won't be violated by someone intent on doing so. It's a society thing, not a physical capability thing. How difficult it is to violate your privacy has little to do with it.
Inside your home, or your own back yard (or in the middle of your 150 acres), you can reasonably expect that other members of society won't snoop on your business. Even though it's pretty simply to look in through a window or peek over a fence. In a restaurant or a public park you have no expectation of privacy, because for one you're in public with other people and for two they'd have to go out of their way to not hear or see you, and that's not reasonable to expect.
So, is it reasonable to expect that the authorities won't be tracking your every movement on a whim whenever you are outside your house? Yes, yes it is. Is it reasonable to expect that a police officer won't watch what you're doing when you walk by them? No, no it isn't.
Slashdot Mirror
Twoooooo Biiiiiiits! :)
That kind of math shouldn't really need explanation or defending, but the organic movement forbids the use of posilac, despite it being molecularly identical to the naturally occuring bovine somatotropin normally found in milk.
Molecularly identical means it's no different than what's naturally occurring pharmaceutically, but the effect of pharmaceuticals change with dosage. This is what is alarming to me about bovine growth hormone, that the concentrations are much higher than before.
The fact that tests have been done where rBST and purified 'normal' BST have been injected into human tissue and proved to be too dissimilar to interact with the receptors for human sotmatotropin seems not to faze anyone for some reason.
I've never heard that before, which is a good reason why that hasn't fazed me. If it's true that it doesn't interact with our bodies, than that resolves my concern. It'll take more than a slashdot post to convince me, but I'll keep an eye out. I'm just cautious around hormones, since my father worked with pharmaceutical hormones a lot, and I learned they can be fairly "general" even when using another species' hormones, but it's ultimately all about the chemistry that I don't know and might mean nothing happens.
So, good, it's not the beef hormones in McD's that's making kids mature faster and get fat, that's just the crap load of fat and calories in it.
Sub-theraputic use of antibiotics both prevents clinical, as well as sub-clinical infections and is primarily used in animals predisposed to infections due to stage of development (weaning comes first to mind)...None of the data coming out of the EU in the wake of their complete ban of sub-theraputic antibiotics has shown any reduction in the prevalence or distribution of antibiotic resistance genes.
Okay, but, I'm still not convinced that's a good idea. Why would not using antibiotics reduce the number of resistant strains once they're already "in the wild"? This behavior sounds like giving every kid Amoxacilin because they just turned 9 and kids that age might have strep throat. Like, worse than the shameful abuses in hospitals that I've seen with my own eyes. Sure most of the bugs only affect the animals themselves. Again, not sure why that makes it a good idea.
You seem to leave out the part about WHY the Spanish even wanted to attack the Americas. Or why the muslims attacked africa. Or why ...
Yes, because as I said so did Jared Diamond. Because seriously, what difference does it make? They came to expand and find riches for Spain, to gain prominence over other European nations. Many notions have done this, others have instead been peaceful. Wars happen for any of a million reasons that all boil down to resources. The point is that natural history (plants and animals and terrain and weather and other things relating to where people lived), and thus human history, led these peoples to certain situations and certain advantages when they did go against each other.
There's also a piece in the book about just why there are so few differences among races. If we look at history, you see, we will find more races. Pygmees being the most recent disappearance (99%), but there are other genes disappearing too.
Yeah that's a population bottleneck, where humankind was reduced to maybe a few thousand or even fewer individuals during the last ice age.
Unless our current civilization falls in the next 200 or-so years, only a single race, and beyond that only a single culture will survive, because that's what always happens if 2 cultures come into contact.
That's some bullshit not supported by the book. I'm not saying what's going to happen vis-a-vis our culture, but Jared's conclusion is largely that human history is a matter of environment affecting societies instead of inherent human differences. It's most certainly not his point that to-the-death competition between cultures and single-race population bottlenecks are necessary or inevitable. Hell, much of the book covers the many advantages of stability, law, organization, peace, the sharing of ideas between disparate peoples, and so forth.
And this "does not have to be a violent evolution", which is true, it just has to be one that ends with the other guy dead. You know, natural selection.
Ha ha heh. It's funny, because as far as natural selection goes, the main thing Diamond argues for is that most humans alive today, those decscended from city-based cultures, are largely selected for the strength of their immune systems against communicable disease. "The other guy" could be the 3rd of Europe more vulnerable to the Black Death, rather than some other culture who you imagine you are superior to. The thing about natural selection is, it just means whoever survives, and it doesn't really follow or care about what any person thinks are "positive" traits. Your idea of strength and nature's is going to differ, wildly so depending on the circumstance.
Yeah, you're almost certainly right. Even if Big N was somehow involved in distribution (through Wii Ware for example) SCUMMVM probably wouldn't seriously have any beef with them anyway. Like most people using the GPL, they pretty much want either distribution (of their code, if you want to replace their code no problemo) to stop or GPL to be complied with.
Not everyone (thanks btw) but enough to make the joke extra funny to me at least. :)
Gotta give you props for the damn funny idea of raising bobcats. :)
Most humans are already predisposed towards the herbivore end, that's why we breed so many cows, rather than, say, bobcats.
Well, as spokesperson for the National Bobcat Meat Council, all I can say is that you're missing out!
For the consumer, bobcat is a wonderful choice. Bobcat is delicious, naturally lean, high in vitamins and minerals, and, let's face it, a completely awesome thing to say you are eating. Imagine you're in your backyard at your grill, talking to your competitive neighbor Bill over the fence. "Hey Bill, how's it going?" you say. "Oh not bad, just grilling up some pork sausage on my new 80,000 btu propane grill. How bout you?" Bill says. "Oh, not bad, slumming it with my measly 20,000 btu grill... making bobcat burgers!" Bill is stunned. "Oh wow! You are my king! I worship you!" he says in one of those awkward vaguely homo-erotic moments that seem to happen around Bill a little too often. But he is right -- bobcat is the burger of kings.
And for the rancher, bobcat presents many exciting opportunities as well. For one, wolves and other predators will not fuck with your livestock. You can even put your pig or goat pens -- needed to feed the bobcats -- in the middle of the bobcat pens and provide the ultimate in protection for your herbivore stock as well! Also, if you're tired of complacent cows and the tedious and unexciting process of herding them for slaughter, well, you're in for a thrill! Any wannabe cowboy brand a cow, but come at a bobcat with a glowing red brand and get ready to prove your mandhood! Compare scars with other bobcatboys and see who really has what it takes! I had one rancher tell me that they were thinking of getting out of the business due to the lack of physical danger, until I took him on a tour of a bobcat ranch and one of the feisty rascals hiding in a dark corner nearly took his face off. Well I had him signed up that very day to start his own bobcat ranch!
Okay... I'm not going to lie. Bobcat ranching is hell. They're mean, ornery, antisocial, dangerous, and have no compunction about going for the junk. The only thing that rancher signed was the out-of-court settlement with the National Bobcat Meat Council for his injuries. But seriously, I need to push these bobcat ranches or I'm going to lose my job. We'll even start you out with a bunch of free livestock! We're up to our fucking necks in bobcats, come on take some off our hands. They aren't even that tasty but god damn cut me some slack I'm trying to move product here. Eat some fucking bobcat already!
- Chris Burke, spokesperson, National Bobcat Meat Council. NBMC says: "Eat some fucking bobcat already!"(tm)
His thesis seems to be that history proceeded the way it did because of "accidents" in geography, climate and access to natural resources, rather than through inherent genetic, ethnic or cultural differences.
Yes, that's precisely the central thesis of the book. That's the answer to "Why were the Spanish able to destroy the massive empires in the Americas with only a handful of troops" which is posed in the first chapter.
I don't see how that's completely different than my take... seems the same to me. I'm just saying, at no point does he say that it was necessary for the Spanish to invade America, or that war itself is necessary. Just, it happens, and he is exploring why the outcome was the way it was.
They can demand it, but is an unknowing party subject to the license or simply required to cease distribution when informed? It would be difficult to legally force Nintendo to provide anything in this circumstance...
Even assuming that any of Nintendo's code would be involved (it's not obvious to me that this would be the case), you couldn't force them to do anything. If they don't comply with the terms of the GPL, then they are not licensed under the GPL, ergo they are guilty of copyright violations. It'd be their choice to comply with the GPL or accept the penalties for copyright violation, which would include having to cease distribution. You can't force a company to comply with a license agreement they never agreed to, you can only punish them for not having a license to begin with.
So yeah, you're right.
Pah. The scientific establishment has ONCE AGAIN proven that they are unwilling to consider new ideas. Now, where DID I put that perpetual motion machine...
*and just after the last scientist leaves the room, closing the door behind them with an angry scoff*
Oh here it is! It was behind the copy machine the whole time along with the free energy machine! Gawd I'm such a dunderhead sometimes!
Guys! Guys! I found it! Oh... they're all gone. Well I guess they just aren't interested in the best thing ever. Their loss!
*tosses the free energy machine into the basket on the perpetual motion machine, and effortlessly flies off into SPAAAAAAAAAAAACE!*
But they could have all the pizza they wanted delivered to the deliberation room!
Oh, okay. They showed footage of the jet engine version too and I thought it had the same rocking problem. The documentary also claimed the problem was solved by the B-2's fly-by-wire system (which was partly a lead-in to discussing the F-117 for which fly-by-wire is essential). That's all I'm going off of, I'm no expert. And speaking of, why did the pusher propellers cause a rolling problem and not a yaw problem?
This is simply false.
Not at all! One shot from the German Tiger and BAM! That Russian tank is on the ground!
Very darwinistic view of the world that man has. If he's right, the tactics in life are the same as in quake. Anything that moves and isn't obviously on your side, shoot it. Anything that doesn't move, shoot it anyway because it's probably thinking about moving and killing you as soon as you turn your back.
Why are you making this out to be his worldview? That these were the tactics of the majority of humans for the majority of history is just a matter, of, well, history. Wars between nations, strong tribes subjugating weak ones, nation-states subjugating non-centrally-organized peoples, this actually happened and none of the people doing it read Diamond's book.
In fact, I can't recall him ever discussing it in terms of tactics or intent. The question he asked and attempted to answer was not "why did the Spanish come to the Americas to crush the Inca, Aztec, and Mayan empires." The question he asked was "when they came to the Americas with this intent, why were they able to succeed so handily?"
I mean he does discuss the success of European countries in terms of them being sizable enough to take advantage of specialization, but small enough and with enough similarly-sized and hostile neighbors that they couldn't afford to eschew some technology or tactic for cultural reasons -- the kind of every-wary shoot-first-ask-later strategy you are talking about. I don't think he ever hypothesized that a nation-state's neighbors must be hostile, or that the nation-state must subjugate those weaker than itself. That's just the reality of the situation in Europe.
But I could be wrong. It's been a few years since I read it.
The f-117 isn't supersonic and it takes a computer to keep it stable.
Well the F-117 is kind of a special case, since it was (more or less) designed by a radar engineer first to be stealthy, then handed to the aerospace engineers to try to make the bastard fly. There's a big gap between the instability of the flying wings and the blatantly un-aerodynamic F-117.
Northrop eventually went on to use that knowledge to produce the B-2... ... which uses a fly-by-wire system. But you're right, those are the planes from the documentary, thanks.
Not exactly. It is possible to build a flying wing type aircraft that is stable. They're generally not as easy to fly as more traditional designs, but it's possible.
Which, according to a documentary I saw where the U.S. actually built a 'flying wing' stealth prototype based on this very aircraft (in the 60s or 70s, can't remember exactly), translated to a plane that would in fact fly, but was constantly rolling back and forth because the skilled but human test pilot couldn't make the constant tiny adjustments needed, and thus was always overcompensating which lead to the oscillation behavior.
So it still took fly-by-wire systems to truly make the flying wing practical. Not to the same extent as say the F-117 or F-22 which are completely unstable and need the computer just to avoid crashing as soon as they take off. Enough though that I still doubt claims that the German stealth bomber would have changed the war if only it had reached production in time.
Personally, I'd take $47000 over $32000 any day.
Yeah? What about Opposite Day?
... if the company in question is still around to stand behind it. I get a laugh out of roofers that offer 50 year guarantee on roofs when they know full well they themselves are unlike to be around by then. A lot can happen in 30 years.
Oh, they'll probably be around in that time, but it won't be the same company. There's a lot of fraud in construction (or was, during the housing boom, not that I imagine it all went away), and it was pretty common for a roofer to set up shop, bang out some piss-poor work while promising the world, and then fold the "company" and reform under a different name before anyone could come to claim their warranty -- or bring the law to bear against the sonovabitch.
I hear they're petitioning the NFL to lengthen the season so they can get more games in, since otherwise they have no way to out-do themselves.
Americans only, eh? I forgot about how nobody else uses timber for anything, ever.
Well not ever. They need some timber to make their soapboxes with.
The problem with Clear is that they are not available at more than a couple of gates and terminals at any airport.
Huh. I'd never heard of them before, and on reading the summary my thought was that the biggest problem with Clear is that they are apparently pioneers in an industry that by all reason and logic should not exist.
I think he's just labeling every conflict in the region a 'civil war'. Eritrea vs Ethiopia is about as close to a state-vs-state conventional war as we're going to get in this era even if currently in an "irregular" phase.
Discipline is needed to keep respect and authority.
I know someone who would agree!
Nurse Diesel: I know you better than you know yourself.
You live for bondage and discipline.
Dr. Montague: Too much bondage. Not enough discipline!
Diesel: You want discipline? I'll give you discipline.
Montague: Yes! Yes. I'm sorry! Yes! It feels so good!
I take it you're more of a Dr. Montague to our President Diesel?
For those following along at home, it's important to remember that "expectation of privacy" refers to a reasonable expectation that your privacy will be respected, not that your privacy won't be violated by someone intent on doing so. It's a society thing, not a physical capability thing. How difficult it is to violate your privacy has little to do with it.
Inside your home, or your own back yard (or in the middle of your 150 acres), you can reasonably expect that other members of society won't snoop on your business. Even though it's pretty simply to look in through a window or peek over a fence. In a restaurant or a public park you have no expectation of privacy, because for one you're in public with other people and for two they'd have to go out of their way to not hear or see you, and that's not reasonable to expect.
So, is it reasonable to expect that the authorities won't be tracking your every movement on a whim whenever you are outside your house? Yes, yes it is. Is it reasonable to expect that a police officer won't watch what you're doing when you walk by them? No, no it isn't.