In Voyager, 7-of-9 had to keep going back to her drone recharge/nutrition unit until her digestive system reformed. Basically a whole bunch of Borg equipment replaced basic staying-alive organs.
So if they don't ingest, I'd imagine they don't shit.
Look, I like them, so I'm not exactly knocking them, but a long time ago I was working an overnight inventory shift, and my manager at the time put on a Linkin Park album, and I predict how every song was going to go because they all seemed like the same song.
For me, i tell them "why" isn't a complete question. If you can't make a full question like "why does we need food?" then they don't deserve an answer because they're just trying to be annoying.
My biggest gripe about it is that it should mean sacrificing a tenth (or a small portion) in order to preserve the whole.
So many words that mean completely destroy, and we have to make the one meaning specifically not that to also mean completely destroy. The language is weaker for it.
The wars in the Middle East are tricky, though, because to have a "victory" you would need a clear metric for it, a clear goal. It's not like the US was looking to conquer and annex those countries
If the goal was to completely fuck up a country with little to no (physical, not financial) damage to our home country, mission accomplished, one helluva victory.
If the goal was to stop Terrorism... that's like the War on Drugs, there's no winning that.
If the goal was merely to occupy them in order to (temporarily) prevent them from being a staging ground and financial support for Terrorism... I guess that worked? For awhile?
Vietnam and Korea were about stopping Communists from taking over the country. Huge failure on Vietnam, and apparently a draw in Korea (considering the North/South divide). But it was a clear enough goal. The Middle East? Who knows what the specific goal was (other than trillions of dollars to the Military Industrial Complex).
Wow, people are really pulling the last bit out of context and assuming the worst implications. His "stand by you" and "knocking on doors" thing is him acknowledging his white male privilege to feel safe doing things like going door to door in most neighborhoods, and being happy to extend that safety to others by standing beside them while they do it.
I get the concern about having a Nazi tattoo for over a decade, and concern that everything he is doing is performative based on his past. But what he said was pretty unequivically that he will support LGBTQ+ people, including in action. Whether anyone believes him or not is up to them. But what he said was not mealy-mouthed, it was direct.
I talked so much shit about Heath Ledger playing the Joker before that movie came out. The pretty boy from "10 Things I Hate About You?" Ridiculous. Just getting a big name, you know? And then he was beyond incredible, and a perfect example of what the Joker should be.
That made me hold my tongue when so many questionable choices for actors came out in the future, like both Ben Affleck and Robert Pattinson for Batman.
Turns out Ledger was just an anomaly, though. So I'm still not going to be watching Tron: Ares.
They still play DD and recommended being a DM to people that think they want kids. Apparently there is a fair bit of overlap in running a fun game, and a functional family.
I am a parent, and this tells me I lack the requisite energy and creativity to be a DM. I struggle enough as it is.
Also, whenever my wife and I are really sleepy during the day, one of us will pull out "People let me tell you 'bout my NEW BEST FRIEND! Barnaby Jones....
That is not the problem. Population declines as countries move to first world status, and I think the people not having kids due to financial constraints are few and far between. Otherwise population would not start and continue diminishing as an area becomes more affluent. People have less (or no) kids because they don't want kids, don't want a bunch of kids, and can reasonably expect the kids they have to survive to adulthood. And access to birth control, education, and other opportunities (mostly for women) makes having less kids (by their own desire) possible.
So bringing capable workers in means they pay into taxes that support the aging and school-age population, and never had to have their school-age years paid for. They're a productive member with half the cost over their lifetime.
It's a no-brainer... as long as you're not worried about changing the... shade or hue... of your population over time.
Our replacement rate has been low for a long time, but our population has stayed relatively steady.... because of immigration.
Low replacement rate is only bad if you're racist/xenophobic. Otherwise there's usually (in a supposedly first-world country) an easy solution.
And if you think this is a dig on specifically the US, it isn't. Japan and South Korea are about to have insane difficulties with a very obvious and simple solution, and the US had that solution and are destroying it in favor of racism and xenophobia.
In Voyager, 7-of-9 had to keep going back to her drone recharge/nutrition unit until her digestive system reformed. Basically a whole bunch of Borg equipment replaced basic staying-alive organs.
So if they don't ingest, I'd imagine they don't shit.