I would say there is no strictly speaking there without a strict context. Bear in mind the characteristics of different animals excrement is not designed to any specification, it evolves in the context of it altering the animals habitat to some extents. We specify 'waste' should alter our habitat to a minimal degree, but we cant say for sure it evolves to that effect. It can fertilize, it can create apparent immediate problems, but such apparent problems can have significant systematic roles. To me the term 'output' then is less potentially misleading than 'waste'. A bit like the distinction between a crop and a weed. Our naming of things encapsulates presumptions and intentions, which is fitting for design, but things that are not designed are liable to exceed expectations.
No comments yet.