If someone is baking cookies it doesn’t improve the cookies if they have to run a mile for each ingredient. What am I missing?
I had to have a good think about this, because no, performative or unproductive effort doesn’t add anything. But…
Is it just that someone being willing to run and get each ingredient demonstrates a level of care?
…I think this gets closer—that the idea is important enough, that they cared enough, to put in the time and energy. But it has to be meaningful effort; the running-a-mile analogy wouldn’t qualify, but there’s a difference between someone serving me cookies that they worked at for hours to bake, and the same person handing me chemically-identical cookies that they purchased at the grocery store. Knowing that they cared enough to do that means that what they’re trying to express means a lot to them (or at least that I do).
Sloppers don’t have any messages that mean anything to them. They just care about the quantity; and in the case of AI, they literally can’t care about the message. But the Chobani animators and the poster designers in 19th century Paris have a message that means a lot to them, and they bury it under the advertisement so that their art gets out there and they can also feed their family.
back in my day, it wasn’t uncommon to be using/hearing Microslop to refer to the company and it’s shitty half-ass product implementations since at least 2018
Oh man, remember Windows Vista? That was a slop-y and sloppy trip.
It makes 100% sense that the more popular definition would’ve lost the ‘sloppy’ association and gone back to the ‘low quality, high quantity animal feed’.
Yeah, I think partially because it’s superficially quite polished. If you look closely you can see AI artifacts, but on a first glance it looks like an uncanny valley version of a polished, final product.
However, bringing it back to the original topic, I do think that definition/perspective is more damning of Kurzkesagt. Their videos are rushed but they do take great care to not be sloppy in that way.
Hmmm. I’m going to have to think about it, but I really do think that the people there actually are putting in a ton of effort. And sometimes doing a bad job anyway, but I don’t think they put out a large enough quantity to reasonably call it slop. Still, I’m intrigued by the question.
I think this is where we flip sides on the ‘sloppy’ vs. ‘slop’ distinction. I do think that objectively good art (if we pretend that’s a thing) can be slop if it’s purpose is ‘high volume animal feed’. That might be coming from the culinary association of things like sloppy joes, casseroles, mashed veggies, biscuits and gravy, MREs, etc. as ‘slop’ and sometimes even ‘tasty slop’.
Interesting. I don’t agree, but because at the end of the day, slop isn’t made for humans, so it can’t ever be objectively (granting your premise) good to the human palate. Guilty pleasure, sure. Perverse curiosity, yeah. But that isn’t saying much, as the “Love Island” conversation is about to talk more about.
That said, I think I see where you’re coming from. I do like me some sloppy joes and biscuits and gravy. Not all together, though.
…Sorry to curse you with that…
Nah, I knew the risks when I signed up for this gig.
it felt like some of the most soulless TV I’ve ever seen. […] everyone on set looks dead inside, they’re all kissing eachother all the time but it doesn’t look like any of them are having any fun.
Dang. That sounds awful. Why do people subject themselves to that sort of…oh, prize money, right
and my friend agreed.
That is one impressive bit of self-awareness, honestly. lol