this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2026
102 points (91.1% liked)

Showerthoughts

43389 readers
463 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's rendered pixels that don't exist anywhere else except the digital world. Ergo...a cartoon or animated film by definition.

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Are most current blockbusters cartoons then? Because most of them are just cgi. Which percentage of computer generared graphics does it need to have to became a cartoon?

[–] BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

They are a mix of mostly animation with a bit of live action acting sprinkled in, like who framed Roger rabbit but more animation and less people, just because the animation is in the photo real style doesn't make it any different from traditional animation, like the "live action" lion king movie and the original lion king are both just animated movies with different styles, they make the live action version to market it to boomers who equate anything traditionally animated as cartoons for children

[–] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 54 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Idk I feel like the terms "cartoon" and "animation" should be saved for things that were made deliberately.

Pretty sure what you're referring to is just called "slop".

[–] cannedtuna@lemmy.world 24 points 2 days ago

Agreed.

No matter how “realistic” A.I. gets, It’ll always be slop.

[–] THE_GR8_MIKE@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Yeah, the phrasing of this reminds me of how Steven Ogg, the guy who plays Trevor in GTA 5, calls video games cartoons and doesn't consider them an art form.

[–] Cornpop@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

/r/unpopularopinion would be a better place for this lol a cartoon is a specific thing and not all ai videos are cartoons.

[–] Sour_Kabos@reddthat.com 1 points 1 day ago

And this matters because?

[–] rImITywR@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

I got in this argument about CG when the "live action" Lion King remake came out. Its not live action do you think they went out and filmed actual talking lions? It's still animated, just in a different art style. And imo that art style is much worse for the story.

[–] BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

They call it live action to sell it to boomers who think anything in the traditional animation style is just cartoons for children

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

And yet Dinosaur is considered animated. Dinosaur used live backgrounds, it's more live action than The Lion King

[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I always wondered how they taught the animals to memorize the script.

[–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 6 points 2 days ago

Lots of treats 😌

[–] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think “live action” indicates real principle cinematography - e.g. they have to shoot the scenes to be edited later. But I actually have no clue.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

records empty Safari

“Live”

adds action afterwards

“Action.”

Huh, I guess that’s one way of putting it.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago

Yes, it definitely isn’t as epic as “Milo and Otis”.

[–] Iconoclast@feddit.uk 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

What's the practical difference after the point of which you no longer can tell them apart?

[–] DJKJuicy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah even without AI and CGI at this point nothing on a screen is real anymore. We stopped having a 1:1 conversion of a photon hitting a media quite a while ago.

When you take a pic with your phone it's already digitally filtered and processed even before you start removing a trash can or an random person with AI.

What is even real at this point? You can't trust anything that's not real world meatspace any more.

[–] TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

A picture is worth a thousand lies. An AI generated video is worth 30 000 lies per second.

[–] AngryRedHerring@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Same with CGI. Early reliance on it is painful to watch. Jurassic Park still holds up, but try watching Beowulf sometime-- made 14 years after JP.

[–] BigTrout75@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Check out Jurassic Punk. Great documentary about the making of JP