#glitchprod — Public Fediverse posts

(Cont. 2/2)

But then, in the episode 8, we have Kinger describing Scratch (the first abstraction) as:
"I wasn't quite on Scratch's level of thinking outside the box. [...] His ideas were often so bizarre and ABSTRACT that the rest of the team had no idea how to work in his language. Either due to pure brilliance, or the tumor in his head."

That word choice is 100% intentional. The only question is what do the writers want us to take away from that?

I'm still not entirely convinced the technical definition is relevant here (though Kinger, Scratch, and the rest of the initial team are definitely the right people to know it--its not off the table either), but clearly it was important to latch on to that term in general

I think those monsters are called "abstractions" BECAUSE of Scratch. From a man known for his (creative) "abstractions", what is devolving into an abstract monster if not the ultimate abstraction? Especially, from a man with a brain tumor. And a man who (allegedly) had his brain tampered with by an AI that fundamentally doesn't understand humans.

In a way, to abstract is to become Scratch, to follow in his footsteps.

What do you all think of this? Is there a better connection to "abstraction" in the OOP sense? I really feel like there should be, but I already waited a few days before posting this and it just hasn't come to me.
I think Scratch and the origin/nature of abstraction are going to be important details in a post-Caine Circus, so maybe I'm being proven wrong as we speak!

🧵 2/2

#TheAmazingDigitalCircus #TADC #GlitchProductions #GlitchProd #GLITCH

(Cont. 2/2)

But then, in the episode 8, we have Kinger describing Scratch (the first abstraction) as:
"I wasn't quite on Scratch's level of thinking outside the box. [...] His ideas were often so bizarre and ABSTRACT that the rest of the team had no idea how to work in his language. Either due to pure brilliance, or the tumor in his head."

That word choice is 100% intentional. The only question is what do the writers want us to take away from that?

I'm still not entirely convinced the technical definition is relevant here (though Kinger, Scratch, and the rest of the initial team are definitely the right people to know it--its not off the table either), but clearly it was important to latch on to that term in general

I think those monsters are called "abstractions" BECAUSE of Scratch. From a man known for his (creative) "abstractions", what is devolving into an abstract monster if not the ultimate abstraction? Especially, from a man with a brain tumor. And a man who (allegedly) had his brain tampered with by an AI that fundamentally doesn't understand humans.

In a way, to abstract is to become Scratch, to follow in his footsteps.

What do you all think of this? Is there a better connection to "abstraction" in the OOP sense? I really feel like there should be, but I already waited a few days before posting this and it just hasn't come to me.
I think Scratch and the origin/nature of abstraction are going to be important details in a post-Caine Circus, so maybe I'm being proven wrong as we speak!

🧵 2/2

#TheAmazingDigitalCircus #TADC #GlitchProductions #GlitchProd #GLITCH

(Cont. 2/2)

But then, in the episode 8, we have Kinger describing Scratch (the first abstraction) as:
"I wasn't quite on Scratch's level of thinking outside the box. [...] His ideas were often so bizarre and ABSTRACT that the rest of the team had no idea how to work in his language. Either due to pure brilliance, or the tumor in his head."

That word choice is 100% intentional. The only question is what do the writers want us to take away from that?

I'm still not entirely convinced the technical definition is relevant here (though Kinger, Scratch, and the rest of the initial team are definitely the right people to know it--its not off the table either), but clearly it was important to latch on to that term in general

I think those monsters are called "abstractions" BECAUSE of Scratch. From a man known for his (creative) "abstractions", what is devolving into an abstract monster if not the ultimate abstraction? Especially, from a man with a brain tumor. And a man who (allegedly) had his brain tampered with by an AI that fundamentally doesn't understand humans.

In a way, to abstract is to become Scratch, to follow in his footsteps.

What do you all think of this? Is there a better connection to "abstraction" in the OOP sense? I really feel like there should be, but I already waited a few days before posting this and it just hasn't come to me.
I think Scratch and the origin/nature of abstraction are going to be important details in a post-Caine Circus, so maybe I'm being proven wrong as we speak!

🧵 2/2

#TheAmazingDigitalCircus #TADC #GlitchProductions #GlitchProd #GLITCH

(Cont. 2/2)

But then, in the episode 8, we have Kinger describing Scratch (the first abstraction) as:
"I wasn't quite on Scratch's level of thinking outside the box. [...] His ideas were often so bizarre and ABSTRACT that the rest of the team had no idea how to work in his language. Either due to pure brilliance, or the tumor in his head."

That word choice is 100% intentional. The only question is what do the writers want us to take away from that?

I'm still not entirely convinced the technical definition is relevant here (though Kinger, Scratch, and the rest of the initial team are definitely the right people to know it--its not off the table either), but clearly it was important to latch on to that term in general

I think those monsters are called "abstractions" BECAUSE of Scratch. From a man known for his (creative) "abstractions", what is devolving into an abstract monster if not the ultimate abstraction? Especially, from a man with a brain tumor. And a man who (allegedly) had his brain tampered with by an AI that fundamentally doesn't understand humans.

In a way, to abstract is to become Scratch, to follow in his footsteps.

What do you all think of this? Is there a better connection to "abstraction" in the OOP sense? I really feel like there should be, but I already waited a few days before posting this and it just hasn't come to me.
I think Scratch and the origin/nature of abstraction are going to be important details in a post-Caine Circus, so maybe I'm being proven wrong as we speak!

🧵 2/2

#TheAmazingDigitalCircus #TADC #GlitchProductions #GlitchProd #GLITCH

Happy TADC: The Last Act day! I won't be seeing it until this weekend, but in rewatching the series again, I wanted to finally sit down and address something that stood out to me all the from the pilot: the use of the term "abstraction" for the big scary monster people turn in to

You see, "abstraction" has a special meaning in Computer Science. It's one of the "four pillars of Object-Oriented Programming", and I feel like that definition really *doesn't* line up with how TADC uses it

To grossly oversimplify: "abstract" in CS is more like "generic" or "template". Abstract classes and methods have definitions for *what* they do, but not *how* they do. For example, you can have an abstract class called Animal, with an abstract method called "move()". Animal just says the ability to move exists, it doesn't say how that happens. Instead, Human takes Animal as a template and says you move() by walking, and Bird takes Animal as a template and says you move() by flying.
The closest approximation in the Circus would be like the NPC mannequins, under the old theory that they could be "claimed" by new players entering (but even that is imperfect since technically you can't actually spawn objects from an abstract class, you have to use a fully defined class)
Those monsters that Kaufmo and Queenie and all the others turned into dont really seem to fit that definition. "Corruptions"? Sure. But not "abstractions"

Now, that's all easy enough to dismiss as simply "Gooseworx is not familiar with OOP and just chose a term that seemed cool/fitting", and yeah that's exactly what I did eight episodes ago. After all, they are still pretty artistically abstract. Without that specific technical context, it is definitely a reasonable term. Through the first 7 episodes, I didn't question it

🧵 1/2

#TheAmazingDigitalCircus #TADC #GlitchProductions #GlitchProd #GLITCH

Happy TADC: The Last Act day! I won't be seeing it until this weekend, but in rewatching the series again, I wanted to finally sit down and address something that stood out to me all the from the pilot: the use of the term "abstraction" for the big scary monster people turn in to

You see, "abstraction" has a special meaning in Computer Science. It's one of the "four pillars of Object-Oriented Programming", and I feel like that definition really *doesn't* line up with how TADC uses it

To grossly oversimplify: "abstract" in CS is more like "generic" or "template". Abstract classes and methods have definitions for *what* they do, but not *how* they do. For example, you can have an abstract class called Animal, with an abstract method called "move()". Animal just says the ability to move exists, it doesn't say how that happens. Instead, Human takes Animal as a template and says you move() by walking, and Bird takes Animal as a template and says you move() by flying.
The closest approximation in the Circus would be like the NPC mannequins, under the old theory that they could be "claimed" by new players entering (but even that is imperfect since technically you can't actually spawn objects from an abstract class, you have to use a fully defined class)
Those monsters that Kaufmo and Queenie and all the others turned into dont really seem to fit that definition. "Corruptions"? Sure. But not "abstractions"

Now, that's all easy enough to dismiss as simply "Gooseworx is not familiar with OOP and just chose a term that seemed cool/fitting", and yeah that's exactly what I did eight episodes ago. After all, they are still pretty artistically abstract. Without that specific technical context, it is definitely a reasonable term. Through the first 7 episodes, I didn't question it

🧵 1/2

#TheAmazingDigitalCircus #TADC #GlitchProductions #GlitchProd #GLITCH

Happy TADC: The Last Act day! I won't be seeing it until this weekend, but in rewatching the series again, I wanted to finally sit down and address something that stood out to me all the from the pilot: the use of the term "abstraction" for the big scary monster people turn in to

You see, "abstraction" has a special meaning in Computer Science. It's one of the "four pillars of Object-Oriented Programming", and I feel like that definition really *doesn't* line up with how TADC uses it

To grossly oversimplify: "abstract" in CS is more like "generic" or "template". Abstract classes and methods have definitions for *what* they do, but not *how* they do. For example, you can have an abstract class called Animal, with an abstract method called "move()". Animal just says the ability to move exists, it doesn't say how that happens. Instead, Human takes Animal as a template and says you move() by walking, and Bird takes Animal as a template and says you move() by flying.
The closest approximation in the Circus would be like the NPC mannequins, under the old theory that they could be "claimed" by new players entering (but even that is imperfect since technically you can't actually spawn objects from an abstract class, you have to use a fully defined class)
Those monsters that Kaufmo and Queenie and all the others turned into dont really seem to fit that definition. "Corruptions"? Sure. But not "abstractions"

Now, that's all easy enough to dismiss as simply "Gooseworx is not familiar with OOP and just chose a term that seemed cool/fitting", and yeah that's exactly what I did eight episodes ago. After all, they are still pretty artistically abstract. Without that specific technical context, it is definitely a reasonable term. Through the first 7 episodes, I didn't question it

🧵 1/2

#TheAmazingDigitalCircus #TADC #GlitchProductions #GlitchProd #GLITCH

Happy TADC: The Last Act day! I won't be seeing it until this weekend, but in rewatching the series again, I wanted to finally sit down and address something that stood out to me all the from the pilot: the use of the term "abstraction" for the big scary monster people turn in to

You see, "abstraction" has a special meaning in Computer Science. It's one of the "four pillars of Object-Oriented Programming", and I feel like that definition really *doesn't* line up with how TADC uses it

To grossly oversimplify: "abstract" in CS is more like "generic" or "template". Abstract classes and methods have definitions for *what* they do, but not *how* they do. For example, you can have an abstract class called Animal, with an abstract method called "move()". Animal just says the ability to move exists, it doesn't say how that happens. Instead, Human takes Animal as a template and says you move() by walking, and Bird takes Animal as a template and says you move() by flying.
The closest approximation in the Circus would be like the NPC mannequins, under the old theory that they could be "claimed" by new players entering (but even that is imperfect since technically you can't actually spawn objects from an abstract class, you have to use a fully defined class)
Those monsters that Kaufmo and Queenie and all the others turned into dont really seem to fit that definition. "Corruptions"? Sure. But not "abstractions"

Now, that's all easy enough to dismiss as simply "Gooseworx is not familiar with OOP and just chose a term that seemed cool/fitting", and yeah that's exactly what I did eight episodes ago. After all, they are still pretty artistically abstract. Without that specific technical context, it is definitely a reasonable term. Through the first 7 episodes, I didn't question it

🧵 1/2

#TheAmazingDigitalCircus #TADC #GlitchProductions #GlitchProd #GLITCH

Just watched the Gameoverse pilot, and oh my! It's so great! Probably my favorite of Glitch's art styles (quite a high bar), it's fun, I'm pretty sure I'm gonna absolute love the themes, it's seems to be queer, it seems to have nice story (al least that episode had). Probably gonna be my comfort show, but also rip my heart out…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jNk5tmjhpc

#gameoverse #glitchProductions #glitchProd #glitch