• Billiam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    90
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Because corporate logos are intentionally designed to evoke the brand they represent?

      • Venator@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        3 months ago

        Also most of the logos are just the name next to an icon. Plants only occasionally have thier name written next to them.

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Also most people have little to no reason to identify plants. Most of the time we don’t even eat the whole plant, we eat the fruit or the root or some very specific part of the plant. You could easily identify a potato, but could you identify a potato plant? There are a lot of plants where you see a part of it in the store but you’ve never seen the entire plant. I never knew I had asparagus growing in the garden because what is sold in the store is not what grown asparagus looks like. We don’t eat grown asparagus, we eat the young shoots before they’ve turned woody. A grown asparagus is inedible and the berries are toxic.

  • sudo_shinespark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Let’s make sure to shame the people being bombarded by advertisements for 90% of their lives. That’ll motivate them to be more cognizant of botany

    • Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      This could as easily be read as a critique of modern capitalism for that very reason.

  • Agent641@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Broccoli, cabbage, kale, Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, bok choy, turnip, radish, collards and Mustard greens. 10 different plants, easy peasy!

  • socsa@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    3 months ago

    To be fair, corporate logos are specifically designed to take advantage of quirks in human cognition to make them distinct and memorable. Most plants pre-date human cognition, and the ones which don’t tend to be the ones people recognize instantly.

  • Hedup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    How many of those plants do ppl use in their daily lives? vs How many of those corporate products do they use in their daily lives?

  • Mataresian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    3 months ago

    If the names of the plants would be spelled for me under each plant every time then that would greatly enhance my memory.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    3 months ago

    In fairness if plants had their names written on them, I’d probably be able to identify those as well.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      I knew there was something wrong with my place in Phoenix, AZ. Dang Democrats stole the forest!

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        And the golf courses and lawns have made it humid! I thought it was supposed to be a “dry heat,” fucking over 100° and 70% humidity every single time I have to visit. Either that of freezing. One time it snowed… IN PHOENIX! Well, technically Mesa, but that’s just a suburb of Phoenix.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Mesa is one of those places they put several man made lakes in to make people think they could do watersports in their housing development. And in reality it just humidifies the heat and breeds mosquitos.

  • cobwoms@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    is the number 1000 based on anything? i’m curious if there have been any studies on the amount of logos most people recognize. 1000 seems high but also not, so i wonder if there’s science to back it up

    • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s obviously bullshit.

      Could you imagine sitting through a survey with over a thousand logos and plants to be able to reach this conclusion?😆

      • CheezyWeezle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I think it would be possible to reach this conclusion. Using shorter surveys, like Google opinion surveys or something, asking people if they recognize 2-3 logos at a time, run a few hundred of those surveys over a few years and you could categorize each logo based on % of participants who recognized, anything over like 66% could be considered “generally recognizable” and then count how many generally recognizable logos you had.