three.js + AI debate: creator fires back at "unserious toys" criticism with long-form rebuttal
anselm · x · 2026-09-09
After criticism that three.js is "for unserious people" building dead-end AI demos, developer @alightinastorm published a long rebuttal: distribution channels always evolve and attention creates demand; the demos exist because hard technical problems — ones even Fable/Astra must solve — are being worked out and shared openly; demos are evidence of possibility, not proof of failure. The spat captures the core tension in AI-generated games: technical feasibility vs. commercial distribution.
More from AGI Musings
- Another Anthropic researcher quits over safety: 'AI could kill us all by end of decade' — connoraxiotes · 2026-09-09
- Ex-Anthropic researcher puts >10% odds on AI killing humans by 2035, doomers push back — inductionheads · 2026-09-09
- Erik Hoel: culture is becoming a dark forest as AI commoditizes intellectual work — erikphoel · 2026-09-09
- OpenAI's Millennium Prize Problem Claim Marred by Uncredited-Work Accusations — techreview · 2026-09-09
- Code Generation Is Solved, Software Engineering Isn't—Code Was Never the Bottleneck — _jaydeepkarale · 2026-09-09
- GPT-6 Astra system card draws fire: OpenAI claims 'most aligned model' ever — TheZvi · 2026-09-09