Marco Gomez

How I created an OpenSource 3D game with @threejs and MML while live streaming the development of the entire game in a way that it could be watched inside the game itself 🤓 Time stamps: 00:00:00 - Intro 00:00:18 - The game engine 00:02:06 - The MML documents 00:04:06 - multi-player sync 00:07:58 - memory game example 00:09:20 - client-MML communication 00:10:50 - reusability and composability 00:12:06 - MML tags and attributes 00:13:32 - interoperability 00:14:11 - the platformer game 00:16:15 - more MML tags and attributes 00:18:16 - let’s write a game 00:24:52 - 3d objects with primitives 00:33:41 - creating interactive blocks 00:41:29 - creating click event handlers 00:44:30 - creating animation functions 00:51:25 - the game step function 00:59:22 - checking states for victory or draw 01:03:42 - creating display labels 01:15:16 - the reset game function 01:17:29 - the finished game 01:18:50 - final considerations If you liked the project, please also follow these legends: @MarcusLongmuir : the father of MML; @MorgeseSacha and @deej_io : my buddies at the MML Team; @RJFWhite and @HermanNarula : creating the craziest possible shit you can imagine (and some you can't even imagine yet) at @Improbableio

@ThePrimeagen @elonmusk LMFAO this reply caught me absolutely off guard

@elonmusk its recommended not to goon on main, Elon

You said: "AI took away the parts I hated and left me with the parts I love: architecture, product thinking, creative problem solving." The parts you listed as the ones you love are tightly coupled to what a product person does, but your claim is about whether AI has ruined coding (a programmer's activity, not a product person's). Maybe that shows you're really a product person who also writes code, not a programmer who also does product thinking (those are very different). I'm not claiming that AI ruined coding, but the paradigm shift is real. Before LLMs, for those who loved programming, the activity was a reward in itself. Many valued the process more than the result. The process of writing code was its own reward. Now, the process these people used to love "no longer exists" (at least, it has changed radically into something else). I totally understand what you're challenging here, but even if you like certain aspects of AI (like I do), you can't ignore the real reasons many people have to hate it. For the record: not everyone spent their careers writing CRUD endpoints.

"AI ruined coding" is the hottest take in tech right now. But what exactly did it ruin? Writing the same CRUD endpoints for the 400th time? Debugging webpack configs? Copy-pasting from Stack Overflow? AI took away the parts I hated and left me with the parts I love: architecture, product thinking, creative problem solving. Coding hasn't been this fun for me in 7 years.

So many responses to this post like "actually™: Doom was written in C", "actually™: Doom was not really 3D"... Feels like you're pointing at the moon, and everyone is looking at your finger. And yes, the message is quite on point. 1) Carmack is the GOAT. 2) Yes, pick something you care about and go hard on it, ever!

Imagine you're John Carmack you're 22 years old and you just wrote a 3D engine in assembly that runs at 35fps on a 486 Doom drops. Quake drops. Half the planet is playing your code. you're the reason GPUs exist. you're the reason your friend Jensen has a yacht today. then in 2009, you sell id Software. people call it betrayal. you call it "they made an offer I couldn't refuse." VR obsession. Oculus. Meta buys it for $2B. you're CTO. but Meta thinks you're a liability. your demos are "too intense." your emails are "too long." your focus on frame timing is "slowing us down." 2022. they push you out. not fired officially. just "restructured." the media writes "end of an era." some crypto bro calls you "washed up." silicon valley moves on. but you don't. you don't write a book. you don't start a podcast. you don't collect speaking fees. you go completely quiet. you take the money. you buy a warehouse in Texas. you hire 10 engineers. and you start coding. not games. not VR. AGI. two years. radio silence. no tweets. no conference talks. while everyone's debating ChatGPT, you're debugging CUDA kernels at 3AM, testing world models. then in 2025, Keen Technologies pivots hard. you're not "exploring" anymore. you're building it. here's what people get wrong: everyone calls it a comeback. a redemption arc. "revenge on Meta." it's none of that. you're a 54-year-old engineer who still codes 12 hours a day because you genuinely can't stop. most CTOs would have bought an island. most legends would have written memoirs. you just kept typing. the most dangerous person in any codebase is the one who goes quiet and never stops shipping commits. karma doesn't need to be real. but obsession is. welcome back, Carmack.

@theo GitHub was slowER before React. Web and APIs.

GitHub was slow way before they moved to React. You can hit the APIs yourself. They take multiple seconds to respond.

@levelsio The very same logic (or lack thereof) in this decision makes it a favour. If the same people still interested in migrating really knew how rotten Europe is right now, they'd be relieved for being prevented from doing it.

Literally just Brazilians and Argentineans! But no import people from non-aligned cultures instead with no income Who is making these decisions?!

Funniest part of it that this was mostly Brazilians with Italian heritage getting passports A demographic that's high educated and high income and culturally aligned with Italy and Europe, I mean they're genetically Italian! Instead they'll now give away passports to low educated welfare seekers without income from cultures that hate them It seems European governments enemy is immigrants that are a net positive addition to their culture while wanting to bring in more people that want to destroy their societies

For starters, in any public institution. They can, for example, prevent public schools from installing Linux on school-owned computers to teach students. Also, businesses can be harmed. You may follow @carlrichell (founder of System76, a company based in Colorado) to learn more about the practical consequences of the age verification laws for Linux. He has been actively talking about this.

@BowTiedTails @wookash_podcast How will it be enforced?!

California and Colorado want OS level API for age verification (???) Linux: let's exempt open source software? Windows: :)))))))))))))))))))))))

@andhideki É exatamente esse o mindset atual das empresas que leva ao que chamamos de "race to the bottom".

... ou seja, eu não estou falando literalmente sobre "levar um hit", e sim sobre uma forma alternativa e, na minha opinião, melhor de maximizar lucro. Eu só usei "take the hit" porque, na visão das empresas que tão fazendo essa merda, deixar de maximizar lucros da forma fácil e rápida (deixar de simplesmente demitir funcionários) é sinônimo de "levar a pior" (na minha opinião, por ignorância, visão limitada de longo prazo dessas mesmas empresas).

Al will never be a net positive for mankind unless the corporate mindset changes drastically. Not because AI can't evolve into something much better, but because humans so far haven't. Human nature is to compete and it is very rare for people to take a hit for the greater good...

No, I think that's wrong. I'd bet almost all of what you pay monthly for a major AI subscription service covers inference, not training. Training is huge, but amortized across millions of users and many months. I'd guess it would be a reasonable rough estimate for a $200/month plan today to be something like: - inference/serving: 85% - training amortization: 10% - others (R&D, infra): 5% And we're very far from having computers capable of running capable open-source agents locally.

@TheCodeTherapy @ID_AA_Carmack Right, that's because closed-source models do much more than just scrape-train on OSS code. And that's exactly what you pay for. Training costs are certainly high, but that hasn't stopped open-source models. Likely to drop dramatically with Vera Rubin.

I know there is some overlap between open source and anti-AI activists, but I have a hard time reconciling it. My million+ open source LOC were always intended as a gift to the world. Yes, I would make arguments about how it would strengthen our communities, and the GPL would prevent outright exploitation by our competitors, but those were to allay fears of my partners to allow me to make the gift. AI training on the code magnifies the value of the gift. I am enthusiastic about it! Some people do look at open source as a tool for social change, career advancement, or reputation building, but those are all downstream of the gift.

What has prevented multiple models so far is the high cost of training one. There are a few open-source models already, but they still can't compete with the major centralized/closed ones. For the record: I'm not against AI at all, as I stated in my first reply. I just think it's valuable to recognize the changes it brings into the dynamics of shared knowledge.

@TheCodeTherapy @ID_AA_Carmack What prevents multiple models? Also value from those models (even commercial ones) does spread into new OSS. And much faster too.

The scale and structure are radically different. Even if you claim that the previous loop you mentioned was already unfair, the value distribution was decentralized (no single actor could capture the whole value). AI changes the topology of the loop. As in: millions of repositories -> trained into a single model -> sold via a single API. So instead of knowledge -> ecosystem, it becomes knowledge -> platform. In the old OSS economy, we had many contributors, many learners, and many companies, so the value used to spread. Now we have many contributors, a few model trainers, and global platform services, so the value concentrates. It may show old patterns, but it's a new game.

@TheCodeTherapy @ID_AA_Carmack OSS -> human learning/exploration -> consulting services

Our evolutionary pattern is parochial cooperation. We're very tribal and territorial animals. We're prone to cooperate within what we perceive as our immediate tribe, while competing against external groups. Maybe the urge to compete against the external groups in a modern context blinds us to the cooperation we should have with our own.

@TheCodeTherapy Human nature is to be cooperative. The system instigates competition cause it drives us be over productive, have no time to think, get ill, step on others foots and forget who are the ones really fucking us up.

We should all be aiming to profit from better and faster output, not from cheaper input.

That's why you see thousands of devs claiming to be individually 10X more productive for a year now, while software quality and outages on services only get worse. That's not a consequence of LLMs' nature. It's a consequence of how the corporate mindset has all companies using AI

@itsjustcornbro Yeah. Symptom of short sight. There's no worse enemy of capitalism than participating in a systemic logic that makes your consumer base unable to buy shit cause they don't have jobs anymore. We should all be aiming to profit through faster output, not cheaper input.

@TheCodeTherapy yea, that's pretty much my argument against the new generation of what I call "corpo-woke hypercapitalists" they will never take their foot off the gas in the race-to-the-bottom, and arguing any sort of restraint makes you some sort of enemy of capitalism

Yeah, you can bet many people will think I'm arguing for collectivism when I'm just describing incentive structures. When every company is forced to maximize profits in a competitive market, the rational move is to lay off workers. That's a game-theory problem, not an ideology. Also, you can be the biggest fan of capitalism ever, and still comprehend the race-to-the-bottom trap.

@TheCodeTherapy taking a hit for the greater good makes you a communist, so i've been told