I think you misunderstand the point of the demoscene. It’s about mathematical prowess and the joy of puzzle-solving moreso than pretty pictures.
Appropriate uses for AI could be to trace the history of demoscene effects, or to explain how a particular scene works so you can understand it better. Nobody in the scene wants a magic box that solves the puzzle for them.
It might be difficult to say "No, I do not want this magic box." when under the pressure of economic forces that require you to use the magic box, but that doesn't mean you need to use the magic box in all other areas of your life.
The human side of the demo scene is what I think makes it appealing. Sharing and consuming. A fellow human did that! Coder-as-problem-solver-and-artist.
For sure it’s intellectually interesting if AI can generate something novel within demoscene constraints (140 chars or extreme low res or a POKEY chip at 1MHz or whatever) … something humans maybe thought impossible … like a winning move that makes a go or chess grandmaster say WTF. It changes what’s possible. But then most of us (?) still hope the sport/scene/art goes back to human endeavour.
I’ve been to parties where demos are running on a large screen, even ones we’ve seen before, and the audience will ooo and aah because a human figured out how to do that stuff under constraint. The magic is lost if it’s generated IMO.
> ... and the audience will ooo and aah because a human figured out how to do that stuff under constraint.
Or because the audience appreciates the artists' emotion and creative effort embodied in what they're watching. The Razor1911 demo, released at Revision 2026, is a great example there - there's some neat effects but nothing groundbreaking, but that isn't the point. It's a retrospective on the group that produced it, and the surrounding scene, and that's what won it the competition.
The existence of LLMs is not the problem. The insane way they've been integrated into society is the problem. Back in 2020, GPT-2 was something novel you'd do random experiments with and something like this would've been cool. As long as it remains a silly experiment, it still is cool.
Every time I see a person leading a model to specialize in a uniquely human endeavour, I think of the last lines of this stanza from Bob Dylan's It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding):
Disillusioned words like bullets bark
As human gods aim for their mark
Make everything from toy guns that spark
To flesh-colored Christs that glow in the dark
It’s easy to see without looking too far
That not much is really sacred
The post seems to refer to a very specific subset of demoscene:
> I came across Dwitter.net, which is like Twitter but for 140 character JavaScript demos. They already supported “remix”-ing any dweet so that we can build on top of them.
This person is actually correct. Demos are much more on the art side of coding than most forms of programming, so while LLMs may be up to the mechanical task, they won't produce code with the finesse that a human coder can. That goes double for the art and music. What's more, a demo with AI-gen elements wouldn't be accepted by the community. AI-gen webshit may be embraced by the industry, but the demoscene has different standards: human craftsmanship is the entire point.
Relatedly, I was a bit surprised and delighted to find out that the Sonic (the Hedgehog) community is vehemently rejecting AI recompiles, ports, and fangame projects. Clankers are ok with them when it comes to Dr. Robotnik's evil creations, but not in the real world!
Would be fun to see models trained on ancient figures that you could interact and chat with.
Less fun to see models imitating human art, they’re not ready for that yet IMP because they’re too derivative and not creative in interesting ways in the way that humans are.
I tend to think of "Damascus" or something, and the Greek feeling of the word is undeniable. The modern Rosetta Stone. So it is understandable when others in this thread are crying blasphemy, and hoping the TFA author gets struck blind.
congratulations on rediscovering genetic algorithms in procedurally generated art. why learn the math and size coding optimizations that make the effects possible when you can just throw tokens at it and spend time filtering the garbage for the machine? what a time to be alive!
You're not really making anything. It's like if chess players sat down at the table, each pulled out a laptop, and just ran stockfish - it's simply not impressive at all...
I think you misunderstand the point of the demoscene. It’s about mathematical prowess and the joy of puzzle-solving moreso than pretty pictures.
Appropriate uses for AI could be to trace the history of demoscene effects, or to explain how a particular scene works so you can understand it better. Nobody in the scene wants a magic box that solves the puzzle for them.
Who is this hurting, exactly? It's just a project designed for writing short JavaScript animations. Nobody is forcing anybody to use it.
> Who is this hurting, exactly?
It devalues art.
Yes.
If something is overvalued then a process that devalues it should be welcomed.
May I refer you to the rule you have quoted in your own profile?
Thanks for saying the quiet part out loud, glad some of you people are finally courageous enough to own your beliefs.
If you came to my house to take a shit on my carpet, it wouldn't really hurt anyone, but I'd still throw you out.
Shitting on someone else’s carpet is absolutely hurting someone.
A better example:
You prefer to shit in your own toilet but someone else prefers to shit on their own carpet.
[flagged]
I would wager that claiming it to hold one singular meaning for "everybody" is the misunderstanding.
They aren't referring to "everyone" they are referring to "the people in the demoscene" and they are correct.
How much would you wager? And what’s the house advantage for the scare quotes?
I shouldn’t add to this mess.
I used to have a reasonable experience on HN.
In this one particular instance being a reductionist is ok. I know it's weird, but that's just how it is.
> Nobody in the scene wants a magic box that solves the puzzle for them.
Largely true for all people who do creatively skilled tasks, and yet AI is still coming for all of us.
It might be difficult to say "No, I do not want this magic box." when under the pressure of economic forces that require you to use the magic box, but that doesn't mean you need to use the magic box in all other areas of your life.
Quit with the doomposting. How long before you guys go on the street chanting ‘AI is coming for all of us?’
The human side of the demo scene is what I think makes it appealing. Sharing and consuming. A fellow human did that! Coder-as-problem-solver-and-artist.
For sure it’s intellectually interesting if AI can generate something novel within demoscene constraints (140 chars or extreme low res or a POKEY chip at 1MHz or whatever) … something humans maybe thought impossible … like a winning move that makes a go or chess grandmaster say WTF. It changes what’s possible. But then most of us (?) still hope the sport/scene/art goes back to human endeavour.
I’ve been to parties where demos are running on a large screen, even ones we’ve seen before, and the audience will ooo and aah because a human figured out how to do that stuff under constraint. The magic is lost if it’s generated IMO.
> ... and the audience will ooo and aah because a human figured out how to do that stuff under constraint.
Or because the audience appreciates the artists' emotion and creative effort embodied in what they're watching. The Razor1911 demo, released at Revision 2026, is a great example there - there's some neat effects but nothing groundbreaking, but that isn't the point. It's a retrospective on the group that produced it, and the surrounding scene, and that's what won it the competition.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWs3N8eaPMY
https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=105954
Demoscenes are a uniquely human endeavour.
The existence of LLMs is not the problem. The insane way they've been integrated into society is the problem. Back in 2020, GPT-2 was something novel you'd do random experiments with and something like this would've been cool. As long as it remains a silly experiment, it still is cool.
Every time I see a person leading a model to specialize in a uniquely human endeavour, I think of the last lines of this stanza from Bob Dylan's It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding):
The post seems to refer to a very specific subset of demoscene:
> I came across Dwitter.net, which is like Twitter but for 140 character JavaScript demos. They already supported “remix”-ing any dweet so that we can build on top of them.
This person is actually correct. Demos are much more on the art side of coding than most forms of programming, so while LLMs may be up to the mechanical task, they won't produce code with the finesse that a human coder can. That goes double for the art and music. What's more, a demo with AI-gen elements wouldn't be accepted by the community. AI-gen webshit may be embraced by the industry, but the demoscene has different standards: human craftsmanship is the entire point.
Relatedly, I was a bit surprised and delighted to find out that the Sonic (the Hedgehog) community is vehemently rejecting AI recompiles, ports, and fangame projects. Clankers are ok with them when it comes to Dr. Robotnik's evil creations, but not in the real world!
you're absolutely right
Misread this as Demosthenes at first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosthenes
Would be fun to see models trained on ancient figures that you could interact and chat with.
Less fun to see models imitating human art, they’re not ready for that yet IMP because they’re too derivative and not creative in interesting ways in the way that humans are.
I tend to think of "Damascus" or something, and the Greek feeling of the word is undeniable. The modern Rosetta Stone. So it is understandable when others in this thread are crying blasphemy, and hoping the TFA author gets struck blind.
I'm pretty sure this violates the entire ethos of the demoscene
Demo-sce-nes (dai-moh-ske-nes), the famous geek philosopher...
Neat.
To me, demoscene was about embracing new technology and using it to express yourself.
It's enshrined now and so I find it to have served it's purpose. Look forward, not back.
To me, It sounds like you don't know anything about the demoscene.
congratulations on rediscovering genetic algorithms in procedurally generated art. why learn the math and size coding optimizations that make the effects possible when you can just throw tokens at it and spend time filtering the garbage for the machine? what a time to be alive!
"I stole some art" great good for you i'm sure that took a lot of effort
All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned.
Trust me when I say there are few things the demoscene despises more than using AI to make demos.
This is oil and water.
>Here is an example, I traced back d/36555 from d/367547 which in turn is derived from d/36467.
slop. Dwitter is nowhere near approaching a count of d/367547
This is probably a typo and only exists because it was written by a human.
Not to be confused with training a model on Demoscenes, the little-known cousin 3rd degree of Greek statesman Demosthenes.
[dead]
[flagged]
We've banned this account.
[flagged]
[flagged]
You miss the point.
Demoscenes are for human creations.
Leave AI out of it. Don't ruin yet another hobby.
The community will never accept what you made.
Pft.
The scene is about making art and cool stuff with tech. AI is just the latest tech, it’s entirely what the scene is about.
To deny that is just to be a silly snob and just to show them for who they really are.
You're not really making anything. It's like if chess players sat down at the table, each pulled out a laptop, and just ran stockfish - it's simply not impressive at all...