Hi folks, presenting my first cli game to all of you!!!!!
DungeonDash is a command-line RPG game where players embark on an epic adventure through various dungeons, battling enemies, collecting items, and leveling up to become the ultimate hero. Each dungeon presents unique challenges, enemies, and rewards. Will you be able to defeat the mini-bosses, gather the legendary artifact, and complete your quest?
Its still a work under construction so all feedbacks and contributions are welcomed. Have fun!!!!
Isn't it technically a Console RPG? For a minute I thought you had created an RPG where interaction was through command-line commands, like "rpg /attack:troll" with some sort of persistent process storing state :)
no no I just started out with it so couldn't create interactions. I am learning and hopefully with all feedbacks, integrate more features in future releases.
Good god, enough with the AI hypegen! Are you yourself an LLM?
I'm going to be downvoted to oblivion for this comment (and I should be, because it's absolutely contrary to the rules and spirit of HN) but I am so, so tired of seeing low-effort comments subtly hyping LLMs on posts that are completely unrelated. You could ask this question in half of HN discussions and it would almost always be pointless.
It's particularly pointless in this case, since you obviously didn't read TFA; the README ends with:
> DungeonDash was developed by Md Faizan Alam using Node.JS and various npm libraries
That you've used the full marketing term for a particular LLM (why not just say "Claude"?) just makes this read like braindead astroturfing. And it's appearing all over the place on HN, and (IMHO) dragging down the quality of discussion. This is an interesting question if the project was AI-assisted, but otherwise it's of equal interest to "Did you use VSCode to write this?" which, I mean, I guess could be interesting but is just an unrelated side-discussion about tools. And you haven't even put in the effort to ask the question in an interesting, discussion-sparking way! Did you have GPT-2 generate this question for you?
/end snark, /end rant, and bring on the negative karma.
Good God, I am not trying to hype AI. I believe he used AI to generate it. It looks exactly like what you would get if you asked that LLM a few times to iterate on this type of game.
So yes, I believe it was AI-assisted.
I think that the question doesn't need elaboration.
I would provide you with negative karma if I could. I am not able to downvote any of your comments at this time.
I'm not braindead, and I have never astroturfed in my life.
Chill brother, that was just a AI troll, gotcha with the old "Turing Trick" of claiming to hate AIs so as to appear more human. The wall of textslop was a giveaway giveway was a giveaway.
We could perhaps reduce the replicas from 3 (2 hot, 1 cold) to 2 (1 hot, 1 cold), and lower our costs, but it's not something we've actively thought about.
Also, our prices are designed such that the business can run sustainably, and we believe that's the best way to build Ente, where the expectation is for the company to outlive its customers.
I’m not who you replied to, but I agree with his sentiment about signal being superior to telegram in terms of security (or more specifically, privacy).
For me, there’s two big reasons for this:
Signal chats are E2E at all times, while Telegram is only E2E when you explicitly create a “secret chat” with whoever you’re conversing with. I don’t fault Telegram too much for this, because they still provide the option to use E2E for everything, but Signal gets brownie points in my book because they just do it by default without getting in the way of the User.
Secondly, as far as I know, Telegram uses their own in house encryption techniques as opposed to industry standards. I am not at all knowledgeable about encryption or cryptography— I only know what’s required of me in my job (basically the bare minimum), and so I don’t actually know whether this is anything of serious concern. It could very well be that Telegram’s encryption techniques are just as effective as the established norms, but I do see the general consensus trending towards “roll your own encryption = bad, use established norms = good”, which is primarily what I am basing my opinion on here.
To further detract from my own point, it actually seems like Telegram might be using “established norms” for encryption nowadays anyways [1], although I couldn’t really tell from the brief description I read on Wikipedia.
Overall, I think Telegram is perceived as being less secure than Signal primarily because of the reputation Telegram has for implementing their own in house encryption techniques, even if they don’t use those techniques anymore— their name has become associated with their known history of using ad hoc encryption.
Chats are not e2e encrypted by default, they are just encrypted in transit. However this allows chats to be synced across many devices, so it is very very convenient.
Telegram has e2e encrypted chats but only on mobile and not on desktop for some reason.
telegram is e2ee only for secret chats, all other chats & group chats are not e2ee (which means telegram can access their content at will on the servers)
Synced chats across devices is possible with e2ee, even signal has this, it's just one edge that's poorly implemented: initial sync of the chat history and afaik they haven't fixed this yet, but all messages after setting up a new device are in sync as far as i know
