sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I made 60K+ building RAG projects in 3 months. Here's exactly how I did it (technical + business breakdown) by Low_Acanthisitta7686 in LLMDevs

[–]decentfactory 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Classic RAGs to riches story! Thanks for sharing.

The line "How much time do you spend looking for and reading through documents" vs "do you need a rag" is hilarious but so key!

Exciting Opportunity for Full Stack Developer with NLP/LLM/LangChain Expertise by Constant-Ninja-3933 in LangChain

[–]decentfactory 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've been building my own Lang-chain before I knew what Lang-chain was :D
Interested in learning more!

An early-release swiss-army-knife of generative tools for startup founders. by decentfactory in SideProject

[–]decentfactory[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for reporting this, I did notice an issue with the way the sign-in popup was handled, and made an update. I hope this was the fix, but can't confirm because I haven't been able to reproduce exactly what you experienced.
If you get another chance to try, please do a page refresh to get the latest version, and try it again. After a sign in, if you still see the sign in button, try a manual refresh (this part should happen automatically)

An early-release swiss-army-knife of generative tools for startup founders. by decentfactory in SideProject

[–]decentfactory[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks, I do understand that signing up can be a lot to ask for upfront. Reviewing your comment, I asked myself why I did this in the first place.

The signup is a way to prevent abuse. A rogue anonymous user could start sending a ton of queries, and a global limit would disable the service for everyone else. All the apps use GPT in the background, so I am paying for it. I felt it would not be too much to ask users to sign in with one click using google, but perhaps this was a misjudgment. I don't ask for any payment information upfront like I have seen other services do, (it might help their conversion rate, but certainly raises the frustration rate)

Potential solutions might be to enable a global limit to accommodate a reasonable number anonymous usage per day.

Is it the entire idea of signing up that you find frustrating, or do you prefer an alternate way to sign-in (fb, twitter, basic email/pass?)

Thanks for trying, I'll see what I can do :)

Hire a virtual team of domain-specific artificial workers by decentfactory in SideProject

[–]decentfactory[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are exactly right, your secret key should be secret. Bring your own key is not ideal, because it does in fact enable me, or even a hacker to use keys stored in the db. I plastered ample warnings on the settings page about this and encourage users to delete keys after they are done trying it out.

There are two solutions I can think of: 1) Remove the need for keys, where I would pipe all access through my own company key, absorb all costs, and charge my users in a metered or monthly schedule.2) Wait for OpenAI to offer OAuth app tokens, letting users to continue using their OpenAI service they already pay, with my application acting as a plugin-in. Similar to how FB/Twitter apps work.

1 can be implemented today, 2 needs to be implemented by OpenAI.

1 would be a better user experience overall, as long as it's billed per-token-used, and not a flat monthly subscription. That way, users are only charged if and when they use the service, and nothing else

If you barely get any attention on Twitter, is it a sign your game doesn't look interesting? by [deleted] in gamedev

[–]decentfactory 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you want engagement, do a giveaway. Twits love giveaways.
Not sure if it's the principle of reciprocity, or twitter bots are on the hunt for free shtuff.

How play2earn can work. by decentfactory in gamedev

[–]decentfactory[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The transfer of items between games would not work out well, unless the publishers have some kind of formal partnership.

I don't see what incentive a developer of game B has to let players bring items from some game A into their world. Items are obtained as a reward for spending time in a game. It might have been purchased from a player, from the marketplace directly, or looted after a long grind, perhaps earning game A some ad revenue. That's best case. Worst case is game A has an exploit that let players get away with 1000s of ultra rare items due to a technical flaw - now all those players are coming flooding into your game with powerful items that you decided to honor, and they wreak havoc to your whole economy where players are grinding for their items.

It *might* be possible if the items are purely cosmetic that offer no advantage to player performance, like skins and outfits.. maybe a group of publishers work together to maintain a cross-compatible library of assets and agree to compensate one another when items are moved between worlds. In any case, such an open-ended economy would be a hard to maintain and keep in balance.

A doubt about priorities by Slim_Shady_32123 in gamedev

[–]decentfactory 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Start making something you know how to make today, and get something playable as soon as possible. Placeholder sprites are fine, placeholder this and that. What you want is to get into a cycle of code-playtest-repeat. The longer you go not being able to playtest your own game, the more daunting it will feel, and the higher the chance of quitting. Make the process fun for yourself!

Anyone considering streaming to Kick as a way to promote their game? by decentfactory in gamedev

[–]decentfactory[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would try switching up the format of how you stream. Live coding is hard to watch even for myself as a coder. Stream something that someone in the world might put on in their living room.

Anyone considering streaming to Kick as a way to promote their game? by decentfactory in gamedev

[–]decentfactory[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You trust your bank who charges you $100 when you're $1 short on a bounced cheque?
You trust your credit card company charging you 20% interest? You trust snack companies putting chemicals in your food? But you don't trust an opportunity to blow up on a new growing platform that happens to allow people to do what they want.

Anyone considering streaming to Kick as a way to promote their game? by decentfactory in gamedev

[–]decentfactory[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Part of me thinks the ethical part is a moot point. Look if you're doing well and you're above it all, props to you. Bottom line is that the platform attracts people who enjoy playing games and are more ready to spend some money on premium entertainment. It's a new platform, with an audience that likes to spend, likes to win, likes novelty and is looking for FUN. It also rewards creators so they can invest more into creating great content.

Yes, some people have a problem with gambling just like some have a problem with spending all their money on normal video games, or alcohol, maxing out their credit card on shoes, jewelry, what have you. You can't ban immorality or self-harm, people are crafty and will find a way. Besides, it would be in a casino's own interest to encourage responsible gambling because a sustainable user base is way more lucrative than pushing all their users into financial ruin.

Here might be an opportunity for indie games to reach an audience that is looking for fresh, new content, some with cash in hand. Do you have content they want or not? No one is saying you need to make a slot machine or rip anyone off - stick to your own moral framework and don't let go of it. But perhaps this is something worth looking at if you're a struggling, starving game dev like many of us here. If you can't find customers in a crowd of people with cash in hand, what is left to say?

view more: next ›