People

Practical tips on hiring the best people? Which country? Remote vs. In Person?

Hi Reddit, I run a tech startup that's grown to $20M ARR. While we are relatively big, we are incredibly cash strapped till Q3 due to debt we took on last year and are currently paying back. In Q3, I'll finally have a large budget to sit and focus on building out our team. Now I'm trying to figure out: what are the optimal circumstances? We really screwed it up with our first batch of key hires after our seed round: US Product Manager, US Head of Customer Success - quit; US Head of Sales, US Head of Engineering - fired. We've built a mostly B or C team, and it really annoys me. We are slow, we are not up for big challenges, and people are, on average, not that brilliant. Out of our nearly 150 employees, I think I have ONE A player. However, they are also functioning at 60%. We are building additional "brands" this year, so there might be a way to separate a higher performing culture into our second brand. I have 3 questions, might seem relatively basic, but as we did such a bad job the first time around, I'd love to learn what you all think! I'm trying to build an optimal team with A-players! Q1: Today we are fully remote, should I get an in person office going? In which city? Q2: In general, which city should I hire talent from? I live in San Francisco and sometimes LA, but find the culture here generally too laid back. New York? But to keep a high quality, let's say, marketer, interested long term, they're going to want $200-220k base (and that's not even that competitive). While that is fine, it will slow down my intended plan for hiring. London? Salaries are comparatively much lower, and talent quality is still pretty high, but I am a little unsure of the work culture. In terms of budget, I'd love to aim for $150-180k/key hire and to go as high as $300k if appropriate. Q3: Should I be hiring people with 20 years of relevant experience? 2-3 years with a hunger to prove themselves? Fresh grads we can mould into whatever we need? As for what exactly I'm trying to hire for, lots of key hires: department heads, digital marketers, content people, engineers, AI engineers, operations people, strategy people, and more. I don't know enough about all the working cultures in these places, but I want to find and incentivize people who are willing to own and take responsibility for an area of the business, be trusted to make good decisions, and view it as their responsibility to improve their areas drastically, more than the typical 9-5. I feel today's workforce is not content with base + light equity, and maybe we should consider tying an unlimited-upside incentive to a relevant KPI to incentivize people working harder than just "what is required"? (edit: I know might get some hate for this "work harder than 9-5" mentality, but to clarify, I'm trying to figure out what incentive structures will naturally attract the type of person that wants this type of working life) What do you think? Also, any other practical tips for finding awesome people like this? edit: hooooly! this thread blew up. I'll do my best to reply to everyone, thank you for all your responses!

Feeling stuck—built a startup, got rejected from YC & IVI, met smarter people, and now I don’t know what to do. ( i will not promote ) I will not promote

I will not promote I don’t even know where to start, but I just feel completely stuck right now. I’m 20 years oldI don’t even know where to start, but I just feel completely stuck right now. I’m 20 years old, have been grinding non-stop for months, and it feels like I have nothing to show for it. I built an AI agent that automates workflows for businesses. I can build tech, but I can’t sell. That’s been my biggest realization recently—I thought building would be enough, but it’s not. I need customers, I need a co-founder, I need to figure out the business side… and I have no idea how. I applied to YC, IVI at ISB, and EF, met a lot of insanely smart people—some were impressed with me and my work, but they were wiser, more experienced, and honestly, just better at all of this than I am. It made me realize how much I don’t know. I got rejected from YC & IVI. 💔 YC didn’t even give much feedback—just a standard rejection. 💔 IVI told me: “You're too young, you need more experience, and you should work with a team before trying to start something.” That hit me hard. I had already been struggling to find a co-founder, and this just made me wonder if I even belong in this space yet. The Frustrating Part? I KNOW my tool Has a Unique Edge. I’m not just another AI automation tool—I know my tool has a strong USP that competitors lack. It has the potential to be an AI employee for businesses, not just another workflow tool. But I still haven’t built the “perfect product” I originally envisioned. And that’s what’s eating at me. I see what it COULD be, but I haven’t made it happen yet. At the same time, the competition in the AI agent space is exploding. YC-backed companies are working on AI agent startups. OpenAI is making huge progress with Operator. Competitors are moving fast, while I feel stuck. I’ve delayed development because I’m unsure whether to double down, pivot, or just move on entirely. Where I’m Stuck Right Now 🔹 Do I keep pushing and try to crack sales somehow? 🔹 Do I join a startup as a founding engineer to get experience, make connections, and learn sales before trying again? 🔹 Do I move to Bangalore, meet founders, and figure out what’s next? 🔹 Do I pivot to something nicher instead of competing in the AI agent race? If so, how do I even find a niche worth pursuing? 🔹 Do I even belong in startups? Or am I just forcing something that’s not working? I feel stuck in a weird middle zone where I’m not a beginner, but I’m also not successful. I’ve done enough to see what’s possible, but not enough to make it real. Every rejection makes me question if I’m even on the right path. I don’t know if I’m posting this for advice or just to get it out of my system. Maybe both. Has anyone else felt like this before? If you’ve been in this situation—how did you figure out whether to keep going or move on? TL;DR: I’m 20, built an AI agent for automating workflows, got rejected from YC & IVI, met insanely smart and experienced people, realized I can build tech but can’t sell, struggling to find a co-founder, AI agent competition is growing, delaying development, confused about the future—don’t know whether to double down, pivot, or move on. The frustrating part? I\ know I have a unique edge that others lack, but I still haven’t built the perfect product I originally envisioned.* edit: removed the tool's name

Couple people messaged me for Ai agents for their business what is the hype about?

Hey guys hope everyone is well I’m an opportunist seen a post on TikTok about Ai agents and many businesses were interested I did do some outreach some are interested I would like to know your views on these new trends and what your views are? Any of your thoughts on these people on socials promoting Ai agents to scale and automate businesses. Does anyone use one right now and any benefits and disadvantages? Thank you.

Feeling stuck—built a startup, got rejected from YC & IVI, met smarter people, and now I don’t know what to do. ( i will not promote ) I will not promote

I will not promote I don’t even know where to start, but I just feel completely stuck right now. I’m 20 years oldI don’t even know where to start, but I just feel completely stuck right now. I’m 20 years old, have been grinding non-stop for months, and it feels like I have nothing to show for it. I built an AI agent that automates workflows for businesses. I can build tech, but I can’t sell. That’s been my biggest realization recently—I thought building would be enough, but it’s not. I need customers, I need a co-founder, I need to figure out the business side… and I have no idea how. I applied to YC, IVI at ISB, and EF, met a lot of insanely smart people—some were impressed with me and my work, but they were wiser, more experienced, and honestly, just better at all of this than I am. It made me realize how much I don’t know. I got rejected from YC & IVI. 💔 YC didn’t even give much feedback—just a standard rejection. 💔 IVI told me: “You're too young, you need more experience, and you should work with a team before trying to start something.” That hit me hard. I had already been struggling to find a co-founder, and this just made me wonder if I even belong in this space yet. The Frustrating Part? I KNOW my tool Has a Unique Edge. I’m not just another AI automation tool—I know my tool has a strong USP that competitors lack. It has the potential to be an AI employee for businesses, not just another workflow tool. But I still haven’t built the “perfect product” I originally envisioned. And that’s what’s eating at me. I see what it COULD be, but I haven’t made it happen yet. At the same time, the competition in the AI agent space is exploding. YC-backed companies are working on AI agent startups. OpenAI is making huge progress with Operator. Competitors are moving fast, while I feel stuck. I’ve delayed development because I’m unsure whether to double down, pivot, or just move on entirely. Where I’m Stuck Right Now 🔹 Do I keep pushing and try to crack sales somehow? 🔹 Do I join a startup as a founding engineer to get experience, make connections, and learn sales before trying again? 🔹 Do I move to Bangalore, meet founders, and figure out what’s next? 🔹 Do I pivot to something nicher instead of competing in the AI agent race? If so, how do I even find a niche worth pursuing? 🔹 Do I even belong in startups? Or am I just forcing something that’s not working? I feel stuck in a weird middle zone where I’m not a beginner, but I’m also not successful. I’ve done enough to see what’s possible, but not enough to make it real. Every rejection makes me question if I’m even on the right path. I don’t know if I’m posting this for advice or just to get it out of my system. Maybe both. Has anyone else felt like this before? If you’ve been in this situation—how did you figure out whether to keep going or move on? TL;DR: I’m 20, built an AI agent for automating workflows, got rejected from YC & IVI, met insanely smart and experienced people, realized I can build tech but can’t sell, struggling to find a co-founder, AI agent competition is growing, delaying development, confused about the future—don’t know whether to double down, pivot, or move on. The frustrating part? I\ know I have a unique edge that others lack, but I still haven’t built the perfect product I originally envisioned.* edit: removed the tool's name

Looking for more people to test out my AI App building product!

Hey guys, I am looking for a few people to do an early test on a product I made. The product allows you to tell an AI about an app you want, and it will create it for you! I hope this will help many people here build the online business they have always wanted with essentially no work. This isn't like cursor ai, there is no code written in front of you. Instead, you are presented with multiple variations of an app, and you can tell the AI what changes to make. It's meant to be a creative journey, not a technical one. THIS IS NOT A SALES PITCH AND IS 100% FREE. Just building fun stuff out here and I need great people to try it!

Advice on Launching an AI Task Assistant for Forgetful People

Hi everyone, I’m working on an idea for an AI assistant that helps people stay on top of their tasks—like remembering to cancel a gym membership or following up on an important email. What makes this different is that it doesn’t require downloading yet another app. Instead, it integrates with tools people already use, like: WhatsApp Slack SMS Email For critical tasks, it could even escalate reminders to a phone call to make sure nothing gets missed. The main features I’m building include: Daily Check-ins: Quick updates to keep tasks and schedules on track. Persistent Follow-ups: Friendly nudges until tasks are completed or rescheduled. Proactive Scheduling: Automatically resolving conflicts in a calendar. Escalating Reminders: Escalating priority tasks via calls if needed. I’d love to ask for your advice: As a small business owner, would features like these help you or your team stay organized? What’s missing in existing task management tools for busy entrepreneurs? Do you think the “no app needed” angle is compelling enough to stand out in a crowded market? I’m still testing and refining this concept, and I’d love to hear your insights to help make it better. Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts and feedback!

I've made an AI assistant that builds businesses for people, ask anything!

I built an AI assistant that builds businesses for people, ask anything!

Hit a major milestone with my app that helps people find jobs and optimize their resume

I've been grinding for ~1.5 years now on my sideproject, Jobs-Scout, which helps people find jobs and optimize their resume for any specific role. I've been in industry a number of years as a senior manager, so I have done lots of interviewing and hiring and I think that helps my tool do a better job than others in knowing how to position a resume. It's the non-technical stuff, like branding, SEO etc. thats the hardest for me, but my buddy is now helping and we're starting to make in-roads and traffic is up a lot! 🚀 We hit our 200th paid customer today which is a major milestone for us, and just wanted to share! The app features: resume-to-job analysis using AI (of course!) a free job board updated daily matching and emailing new jobs to users (ie. 'scouting' for jobs hence the name!) resume builder and editor with inline AI optimization free tier (3 free analyses a month) and paid tiers If you're curious, everything's running on AWS, and I code and maintain it myself in the evenings after work, and my colleague is now on marketing and business development. Biggest lesson was finding a trustworthy co-founder. I went through a couple of iterations, but you need a certain personality that's able to keep up with the hustle. Would love feedback or tips on how to keep growing 🚀 . Edit: link: https://www.jobs-scout.com

I Launched a Side Project That People Love, But Scaling It Is Brutal

I Built a Side Project with Great Engagement—But It’s Still Not Making Money Six months ago, I started a side project in the consumer AI space: opencharacter.org. It’s been a grind, but I’ve built something people actually love—high retention, strong engagement, and users spending a ton of time on the platform. By all product metrics, it’s a success. But financially? It’s not quite there yet. The biggest challenge hasn’t been technical, managing infrastructure, or even dealing with a community. It’s distribution. Getting people to actually find and use your side project at scale is insanely hard. What’s Worked Reddit – Thoughtful, non-spammy comments in relevant threads drove early users. Instagram – Short-form videos brought in surprising traction. Paid ads – Somewhat effective, but tough to balance customer acquisition costs and revenue. What Hasn’t (Yet) TikTok – Dozens of videos later, still struggling to make it a reliable growth channel. Discord – Great for engagement, but not a strong acquisition channel. Recently, I brought on a co-founder who has done over 100 million views on Instagram Reels in under two years, so I’m hopeful we can crack the growth formula. Because without a scalable system for getting users, even a great side project won’t reach its potential. If I could start over, I’d think much more about distribution before building. Would love to hear from others—how do you drive growth for your side project?

[R] Stanford HAI Spring Conference - Intelligence Augmentation: AI Empowering People to Solve Global Challenges

Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI hosted its spring conference today with interesting conversations about how AI can best support humans in healthcare, art, and education to address global challenges. More details and the event recording are available at the HAI conference site. Here is a quick outline with video sections: Welcome & Introductions: HAI directors Fei-Fei Li, John Etchemendy, Russ Altman, & James Landay Session I: Healthcare Immersive Technologies for Caregiving: Innovation Opportunities and Ecosystem Challenges, Deborah Estrin @ Cornell Tech Student Lightning Talks On Complementing and Extending Human Intellect: Principles and Directions, Eric Horvitz @ Microsoft Mobilizing AI to Achieve Healthy Child Development Worldwide, Dennis Wall @ Stanford Safer and Proactive Care through AI, Suchi Saria @ Johns Hopkins University Session II: Art Other Intelligence: Exoticism and AI, Ken Goldberg @ UC Berkeley Student Lightning Talks Artful Intelligence: Exoticism and AI, Michele Elam @ Stanford The Digital Griot: A Reimagining of the Archive, Rashaad Newsome @ Stanford Amplifying the Human Artist Through AI, Hilary Hahn & Carol Reiley @ DeepMusic.ai Session III: Education Escaping or Automating a Legacy of Bad Instruction, Daniel Schwartz @ Stanford Student Lightning Talks AI to Super Power Teachers, Chris Piech @ Stanford Pushing the Boundaries of Educational Technology, Amy Ogan @ Carnegie Mellon University AI to Accelerate Workplace Learning at Scale, Candace Thille @ Amazon https://preview.redd.it/p2qg7eutibp61.png?width=1928&format=png&auto=webp&s=1cc8dd6c4458c3da79d00415552ca4424f03d0c2

I made an AI agent to create blog posts from top posts on Reddit to automate my programatic SEO content marketing. Showed it a couple people. Now they want one for their small business! Excited to improve it and see where I can take it as a project.

Originally I made this for myself to grow my newsletter via Google traffic. After a few successful runs, I decided to share it with a few people in my network to get feedback. Overall positive reception and they want to trial it in their workflows. Lots to improve but I'm off to a great start. Lesson learned is don't be afraid to share your work with others even if its not finished. You're probably further along than you think! Note: Tried to add a picture of the agent but its not allowed

Business Idea for new app connecting lonely people (e.g. new arrivals to big city), with local businesses organizing events

I came up with a start-up idea for a tool (website, app or both) where lonely people (e.g. recent arrivals to a new city) can match-up with one another, together with local businesses organizing events. I came up with the idea based on my own experiences of moving to a new place where my local social circle was virtually non-existent. Some people do well in such an environment, but I myself and some people I know/have interacted with seem to really struggle to make friends. The main idea would revolve around garnering the help of local businesses that regularly organize events (or would want to start doing so), together with a tool set up like a matching app (not unlike tinder or bumble). The app would contain the following features: People will be able to create a profile (with photos, interests, etc.) from all over the world, and set a specific geolocation of interest. Companies would be able to create pages with agenda’s and upcoming events. People would be able to list upcoming events they are interested in. Maybe together with some kind of AI-tool that will recommend upcoming events based on past liked events and interests. One could then seek out and reach out to other people planning to go to the same event, and perhaps arrange to go together so they know they won’t end up spending their time at the event alone. The business model would either revolve around subscription costs (e.g. for the companies that use it), commission on tickets purchased at the app for events or perhaps advertisement. I know there would be some competitors out there, however it appears most haven’t gained proper traction. I have also noticed most of the competitors have similar features, but haven’t made this business model their main strategy. Bumble for example, has a BFF-mode but advertises mainly about being a dating app. Businesses use their own websites or facebook/Instagram pages, but rely on people actively following them. Etc. What do you guys think? Honest feedback would really be appreciated, as this is my first start-up idea.

The 9 AI Skills You Need NOW to Stay Ahead of 97% of People

The 9 AI Skills You Need NOW to Stay Ahead of 97% of People 🔒 Keep Your Digital Life Private: Stay Safe & Secure Online with NordVPN: https://nordvpn.com/safetyfirst Welcome to our latest educational video, "The 9 AI Skills You Need NOW to Stay Ahead of 97% of People." This video is designed for anyone eager to take a deep dive into the world of artificial intelligence and machine learning. Our goal is to provide you with the most essential AI skills needed to excel in this rapidly evolving field, keeping you ahead of the curve and well-positioned in the job market. In this comprehensive guide, we explore nine fundamental AI skills, ranging from understanding algorithms to deep learning, data science, natural language processing, computer vision, robotics, and more. We also provide practical tips on how to apply these skills in real-world scenarios, whether you're an AI enthusiast or a seasoned professional. AI is not just the future; it's here NOW. By acquiring these nine essential AI skills, you can position yourself among the top 3% of people who are ready to shape the future. Don't be left behind as AI transforms industries, from healthcare and finance to entertainment and transportation. This video is a must-watch for anyone interested in AI, machine learning, data analysis, robotics, or any related field. Whether you're just starting out, looking to upskill, or aiming to stay ahead in your career, these nine AI skills are your key to success. Remember to subscribe to our channel for more valuable content and hit the notification bell so you never miss an update. Join the conversation in the comments section - we'd love to hear your thoughts on AI and how you plan to incorporate these skills into your career or studies. So get ready, click play, and let's take a step towards the future together, learning the 9 AI skills you need NOW to stay ahead of 97% of people. Your AI journey starts here. Enjoy the video! #artificialintelligence #ai #airevolution Subscribe for more! Welcome to AI Uncovered, your ultimate destination for exploring the fascinating world of artificial intelligence! Our channel delves deep into the latest AI trends and technology, providing insights into cutting-edge AI tools, AI news, and breakthroughs in artificial general intelligence (AGI). We simplify complex concepts, making AI explained in a way that is accessible to everyone. At AI Uncovered, we're passionate about uncovering the most captivating stories in AI, including the marvels of ChatGPT and advancements by organizations like OpenAI. Our content spans a wide range of topics, from science news and AI innovations to in-depth discussions on the ethical implications of artificial intelligence. Our mission is to enlighten, inspire, and inform our audience about the rapidly evolving technology landscape. Whether you're a tech enthusiast, a professional seeking to stay ahead of AI trends, or someone curious about the future of artificial intelligence, AI Uncovered is the perfect place to expand your knowledge. Join us as we uncover the secrets behind AI tools and their potential to revolutionize our world. Subscribe to AI Uncovered and stay tuned for enlightening content that bridges the gap between AI novices and experts, covering AI news, AGI, ChatGPT, OpenAI, artificial intelligence, and more. Together, let's explore the limitless possibilities of technology and AI. Disclaimer: Some links included in this description might be affiliate links. If you purchase a product or service through the links that we provide, we may receive a small commission. There is no additional charge for you. Thank you for supporting AI Uncovered so we can continue to provide you with free, high-quality content.

Are people only building Saas? ( I will not promote )

I have been following a lot of entrepreneurs/builders for a while and it’s starting to look like everyone is building a Saas product ( backed by AI ofc ) I am just wondering if there’s anyone building something physical out there cause I don’t see enough of that recently

People are overthinking with digital products.

All you really need is a checkout link to start. I failed a lot of times. Literally I could build the whole landing page, admin panel, ai automation to handle moderation and content. After spending months in vacuum building more, more, more features. Launching and getting 0 customers in the end. You are literally just getting depressed. You know that feeling, right ? Me too. We missed one important step before building anything - ASKING. We need to ask more clients, users, and do our research based on Google Keywords, forums and subreddits. You probably won't do it. It is your choice. You have all rights to do it. Let me give one piece of advice, instead of building more features and spendings months on your MVP. Set a deadline in 2-4 weeks. Build it, launch it, and go live as soon as possible. You need to get a real feedback and face a reality. Most of the companies that you see, started with simple Excel file, Google Doc, or even paper with pen. Do you know why ? Because they didn't have anything in the beginning. No money, no customers, NOTHING. Remember that.

AI Might Be the Best Industry for Ambitious Lazy People i will not promote

Not here to promote, just talk about my experience with starting a new business. I'm not new to the game, so I was able to speed-run my new AI automation agency. I currently run a software company with a co-founder, and I recently decided to start a new AI and automation agency. I just had a private launch this week, and I already have a $2K client lined up, ready to buy, along with some other interested parties, as I have sales calls with them coming up. I found all of my leads after choosing a niche to focus on and using this tool I built that automatically scrapes IG data. My tool is “unique” because it automagically qualifies the leads with AI. It even has a custom frontend, and I used this tool as a case study to secure the client I have now, and I accomplished all of this in the span of about a week. Granted, I have a background in engineering, so picking up AI was easier for me, but anyone can do it. You can even use AI to learn AI. If you haven’t used AI in your business yet, I would strongly suggest getting into AI and automation. If you've been considering starting a business but don't know what business to start, take this as a sign to turn AI into a business. i will not promote

AI Might Be the Best Industry for Ambitious Lazy People i will not promote

Not here to promote, just talk about my experience with starting a new business. I'm not new to the game, so I was able to speed-run my new AI automation agency. I currently run a software company with a co-founder, and I recently decided to start a new AI and automation agency. I just had a private launch this week, and I already have a $2K client lined up, ready to buy, along with some other interested parties, as I have sales calls with them coming up. I found all of my leads after choosing a niche to focus on and using this tool I built that automatically scrapes IG data. My tool is “unique” because it automagically qualifies the leads with AI. It even has a custom frontend, and I used this tool as a case study to secure the client I have now, and I accomplished all of this in the span of about a week. Granted, I have a background in engineering, so picking up AI was easier for me, but anyone can do it. You can even use AI to learn AI. If you haven’t used AI in your business yet, I would strongly suggest getting into AI and automation. If you've been considering starting a business but don't know what business to start, take this as a sign to turn AI into a business. i will not promote

I am a 17-year-old who loves coding and AI, so I launched a non-profit to teach people how to create AI websites from scratch.

Nozomio - Learn AI modern web dev for free. https://preview.redd.it/4l9jxs6h032e1.png?width=2064&format=png&auto=webp&s=2132ace94bb936eb9fcb1134d5ef2eea3df77fb9

I created a tool which helps busy tech people to build their resume. one-click, just linkedIn profile, ATS-Complaint, DOCX, multi-layered prompts, Claude AI, ChatGPT, and FREE (for now).

someone's generated resume link: https://resumebro.com I haven't done any proper launch yet currently testing the waters so far it has helped me secure few profile views from recruiters on LinkedIn when I used the resume generated from it. Note: this only works on technical profiles - and only those profile having bit of information on their LinkedIn as it reads the whole LinkedIn profile and then works its magic.

Disorganized: The note taking app for busy people (no AI inside)

https://preview.redd.it/27qoz7ihlnpe1.png?width=1774&format=png&auto=webp&s=1658d7a4c619df46cd76c5ff639b6c6c7b65fc50 About one year ago I had enough and set out to create my own note taking app, and have been working on it in my spare time since summer. I had two main goals when creating Disorganized: \- Less friction If I'm walking around and a thought pop ups in my head there should be zero friction to writing it down. That's why Disorganized doesn't ask you to write a title, sort it into the correct folder, etc. You write exactly your thoughts and nothing else. \- A better solution than templates. I wanted one app that I could use to track my workouts, my recipes and one-off notes. Other apps accomplish this with templates but I find templates too rigid - I don't want to create a "recipe" template because a "recipe" is not always the same thing. It's usually a table of ingredients and some instructions in text, but other times it's multiple tables of ingredients, or something else entirely. Templates are too rigid. In Disorganized, you "clone" notes to create a new note with the same structure. This way, you can reuse previous set ups, but you're completely free to evolve your "template" as you go. Please try it out and tell me what you think! iOS, three months premium: https://apps.apple.com/redeem/?ctx=offercodes&id=6738280174&code=THREEMONTHS Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.disorganized.disorganized&pli=1 Use code "THREEMONTHS" at checkout for three months. Web version: https://app.getdisorganized.com/

A great use-case for OpenAI's ChatGPT that not many people are talking about: planning. This tool can write and schedule an entire business plan, with deliverables, in just a few seconds.

If you're yet to give ChatGPT a try, it's great fun - and could also be really helpful. And feel free to join us at r/AIforEntrepreneurs where we discuss stuff like this.

I am a 17-year-old who loves coding and AI, so I launched a non-profit to teach people how to create AI websites from scratch.

I made an AI agent to create blog posts from top posts on Reddit to automate my programatic SEO content marketing. Showed it a couple people. Now they want one for their small business! Excited to improve it and see where I can take it as a project.

Google AI Essentials

Google AI Essentials is a self-paced course designed to help people across roles and industries get essential AI skills to boost their productivity, zero experience required. The course is taught by AI experts at Google who are working to make the technology helpful for everyone.

Introduction to Deep Learning & Neural Networks with Keras

Looking to start a career in Deep Learning? Look no further. This course will introduce you to the field of deep learning and help you answer many questions that people are asking nowadays, like what is deep learning, and how do deep learning models compare to artificial neural networks? You will learn about the different deep learning models and build your first deep learning model using the Keras library.

Everybody sucks but me (a shitpost)

Honestly, I’m a god. My ideas and vision are unmatched. I have a new app idea every week, but I never work on them because that’s beneath me. In fact, I’ve never built anything before. Today is different. My superior mind came up with the best app idea ever. Are you ready to hear it? No, of course not ape. But I’ll tell you anyway: An AI-powered dating app for horses. Boom. 🤯🐎 I know you can’t even imagine it. But I’ve already started coding it and I’m coding it with ChatGPT4. Most of you poors can’t even afford 4. I don’t even need to talk to early users. Everyone has this problem. Obviously people are going to pay me for it - all I have to do is build it and they’ll be flocking to it. Easy money. I know, I know. I am a genius. Oh and your girl? You better make sure she doesn’t sign up. /s

Finally Launched My First App Without Any Coding Experience

About Myself I am a structural engineer that are taught to design buildings in the day and I have been dreaming forever to build a SaaS business to get out of the rat race. However, as a structural engineer, coding is definitely not something I am capable of doing (I have some simple knowledge, but its no way close to building an app) The Journey As I've mentioned, I always wanted to build a SaaS business because in my mind the business model is most attractive to me, where you only need to build once and can sell to millions. So I started off searching and exploring on the internet and my first ever "SaaS" was from Wordpress. I am buying plugin from other user and then pluggin into my own Wordpress website. It was a project management tool SaaS. I was so excited about the website and can't even sleep well at night because I'm just so hype about it. But, the reality is because this is my first ever business, I totally didn't realise about the importance of UI UX or my business differentiation, thinking that everyone will be as excited as I am. Then, I went deeper and deeper into the journey (I can write more about this in another post if anyone is interested) and finally landed on Flutterflow to create my first ever app. No Code Journey Thanks to no code builder, I never thought that a non-coder like me can ever create an app and got accepted by the App Store/Play Store. Since that I am using a low-code builder, for any specific requirement that I need that are not covered natively, I will just talk to ChatGPT and boom I pretty much got most of the answer I needed. About The App As someone that always try to keep track of my expenses, I never able to find an app that are simple and interesting enough for me to continue on the journey. I realise that I could have incorporate AI into this journey and hence there go, I created an AI Money Tracker. Let me introduce Rolly: AI Money Tracker - a new AI expense tracker where you can easily record your transactions just by chatting with our bot Rolly and it will automatically record and categorise the transaction into the most suitable category (you can also create any of your own category and it will also take care of it in consideration). I am not sharing the app link here to avoid getting ban, but feel free to search up Rolly: AI Money Tracker on either App Store on Play Store. My Learnings As someone that can't code and never imagine that I could create a production app by myself and publish it on to the App Store and Play Store. Since I am not making any money yet and just at the beginning of my entrepreneur journey, I can't give any substantial advice, all I can say is just my own learnings and feelings. My advice is if you have a dream of building a business, just go for it, don't worry about all the problems that you can think of to convince yourself not making the start at all. From my point of view, as long as you're not giving up everything (eg, putting yourself in huge debt etc), why don't just go for it and you've got nothing much to lose. You'll only lose if you never even get started. And also, I believe that creating an app is always the easiest step out of the entreprenuership journey, marketing and distribution is the key to success. Even though you've spent days and nights on it and it might mean everything to you, the truth is people don't really cares and you'll need to market for it. I am still in journey to learn how to do marketing, content, building a business and everything. I think this is just a very beginning of my journey and hopefully there's more interesting one to share further down the road.

I built something cool hehehe

So after busting my ass off for around 3 weeks and 200+ hours of development time, I finally launched a really cool no-code AI chatbot maker. It was such a huge work as it was something which was pretty complicated in general to build from scratch but I managed to pull it off anyway. How is it different from competition ? I address one pain point specifically: Existing tools are complicated as sh*t. They not only provide 1000000 useless features, but the UI has a million different buttons doing a million different things and it is soooooooo overwhelming. I have tried to make my tool EXTREMELY simple. The UI is really soothing and I got good feedback for it. What do you guys think ? Is it a dumb SaaS ? Or could it make some money ? Shall I try running it for profit, or shall I just sell it ? Will people even buy it lol ? Unfortunately I can’t post link or even pics here otherwise I would get kicked out lolol.

OMG - I'm a tech founder trying to promote my SAAS product and I'm like a deer in headlights!

I've been building a tool for agile project management for the past year or two and I think it is looking pretty good. I've got good feedback from agile leads and such and have adjusted the product accordingly and I think now it is solving the problem it is focused on. It isn't perfect technically and as I am a tech head and I love all the challenges of solving and building tricky software solutions it is very tempting to program and program and program. But I have to bite the bullet and get out of my comfort zone and get some customers! But I have no budget for marketing, and no acumen for it and I don't know where to start. I have researched forums, blogs, AI, etc. and there is a lot of advice, too much in fact. Every intro email or announcement text I write, I review it and rewrite it over and over as I am constantly wondering if it is too wordy, or doesn't focus on benefits, or whatever advice I read last. How do people just get on with it without doubting whether this wording is the most compelling, or the website design doesn't look clunky, or I'm not getting to the right people? The sales and marketing world is so much harder than coding, and at the same time much more squishy and ill defined :-) Can anyone out there relate, offer some advice, help?

Hot Take: Not all your startups need AI forced into them

I'm a final year Computer Engineering student, hence applying for jobs all around. There's this particular trend I've noticed with startups that are coming up these days. That is, even for the absolute basic stuff they'll use 'AI', and they'll think they built something 'revolutionary'. No. You're breaking your product in ways you don't realise. An example, that even some well established companies are guilty of: AI Chatbots You absolutely don't need them and it's an entire gimmick. If you really wanna implement a chatbot, connect the user to an actual person on your end, which I think is not possible if you're at a 'startup' stage. You'll need employees who can handle user queries in real time. If the user really is stuck let them use the 'Contact Us' page. A really close relative of mine is very vocal about the frustration he faces whenever he tries to use the AI Chatbot on any well known e-com website. The only case for AI Chatbot that makes sense is when it's directing the customer to an actual customer support rep if none of the AI's solutions is working for the customer. Even then, implementing a search page for FAQ is extremely easy and user friendly. Another example: AI Interviewer I recently interviewed for a startup, and their whole interviewing process was AI'zed?!?! No real person at the other end, I was answering to their questions which were in video format. They even had a 'mascot' / 'AI interviewer' avatar designed by an AI (AI-ception???). This mascot just text-to-speech'ed all the questions for me to rewind and hear what I missed again. And I had to record video and audio to answer these questions on their platform itself. The entire interview process just could've been a questionnaire, or if you're really concerned on the integrity of the interviewee, just take a few minutes out of your oh-so-busy schedule as a startup owner. Atleast for hiring employees who would make the most impact on your product going ahead. I say the most impact, because (atleast as a developer) the work done by these employees would define how robust your product is, and/or how easily other features can be integrated into the codebase. Trust me, refactoring code later on would only cost you time and money. These resources would rather be more useful in other departments of your startup. The only use case for an AI Interviewer I see is for preparing for an actual interview, provided that feedback is given to the user at the earliest, which you don't need to worry about as a startup owner. So yeah, you're probably better off without integrating AI in your product. Thank you for reading. TLDR; The title; I know AI is the new thing and gets everyone drooling and all, but for the love of God, just focus on what your startup does best and put real people behind it; Integrating AI without human intervention is as good as a broken product; Do your hiring yourself, or through real people, emphasizing on the fact that the people you hire at an early stage will define your growth ahead;

Anyone finding that they just don't NEED to add more Employees anymore? (I will not promote)

A friend of mine who was looking for work asked me if we were hiring and I responded "You know, it's weird but all of our growth goals don't seem to map back to hiring people anymore." This isn't about the economy or growth goals. It's a really fascinating shift in focus and costs for startups. My gut reaction is that I HATE the idea of not creating more jobs. In my career I've hired thousands of people, and I've always prided myself on job creation. We just sold a company that employed 200 people last year, and I'm proud of the work we were able to create. What's interesting is that I simply don't feel like we NEED to like we used to. As we're looking at all of our growth goals, for the first time I'm not assigning FTEs to them. Nearly everything we're doing is actually reducing the need for more humans, not adding them - and we're not even trying to reduce the need. Obviously the timing of AI has had a major impact. Product - Our team is shipping more code than ever before, and even our designers who have never touched code are shipping final code. If we doubled the size of the team, it would make no difference (this is a big deal considering the historical cost here). Marketing - So many aspects of our marketing are getting automated and streamlined, to the point where even a single FTE can create a massive amount of reach across channels. Support - Our Success team is able to effectively respond to tickets in a fraction of the time, which essentially doubles their capacity without adding any more staff. Management - With less staff we need less managers, which are a big expense, but it also means reporting and decisions are more streamlined, which is a positive. But it also means those positions simply don't get created like they used to. I think this is a big deal for the younger startups because it translates into needing less capital (or none!) which provides for more ownership and agency. Clearly we still need some folks to build out the core team, but that's very different than a massive staffing line item. Anyone else here finding the same trend? Opposite? I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I'd love to hear how other Founders are processing this.

I spent 6 months on building a tool, and got 0 zero users. Here is my story.

Edit Thank you all so much for your time reading my story. Your support, feedback, criticism, and skepticism; all helped me a lot, and I couldn't appreciate it enough \^\_\^ TL;DR I spent 6 months on a tool that currently has 0 users. Below is what I learned during my journey, sharing because I believe most mistakes are easily avoidable. Do not overestimate your product and assume it will be an exception to fundamental principles. Principles are there for a reason. Always look for validation before you start. Avoid building products with a low money-to-effort ratio/in very competitive fields. Unless you have the means, you probably won't make it. Pick a problem space, pick your target audience, and talk to them before thinking about a solution. Identify and match their pain points. Only then should you think of a solution. If people are not overly excited or willing to pay in advance for a discounted price, it might be a sign to rethink. Sell one and only one feature at a time. Avoid everything else. If people don't pay for that one core feature, no secondary feature will change their mind. Always spend twice as much time marketing as you do building. You will not get users if they don't know it exists. Define success metrics ("1000 users in 3 months" or "$6000 in the account at the end of 6 months") before you start. If you don't meet them, strongly consider quitting the project. If you can't get enough users to keep going, nothing else matters. VALIDATION, VALIDATION, VALIDATION. Success is not random, but most of our first products will not make a success story. Know when to admit failure, and move on. Even if a product of yours doesn't succeed, what you learned during its journey will turn out to be invaluable for your future. My story So, this is the story of a product, Summ, that I’ve been working on for the last 6 months. As it's the first product I’ve ever built, after watching you all from the sidelines, I have learned a lot, made many mistakes, and did only a few things right. Just sharing what I’ve learned and some insights from my journey so far. I hope that this post will help you avoid the mistakes I made — most of which I consider easily avoidable — while you enjoy reading it, and get to know me a little bit more 🤓. A slow start after many years Summ isn’t the first product I really wanted to build. Lacking enough dev skills to even get started was a huge blocker for so many years. In fact, the first product I would’ve LOVED to build was a smart personal shopping assistant. I had this idea 4 years ago; but with no GPT, no coding skills, no technical co-founder, I didn’t have the means to make it happen. I still do not know if such a tool exists and is good enough. All I wanted was a tool that could make data-based predictions about when to buy stuff (“buy a new toothpaste every three months”) and suggest physical products that I might need or be strongly interested in. AFAIK, Amazon famously still struggles with the second one. Fast-forward a few years, I learned the very basics of HTML, CSS, and Vanilla JS. Still was not there to build a product; but good enough to code my design portfolio from scratch. Yet, I couldn’t imagine myself building a product using Vanilla JS. I really hated it, I really sucked at it. So, back to tutorial hell, and to learn about this framework I just heard about: React.React introduced so many new concepts to me. “Thinking in React” is a phrase we heard a lot, and with quite good reasons. After some time, I was able to build very basic tutorial apps, both in React, and React Native; but I have to say that I really hated coding for mobile. At this point, I was already a fan of productivity apps, and had a concept for a time management assistant app in my design portfolio. So, why not build one? Surely, it must be easy, since every coding tutorial starts with a todo app. ❌ WRONG! Building a basic todo app is easy enough, but building one good enough for a place in the market was a challenge I took and failed. I wasted one month on that until I abandoned the project for good. Even if I continued working on it, as the productivity landscape is overly competitive, I wouldn’t be able to make enough money to cover costs, assuming I make any. Since I was (and still am) in between jobs, I decided to abandon the project. 👉 What I learned: Do not start projects with a low ratio of money to effort and time. Example: Even if I get 500 monthly users, 200 of which are paid users (unrealistically high number), assuming an average subscription fee of $5/m (such apps are quite cheap, mostly due to the high competition), it would make me around $1000 minus any occurring costs. Any founder with a product that has 500 active users should make more. Even if it was relatively successful, due to the high competition, I wouldn’t make any meaningful money. PS: I use Todoist today. Due to local pricing, I pay less than $2/m. There is no way I could beat this competitive pricing, let alone the app itself. But, somehow, with a project that wasn’t even functional — let alone being an MVP — I made my first Wi-Fi money: Someone decided that the domain I preemptively purchased is worth something. By this point, I had already abandoned the project, certainly wasn’t going to renew the domain, was looking for a FT job, and a new project that I could work on. And out of nowhere, someone hands me some free money — who am I not to take it? Of course, I took it. The domain is still unused, no idea why 🤔. Ngl, I still hate the fact that my first Wi-Fi money came from this. A new idea worth pursuing? Fast-forward some weeks now. Around March, I got this crazy idea of building an email productivity tool. We all use emails, yet we all hate them. So, this must be fixed. Everyone uses emails, in fact everyone HAS TO use emails. So, I just needed to build a tool and wait for people to come. This was all, really. After all, the problem space is huge, there is enough room for another product, everyone uses emails, no need for any further validation, right? ❌ WRONG ONCE AGAIN! We all hear from the greatest in the startup landscape that we must validate our ideas with real people, yet at least some of us (guilty here 🥸) think that our product will be hugely successful and prove them to be an exception. Few might, but most are not. I certainly wasn't. 👉 Lesson learned: Always validate your ideas with real people. Ask them how much they’d pay for such a tool (not if they would). Much better if they are willing to pay upfront for a discount, etc. But even this comes later, keep reading. I think the difference between “How much” and “If” is huge for two reasons: (1) By asking them for “How much”, you force them to think in a more realistic setting. (2) You will have a more realistic idea on your profit margins. Based on my competitive analysis, I already had a solution in my mind to improve our email usage standards and email productivity (huge mistake), but I did my best to learn about their problems regarding those without pushing the idea too hard. The idea is this: Generate concise email summaries with suggested actions, combine them into one email, and send it at their preferred times. Save as much as time the AI you end up with allows. After all, everyone loves to save time. So, what kind of validation did I seek for? Talked with only a few people around me about this crazy, internet-breaking idea. The responses I got were, now I see, mediocre; no one got excited about it, just said things along the lines of “Cool idea, OK”. So, any reasonable person in this situation would think “Okay, not might not be working”, right? Well, I did not. I assumed that they were the wrong audience for this product, and there was this magical land of user segments waiting eagerly for my product, yet unknowingly. To this day, I still have not reached this magical place. Perhaps, it didn’t exist in the first place. If I cannot find it, whether it exists or not doesn’t matter. I am certainly searching for it. 👉 What I should have done: Once I decide on a problem space (time management, email productivity, etc.), I should decide on my potential user segments, people who I plan to sell my product to. Then I should go talk to those people, ask them about their pains, then get to the problem-solving/ideation phase only later. ❗️ VALIDATION COMES FROM THE REALITY OUTSIDE. What validation looks like might change from product to product; but what invalidation looks like is more or less the same for every product. Nico Jeannen told me yesterday “validation = money in the account” on Twitter. This is the ultimate form of validation your product could get. If your product doesn’t make any money, then something is invalidated by reality: Your product, you, your idea, who knows? So, at this point, I knew a little bit of Python from spending some time in tutorial hell a few years ago, some HTML/CSS/JS, barely enough React to build a working app. React could work for this project, but I needed easy-to-implement server interactivity. Luckily, around this time, I got to know about this new gen of indie hackers, and learned (but didn’t truly understand) about their approach to indie hacking, and this library called Nextjs. How good Next.js still blows my mind. So, I was back to tutorial hell once again. But, this time, with a promise to myself: This is the last time I would visit tutorial hell. Time to start building this "ground-breaking idea" Learning the fundamentals of Next.js was easier than learning of React unsurprisingly. Yet, the first time I managed to run server actions on Next.js was one of the rarest moments that completely blew my mind. To this day, I reject the idea that it is something else than pure magic under its hood. Did I absolutely need Nextjs for this project though? I do not think so. Did it save me lots of time? Absolutely. Furthermore, learning Nextjs will certainly be quite helpful for other projects that I will be tackling in the future. Already got a few ideas that might be worth pursuing in the head in case I decide to abandon Summ in the future. Fast-forward few weeks again: So, at this stage, I had a barely working MVP-like product. Since the very beginning, I spent every free hour (and more) on this project as speed is essential. But, I am not so sure it was worth it to overwork in retrospect. Yet, I know I couldn’t help myself. Everything is going kinda smooth, so what’s the worst thing that could ever happen? Well, both Apple and Google announced their AIs (Apple Intelligence and Google Gemini, respectively) will have email summarization features for their products. Summarizing singular emails is no big deal, after all there were already so many similar products in the market. I still think that what truly matters is a frictionless user experience, and this is why I built this product in a certain way: You spend less than a few minutes setting up your account, and you get to enjoy your email summaries, without ever visiting its website again. This is still a very cool concept I really like a lot. So, at this point: I had no other idea that could be pursued, already spent too much time on this project. Do I quit or not? This was the question. Of course not. I just have to launch this product as quickly as possible. So, I did something right, a quite rare occurrence I might say: Re-planned my product, dropped everything secondary to the core feature immediately (save time on reading emails), tried launching it asap. 👉 Insight: Sell only one core feature at one time. Drop anything secondary to this core feature. Well, my primary occupation is product design. So one would expect that a product I build must have stellar design. I considered any considerable time spent on design at this stage would be simply wasted. I still think this is both true and wrong: True, because if your product’s core benefits suck, no one will care about your design. False, because if your design looks amateurish, no one will trust you and your product. So, I always targeted an average level design with it and the way this tool works made it quite easy as I had to design only 2 primary pages: Landing page and user portal (which has only settings and analytics pages). However, even though I knew spending time on design was not worth much of my time, I got a bit “greedy”: In fact, I redesigned those pages three times, and still ended up with a so-so design that I am not proud of. 👉 What I would do differently: Unless absolutely necessary, only one iteration per stage as long as it works. This, in my mind, applies to everything. If your product’s A feature works, then no need to rewrite it from scratch for any reason, or even refactor it. When your product becomes a success, and you absolutely need that part of your codebase to be written, do so, but only then. Ready to launch, now is th etime for some marketing, right? By July 26, I already had a “launchable” product that barely works (I marked this date on a Notion docs, this is how I know). Yet, I had spent almost no time on marketing, sales, whatever. After all, “You build and they will come”. Did I know that I needed marketing? Of course I did, but knowingly didn’t. Why, you might ask. Well, from my perspective, it had to be a dev-heavy product; meaning that you spend most of your time on developing it, mostly coding skills. But, this is simply wrong. As a rule of thumb, as noted by one of the greatests, Marc Louvion, you should spend at least twice of the building time on marketing. ❗️ Time spent on building \* 2 people don’t know your product > they don’t use your product > you don’t get users > you don’t make money Easy as that. Following the same reasoning, a slightly different approach to planning a project is possible. Determine an approximate time to complete the project with a high level project plan. Let’s say 6 months. By the reasoning above, 2 months should go into building, and 4 into marketing. If you need 4 months for building instead of 2, then you need 8 months of marketing, which makes the time to complete the project 12 months. If you don’t have that much time, then quit the project. When does a project count as completed? Well, in reality, never. But, I think we have to define success conditions even before we start for indie projects and startups; so we know when to quit when they are not met. A success condition could look like “Make $6000 in 12 months” or “Have 3000 users in 6 months”. It all depends on the project. But, once you set it, it should be set in stone: You don’t change it unless absolutely necessary. I suspect there are few principles that make a solopreneur successful; and knowing when to quit and when to continue is definitely one of them. Marc Louvion is famously known for his success, but he got there after failing so many projects. To my knowledge, the same applies to Nico Jeannen, Pieter Levels, or almost everyone as well. ❗️ Determining when to continue even before you start will definitely help in the long run. A half-aed launch Time-leap again. Around mid August, I “soft launched” my product. By soft launch, I mean lazy marketing. Just tweeting about it, posting it on free directories. Did I get any traffic? Surely I did. Did I get any users? Nope. Only after this time, it hit me: “Either something is wrong with me, or with this product” Marketing might be a much bigger factor for a project’s success after all. Even though I get some traffic, not convincing enough for people to sign up even for a free trial. The product was still perfect in my eyes at the time (well, still is ^(\_),) so the right people are not finding my product, I thought. Then, a question that I should have been asking at the very first place, one that could prevent all these, comes to my mind: “How do even people search for such tools?” If we are to consider this whole journey of me and my so-far-failed product to be an already destined failure, one metric suffices to show why. Search volume: 30. Even if people have such a pain point, they are not looking for email summaries. So, almost no organic traffic coming from Google. But, as a person who did zero marketing on this or any product, who has zero marketing knowledge, who doesn’t have an audience on social media, there is not much I could do. Finally, it was time to give up. Or not… In my eyes, the most important element that makes a founder (solo or not) successful (this, I am not by any means) is to solve problems. ❗️ So, the problem was this: “People are not finding my product by organic search” How do I make sure I get some organic traffic and gets more visibility? Learn digital marketing and SEO as much as I can within very limited time. Thankfully, without spending much time, I came across Neil Patel's YT channel, and as I said many times, it is an absolute gold mine. I learned a lot, especially about the fundamentals, and surely it will be fruitful; but there is no magic trick that could make people visit your website. SEO certainly helps, but only when people are looking for your keywords. However, it is truly a magical solution to get in touch with REAL people that are in your user segments: 👉 Understand your pains, understand their problems, help them to solve them via building products. I did not do this so far, have to admit. But, in case you would like to have a chat about your email usage, and email productivity, just get in touch; I’d be delighted to hear about them. Getting ready for a ProductHunt launch The date was Sept 1. And I unlocked an impossible achievement: Running out of Supabase’s free plan’s Egres limit while having zero users. I was already considering moving out of their Cloud server and managing a Supabase CLI service on my Hetzner VPS for some time; but never ever suspected that I would have to do this quickly. The cheapest plan Supabase offers is $25/month; yet, at that point, I am in between jobs for such a long time, basically broke, and could barely afford that price. One or two months could be okay, but why pay for it if I will eventually move out of their Cloud service? So, instead of paying $25, I spent two days migrating out of Supabase Cloud. Worth my time? Definitely not. But, when you are broke, you gotta do stupid things. This was the first time that I felt lucky to have zero users: I have no idea how I would manage this migration if I had any. I think this is one of the core tenets of an indie hacker: Controlling their own environment. I can’t remember whose quote this is, but I suspect it was Naval: Entrepreneurs have an almost pathological need to control their own fate. They will take any suffering if they can be in charge of their destiny, and not have it in somebody else’s hands. What’s truly scary is, at least in my case, we make people around us suffer at the expense of our attempting to control our own fates. I know this period has been quite hard on my wife as well, as I neglected her quite a bit, but sadly, I know that this will happen again. It is something that I can barely help with. Still, so sorry. After working the last two weeks on a ProductHunt Launch, I finally launched it this Tuesday. Zero ranking, zero new users, but 36 kind people upvoted my product, and many commented and provided invaluable feedback. I couldn't be more grateful for each one of them 🙏. Considering all these, what lies in the future of Summ though? I have no idea, to be honest. On one hand, I have zero users, have no job, no income. So, I need a way to make money asap. On the other hand, the whole idea of it revolves around one core premise (not an assumption) that I am not so willing to share; and I couldn’t have more trust in it. This might not be the best iteration of it, however I certainly believe that email usage is one of the best problem spaces one could work on. 👉 But, one thing is for certain: I need to get in touch with people, and talk with them about this product I built so far. In fact, this is the only item on my agenda. Nothing else will save my brainchild <3. Below are some other insights and notes that I got during my journey; as they do not 100% fit into this story, I think it is more suitable to list them here. I hope you enjoyed reading this. Give Summ a try, it comes with a generous free trial, no credit card required. Some additional notes and insights: Project planning is one of the most underestimated skills for solopreneurs. It saves you enormous time, and helps you to keep your focus up. Building B2C products beats building B2B products. Businesses are very willing to pay big bucks if your product helps them. On the other hand, spending a few hours per user who would pay $5/m probably is not worth your time. It doesn’t matter how brilliant your product is if no one uses it. If you cannot sell a product in a certain category/niche (or do not know how to sell it), it might be a good idea not to start a project in it. Going after new ideas and ventures is quite risky, especially if you don’t know how to market it. On the other hand, an already established category means that there is already demand. Whether this demand is sufficient or not is another issue. As long as there is enough demand for your product to fit in, any category/niche is good. Some might be better, some might be worse. Unless you are going hardcore B2B, you will need people to find your product by means of organic search. Always conduct thorough keyword research as soon as possible.

How I made a high tech salary in my first selling month

For over 7 years I worked as a full-stack developer, helping other companies bring their ideas to life. But one day, I thought “Why not try making my own dream come true?”. That’s when I decided to quit my job and start my own journey to becoming an entrepreneur. At first, it wasn’t easy. I didn’t make any money for months and had no idea where to start. I felt lost. Then, I decided to focus on something popular and trending. AI was everywhere, and ChatGPT was the most used AI platform. So I looked into it and I found the OpenAI community forum where people had been asking for features that weren’t being added. That gave me an idea. Why not build those features myself? I created a Chrome extension and I worked on some of the most requested features, like: Downloading the advanced voice mode and messages as MP3 Adding folders to organize chats Saving and reusing prompts Pinning important chats Exporting chats to TXT/JSON files Deleting or archiving multiple chats at once Making chat history searches faster and better It took me about a week to build the first version, and when I published it, the response was incredible. People loved it! Some even said things like, “You’re a lifesaver!” That’s when I realized I had something that could not only help people but also turn into a real business. I kept the first version free to see how people would respond. Many users have been downloading my extension, which prompted Chrome to review it to determine if it qualified for the featured badge. I received the badge, and it has significantly boosted traffic to my extension ever since. After all the positive feedback, I launched a paid version one month ago. A few minutes after publishing it, I made my first sale! That moment was so exciting, and it motivated me to keep going. I already have over 4,000 users and have made more than $4,500 in my first selling month. I’ve decided to release 1-2 new features every month to keep improving the extension based on what users ask for. I also created the same extension for Firefox and Edge users because many people have been asking for it! I also started a Reddit community, where I share updates, sales, discount codes, and ideas for new features. It’s been awesome to connect with users directly and get their feedback. Additionally, I’ve started working on another extension for Claude, which I’m hoping will be as successful as this one. My message to you is this: never give up on your dreams. It might feel impossible at first, but with patience, hard work, and some creativity, you can make it happen. I hope this inspires you to go after what you want. Good luck to all of us!

I'm a dev with zero fucking ideas. Help?

Long-time lurker, first-time poster here. I'm hoping you guys can help me out. I consider myself an above average engineer. With over 8 years of industry experience, I can whip out an MVP fast and iterate quickly. I love coding and learning new tech, but here's the issue—I've got absolutely no clue what to build. It's like I'm the least creative person I know, and can't find even one problem to solve. I've tried everything I can think of: Scrolling through ProductHunt until my eyes bled Asking non-tech friends about their "pain points" Stalking Twitter/X to see what people are building Experimenting with new AI tech to explore possibilities I've even attempted to build products. Almost 6 months ago, I started working on an AI conversation app to help non-native speakers like myself improve their English. But I soon realized there were already hundreds of apps doing this, and doing it much better than I could. I abandoned the project, figuring it wasn't unique enough. Same story with a couple of other projects that I started working on and abandoned later. So my question is how the heck you all come up with ideas? Any advice, commiseration, or hell—even random ideas you don’t want to build—would be greatly appreciated.

Will AI Tools Make No-Code Platforms Obsolete?

I’ve noticed more non-technical people are building impressive solutions with AI-driven tools like Cursor and Claude. It got me thinking: will no-code platforms like Bubble and Webflow still be relevant in the future? If AI is making it so easy for people to create solutions without knowing how to code. Long-term will there still be a use case for no-code platforms, or will they evolve to behave like Cursor? Curious to hear what you think

What questions to ask to evaluate an offer from start up?

Hello! I am presently working working as a Data Scientist with a medium sized company. Last year my boss left the company to start his own. Very recently his non-solicitation clause expired, and he asked me to join his startup. While I know almost everything about the product idea, and the technical aspect of the startup - I have very less information on more critical points like funding, equity sharing, etc. He has made a verbal unofficial offer, and I have asked for a week to prepare my list of questions for him for me to be able to evaluate his offer. Since I have no knowledge of the startup scene, I would like some help regarding the questions I should put forward to him. Mentioned below are what I know so far and the offer: The company was started by two people, both working full time on it. I would be the third person on the team. The startup aims to introduce AI in a field which has lagged behind in the introduction of technology by at least 2 decades. The big players in this field are conservative, but now they are opening up towards embracing new technology. Personally I have confidence in their idea, and feel this will be a sustainable and profitable company. The offered salary is about 60% of what I make right now. The equity offered is 2%. I do not know the details of the funding they have received so far or the equity split. Any pointers in helping me frame my questions for the evaluation of the offer would be very helpful! Thank you

Zero To One [Book Review]

If you don't feel like reading - check out the video here ##Introduction The more I read into Peter Thiel's background, the more ridiculous it seems.. He’s been involved in controversies over: Racism, Sexism, and, [Radical Right wing libertarianism.] (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-21/the-strange-politics-of-peter-thiel-trump-s-most-unlikely-supporter) He’s built a tech company that helps the NSA spy on the world. He supported Donald Trumps presidential campaign. He’s funding research on immortality And to top it off, he helped bankrupt online media company and blog network Gawker by funding Hulk Hogan’s sex tape lawsuit - after a report of his rumoured Homosexuality rattled his chain… Zero to One clearly reflects his unique attitude and doesn't pull any punches with a genuinely interesting point of view, that has clearly worked in the past, to the tune of almost 3 billion USD. But at times, his infatuation with the All American attitude is a little much…and, quite frankly, he’s not the kind of guy I could sit and have a pint with…without grinding my teeth anyway. The content is adapted from Blake Masters' lecture notes from Thiel's 2012 Stanford Course. This definitely helped keep the book concise and fast paced, at least compared to other books I’ve reviewed. The type of content is also quite varied, with a good spread from completely abstract theories — like the Technology vs. Globalisation concept, where the book get's it's title — to practical examples such as the analysis of personalities in chapter 14, "The Founders Paradox" covering Elvis Presley, Sean Parker, Lady Gaga and Bill Gates to name a few. ###Pros Monopolies To most people a monopoly is a negative thing. But while perfect competition can drive down costs and benefit the consumer - competition is bad for business. In fact, in Thiel's opinion, every startup should aim to be a monopoly or, as he puts it: Monopoly is the condition of every successful business. I like his honesty about it. While I’m not sure about the morality of encouraging monopolies at a large scale, I can see the benefit of thinking that way when developing a startup. When you're small, you can’t afford to compete. The best way to avoid competition is to build something nobody can compete with. The concept is summed up nicely at the end of chapter 3: Tolstoy opens Anna Karenina by observing: ‘All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.’ Business is the opposite. All happy companies are different: each one earns a monopoly by solving a unique problem. All failed companies are the same: they failed to escape competition. Pareto The Pareto Law, which you might remember as the 80/20 rule in Tim Ferris’ The Four Hour Work Week, is often used synonymously with the power law of distribution, and shows up everywhere. Thiel refers to it in his section on The Power Law of Venture Capital. If Tim Ferris recommends identifying and removing the 20% of things that take 80% of your effort - Thiel recommends finding the 20% of investments that make 80% of your return. Anything else is a waste. Soberingly, he also suggests that the Pareto Law means: ...you should not necessarily start your own company, even if you are extraordinarily talented. But to me this seems more like a venture capitalists problem, than an entrepreneurs problem - Personally, I believe there’s far more benefit in starting up your own company that purely profit. ###Cons Man and machine? Content-wise, there is very little to dislike in this book. As long as you accept that the book is written specifically for startups - where anything short of exponential growth is considered a failure - it’s exceptionally on point. However, there are a couple sections dotted throughout the book where opinion and wild speculation began to creep in. Chapter 12 is a good example of this entitled: Man and Machine. It’s a short chapter, 12 pages in total, and Thiel essentially preaches and speculates about the impact of better technology and strong AI. I like to dog ear pages with interesting or useful content so I can come back later, but this entire chapter remains untouched. America, fuck yeah! It would be really difficult for a personality as pungent as Theil's to go entirely unnoticed in a book like this, and indeed it breaks through every now and then. I only had a feint idea of Thiel's personality before I read the book, but having read up on his background, I’m actually surprised the book achieves such a neutral, if pragmatic, tone. Pretty early on in the book however, we are introduced to Thiel's concept of Economic Optimism and quite frankly the whole of chapter 6 should have been printed on star spangled, red white and blue pages. I’m not necessarily against the egotistic American spirit but when Thiel writes, in relation to European Pessimism: the US treasury prints ‘in god we trust’ on the dollar; the ECB might as well print ‘kick the can down the road’ on the euro I can smell the bacon double cheese burgers, with those tiny little American flags from here. Ooh Rah! ###TL;DR (a.k.a: Conclusion) Overall, however, I really did enjoy this book and I can see myself coming back to it. Peter Thiel IS controversial, but he has also been undeniably successful with a career punctuated by bold business decisions. The ideas in the book reflect this mind set well. Yes, he backed Trump, be he also (sadly) backed the winner.

The Drawing of the Three - Once you look through the veil, nothing is the same again. (I will not promote)

Originally published Nov 5, 2024 In my last post, I talked about assembling a series of filters to use to view the startup landscape, which led me to a few conclusions about what opportunities I should pursue. What did I see through those filters? What I saw through the moire pattern of those two lists overlaid by one another is what I think will be the third great monetization strategy for the internet, matching the pattern of: web1 => Ad monetization web2 => Subscription monetization web3 => For AI, neither of those work anymore, which demands something new. But what? Well that’s the important part, isn’t it? Should I just up and tell you? Yawn. The climax of a movie is at the climax, if they tell you the crux at the beginning, it’s a lot less fun (usually). The standard bearer for web1 and ads was Google (with countless followers), and essentially every website adopted that model for their first pass at content monetization. Google has been… let’s call it fairly successful… so it’s not a bad way to look at things. How many websites live and die by selling advertising? The standard bearers for web2 and subscriptions were Salesforce (for B2B SaaS) and Netflix (for B2C SaaS), with countless followers, to the extent that SaaS has been the dominant startup monetization thesis for the last 15+ years. It’s more old and tired by now than most American politicians, but how many websites live and die by people entering payment details for a monthly or annual subscription? Evidence proves those models for web1 and web2 worked well enough that countless businesses depend on them, and countless fortunes have been made and lost surfing the waves, or crashing against the shorelines, of ads and subs. But it’s also apparent (to me, at least) that now that AI is the dominant startup thesis, neither ads nor subs are going to prevail in an AI-centered world, and for one simple reason: Those monetization strategies are for humans, and AI bots are not humans. Changing Environments Require Changing Strategies Every so often, there’s a fundamental shift that demands everything in the ecosystem adapt to a new habitation strategy to survive. We’ve seen this repeatedly across Earth’s ecology (for instance, introducing free oxygen to the atmosphere, producing respiration while destroying all the life forms that existed before oxygen permeated the atmosphere), and across human society (for example, how nuclear bombs changed war, and how drones are changing it again, for less violent examples, consider the adoption of computers and the subsequent adoption of smartphones). Now the ecosystem of the internet has changed irrevocably, opening up countless new and interesting niches to occupy. Humans may see an ad and buy something stupid (or, occasionally, not-stupid), but an AI won’t unless its programmed to. And subscriptions are designed for humans to consume content at a human rate, not for an AI that can choke down an entire database of content (whatever it may be) at whatever speed the servers can manage. Changing conditions require changing strategies. It was clear to me that: The introduction of AI bots to the internet ecosystem was, is, and will be massively disruptive for a very long time The internet population of bots already exceeds humans and is growing faster than the human population The two dominant monetization strategies are not relevant to bots That disruption of expectations across the ecosystem demands a third strategy, a new strategy to handle a massive change in an existing system. And that strategy needs to accommodate, support, and monetize the new demands from the vast armies of new participants in the internet ecology. Therefore, a method that converts bots from an expense into a revenue source would become a dominant monetization strategy, and therefore whoever owns that strategy will be a dominant player in the internet ecosystem. Set the realization of semi-practical, semi-useful AI against a backdrop of technology cycles that have, in the distant past (in internet terms) produced ads and subs, and more recently produced enormous investment into fintech and crypto, I started to see a path that felt like it would grow over time to become a new monetization strategy that works in the AI ecosystem. Sun Tzu had a couple drinks, saw a couple things… There’s at least, and possibly only, two things I know about fighting: You cannot fight the tide, and it’s much harder to fight an uphill battle. If my whole thesis on this go-around was to go with the flow, and that trickle of insight was leading me from my overlook along a roaring flow of cash coursing through a valley filled with AI startups, where exactly would it lead me? Most rivers lead to the sea eventually, but they can take winding paths, and sometimes the quickest route from the mountain to the sea isn’t to follow the river, but to understand where the river leads and go there instead. Getting a view from on high can save you a lot of time on your journey. But before I get to where the path has led (or is leading) that will explain the objective I’ve identified, and the deliverables I have to produce to reach it, let’s talk about a few of the steps on the path I’ve been taking that highlight the process I followed. I figure if I explain the steps I’m taking, as I’m taking them, it may be easier for people who haven’t trod this route before to follow me and understand how to carve their own course towards their own objectives. And maybe the real treasure will be the friends we make along the way. (I will not promote)

Referral program - what would you recommend?

Hi everyone, We’ve developed a platform that uses AI to help users find and apply for grants. After spending quite a bit on marketing, we discovered that warm introductions are far more effective for us than paid ads. That got us thinking: instead of spending our budget on Google Ads, would it make sense to give it directly to the people who bring in customers through referrals? Do any of you have experience with referral programs? Which tools or platforms would you recommend for setting one up? Thanks!

I studied how 7 Founders found their first 100 customers for their businesses. Summarizing it here!

I am learning marketing, and so I combed through the internet to find specific advice that helped founders reach 100 users and not random Google answers. Here’s what I found: Llama Life by Marie Marie founder of Llama Life, a productivity app ($51.4K+ revenue) got her first 100 users using Snowballing effect. She shared great advice that I want to add here verbatim, “Need to think about what you have that you can leverage based on your current situation. eg..When you have no customers, think about where you can post to get the 1st customer eg Product Hunt. If you do well on PH, say you get #3 product of the day, then you post somewhere else saying ‘I got #3 product of the day’.. to get your next few customers. Maybe that post is on reddit with some learnings that you found. If the reddit post does well, then you might post it on Twitter, saying reddit did well and what learnings you got from that etc. or even if it doesn’t do well you can still post about it.” Another tip she shared is to build related products that get more viral than the product itself. These are small stand-alone sites that would appeal to the same target audience, but by nature, are more shareable. On these sites, you can mention your startup like: ‘brought to you by Llama Life’ and then provide a link to the main website if someone is interested. If one of those gets viral or ranks on Google, you’ll have a passive traffic source. Scraping bee by Pierre Pierre, founder of Scraping Bee, a web scraping tool has now reached $1.5M ARR. Pierre and his cofounder Kevin started with 10 Free Beta Users in 2019, and after 6 months asked them to take a paid subscription if they wanted to continue using the product. That’s how they got their first user within 50 minutes of that email. Then they listed it on dozens of startup directories but their core strategy was writing the best possible content for their target audience — Developers. 3 very successful pieces of content that worked were : A small tutorial on how to scrape single-page application An extensive general guide about web scraping without getting blocked A complete introduction to web scraping with Python They didn’t do content marketing for the sake of content marketing but deep-dived into the value they were providing their customer. One of these got 70K visits, and all this together got them to over 100 users. WePay by Bill Clerico Bill Clerico left his cushy corporate job to build WePay which was then acquired for $400M got his first users by using his app. He got his first users by using his app! The app was for group payments. So he hosted a Poker tournament at his house and collected payments only with his app. Then they hosted a barbecue for fraternity treasurers at San Jose State & helped them do their annual dues collection. Good old word-of-mouth marketing, that however, started with an event where they used what they made! RealWorld by Genevieve Genevieve — Founder and CEO of Realworld stands by the old-school advice of value giving. RealWorld is an app that helps GenZ navigate adulthood. So, before launching their direct-to-consumer platform, they had an educational course that they sold to college career centers and students. They already had a pipeline of adults who turned to Realworld for their adulting challenges. From there, she gained her first 100 followers. Saner dot ai by Austin Austin got 100 users from Reddit for his startup Saner.ai. Reddit hates advertising, and so his tips to market your startup on Reddit is to Write value-driven posts on your niche. Instead of writing posts, find posts where people are looking for solutions DM people facing problems that your SaaS solves. But instead of selling, ask about their problem to see if your product is a good fit Heartfelt posts about why you built it, aren’t gonna cut it To find posts and people, search Reddit with relevant keywords and join all the subreddits A Stock Portfolio Newsletter A financial investor got his first 100 paid newsletter subscribers for his stock portfolio newsletter. His tips : Don’t reinvent the wheel. Work what’s already working. He saw a company making $500M+ from stock picking newsletter, so decided to try that. Find the gaps in “already working” and leverage them. That newsletter did not have portfolios of advisors writing them. That was his USP. He added his own portfolio to his newsletter. Now to 100 users, he partnered with a guy running an investing website and getting good traffic. That guy got a cut of his revenue, in exchange. That one simple step got him to 100 users. Hypefury by Yannick and Samy Yannick and Samy from Hypefury, Twitter and Social Media Automation tool got their first beta testers and users from a paid community. They launched Hypefury there and asked if someone wanted to try it. A couple of people tried it and gave feedback. Samy conducted user interviews and product demos for them, And shared the reviews on Twitter. That alone, along with word-of-mouth marketing on Twitter got them their first 100 users. To conclude: Don’t reinvent the wheel, try what’s working. Find the gaps in what’s working, and leverage that. Instead of thinking about millions of customers, think about the first 10. Then first 100. Leverage what you have. Get the first 10 customers, then talk about this to get the next 100. Use your app. Find ways, events, and opportunities to use your app in front of people. And get them to use it. Write content not only for SEO but also to help people. It won’t work tomorrow, but it will work for years after it picks up. Leverage other sources of traffic by partnering up! Do things that don’t scale. I’m also doing SaaS marketing deep dives over 30 pieces of content. I'm posting here for the first time, so I'm not sure if it will stay or not, sorry if it doesn't. I've helped a SaaS grow from $19K to $100K MRR as a marketer in last 2 years, and now I wanna dive deep. Cheers! (1/30)

How a founder built a B2B AI startup to serve with 65+ global brands (including Fortune500 companies) (I will not promote)

AI Palette is an AI-driven platform that helps food and beverage companies predict emerging product trends. I had the opportunity recently to sit down with the founder to get his advice on building an AI-first startup, which he'll be going through in this post. (I will not promote) About AI Palette: Co-founders: >!2 (Somsubhra GanChoudhuri, Himanshu Upreti)!!100+!!$12.7M USD!!AI-powered predictive analytics for the CPG (Consumer Packaged Goods) industry!!Signed first paying customer in the first year!!65+ global brands, including Cargill, Diageo, Ajinomoto, Symrise, Mondelez, and L’Oréal, use AI Palette!!Every new product launched has secured a paying client within months!!Expanded into Beauty & Personal Care (BPC), onboarding one of India’s largest BPC companies within weeks!!Launched multiple new product lines in the last two years, creating a unified suite for brand innovation!Identify the pain points in your industry for ideas* When I was working in the flavour and fragrance industry, I noticed a major issue CPG companies faced: launching a product took at least one to two years. For instance, if a company decided today to launch a new juice, it wouldn’t hit the market until 2027. This long timeline made it difficult to stay relevant and on top of trends. Another big problem I noticed was that companies relied heavily on market research to determine what products to launch. While this might work for current consumer preferences, it was highly inefficient since the product wouldn’t actually reach the market for several years. By the time the product launched, the consumer trends had already shifted, making that research outdated. That’s where AI can play a crucial role. Instead of looking at what consumers like today, we realised that companies should use AI to predict what they will want next. This allows businesses to create products that are ahead of the curve. Right now, the failure rate for new product launches is alarmingly high, with 8 out of 10 products failing. By leveraging AI, companies can avoid wasting resources on products that won’t succeed, leading to better, more successful launches. Start by talking to as many industry experts as possible to identify the real problems When we first had the idea for AI Palette, it was just a hunch, a gut feeling—we had no idea whether people would actually pay for it. To validate the idea, we reached out to as many people as we could within the industry. Since our focus area was all about consumer insights, we spoke to professionals in the CPG sector, particularly those in the insights departments of CPG companies. Through these early conversations, we began to see a common pattern emerge and identified the exact problem we wanted to solve. Don’t tell people what you’re building—listen to their frustrations and challenges first. Going into these early customer conversations, our goal was to listen and understand their challenges without telling them what we were trying to build. This is crucial as it ensures that you can gather as much data about the problem to truly understand it and that you aren't biasing their answers by showing your solution. This process helped us in two key ways: First, it validated that there was a real problem in the industry through the number of people who spoke about experiencing the same problem. Second, it allowed us to understand the exact scale and depth of the problem—e.g., how much money companies were spending on consumer research, what kind of tools they were currently using, etc. Narrow down your focus to a small, actionable area to solve initially. Once we were certain that there was a clear problem worth solving, we didn’t try to tackle everything at once. As a small team of two people, we started by focusing on a specific area of the problem—something big enough to matter but small enough for us to handle. Then, we approached customers with a potential solution and asked them for feedback. We learnt that our solution seemed promising, but we wanted to validate it further. If customers are willing to pay you for the solution, it’s a strong validation signal for market demand. One of our early customer interviewees even asked us to deliver the solution, which we did manually at first. We used machine learning models to analyse the data and presented the results in a slide deck. They paid us for the work, which was a critical moment. It meant we had something with real potential, and we had customers willing to pay us before we had even built the full product. This was the key validation that we needed. By the time we were ready to build the product, we had already gathered crucial insights from our early customers. We understood the specific information they wanted and how they wanted the results to be presented. This input was invaluable in shaping the development of our final product. Building & Product Development Start with a simple concept/design to validate with customers before building When we realised the problem and solution, we began by designing the product, but not by jumping straight into coding. Instead, we created wireframes and user interfaces using tools like InVision and Figma. This allowed us to visually represent the product without the need for backend or frontend development at first. The goal was to showcase how the product would look and feel, helping potential customers understand its value before we even started building. We showed these designs to potential customers and asked for feedback. Would they want to buy this product? Would they pay for it? We didn’t dive into actual development until we found a customer willing to pay a significant amount for the solution. This approach helped us ensure we were on the right track and didn’t waste time or resources building something customers didn’t actually want. Deliver your solution using a manual consulting approach before developing an automated product Initially, we solved problems for customers in a more "consulting" manner, delivering insights manually. Recall how I mentioned that when one of our early customer interviewees asked us to deliver the solution, we initially did it manually by using machine learning models to analyse the data and presenting the results to them in a slide deck. This works for the initial stages of validating your solution, as you don't want to invest too much time into building a full-blown MVP before understanding the exact features and functionalities that your users want. However, after confirming that customers were willing to pay for what we provided, we moved forward with actual product development. This shift from a manual service to product development was key to scaling in a sustainable manner, as our building was guided by real-world feedback and insights rather than intuition. Let ongoing customer feedback drive iteration and the product roadmap Once we built the first version of the product, it was basic, solving only one problem. But as we worked closely with customers, they requested additional features and functionalities to make it more useful. As a result, we continued to evolve the product to handle more complex use cases, gradually developing new modules based on customer feedback. Product development is a continuous process. Our early customers pushed us to expand features and modules, from solving just 20% of their problems to tackling 50–60% of their needs. These demands shaped our product roadmap and guided the development of new features, ultimately resulting in a more complete solution. Revenue and user numbers are key metrics for assessing product-market fit. However, critical mass varies across industries Product-market fit (PMF) can often be gauged by looking at the size of your revenue and the number of customers you're serving. Once you've reached a certain critical mass of customers, you can usually tell that you're starting to hit product-market fit. However, this critical mass varies by industry and the type of customers you're targeting. For example, if you're building an app for a broad consumer market, you may need thousands of users. But for enterprise software, product-market fit may be reached with just a few dozen key customers. Compare customer engagement and retention with other available solutions on the market for product-market fit Revenue and the number of customers alone isn't always enough to determine if you're reaching product-market fit. The type of customer and the use case for your product also matter. The level of engagement with your product—how much time users are spending on the platform—is also an important metric to track. The more time they spend, the more likely it is that your product is meeting a crucial need. Another way to evaluate product-market fit is by assessing retention, i.e whether users are returning to your platform and relying on it consistently, as compared to other solutions available. That's another key indication that your solution is gaining traction in the market. Business Model & Monetisation Prioritise scalability Initially, we started with a consulting-type model where we tailor-made specific solutions for each customer use-case we encountered and delivered the CPG insights manually, but we soon realized that this wasn't scalable. The problem with consulting is that you need to do the same work repeatedly for every new project, which requires a large team to handle the workload. That is not how you sustain a high-growth startup. To solve this, we focused on building a product that would address the most common problems faced by our customers. Once built, this product could be sold to thousands of customers without significant overheads, making the business scalable. With this in mind, we decided on a SaaS (Software as a Service) business model. The benefit of SaaS is that once you create the software, you can sell it to many customers without adding extra overhead. This results in a business with higher margins, where the same product can serve many customers simultaneously, making it much more efficient than the consulting model. Adopt a predictable, simplistic business model for efficiency. Look to industry practices for guidance When it came to monetisation, we considered the needs of our CPG customers, who I knew from experience were already accustomed to paying annual subscriptions for sales databases and other software services. We decided to adopt the same model and charge our customers an annual upfront fee. This model worked well for our target market, aligning with industry standards and ensuring stable, recurring revenue. Moreover, our target CPG customers were already used to this business model and didn't have to choose from a huge variety of payment options, making closing sales a straightforward and efficient process. Marketing & Sales Educate the market to position yourself as a thought leader When we started, AI was not widely understood, especially in the CPG industry. We had to create awareness around both AI and its potential value. Our strategy focused on educating potential users and customers about AI, its relevance, and why they should invest in it. This education was crucial to the success of our marketing efforts. To establish credibility, we adopted a thought leadership approach. We wrote blogs on the importance of AI and how it could solve problems for CPG companies. We also participated in events and conferences to demonstrate our expertise in applying AI to the industry. This helped us build our brand and reputation as leaders in the AI space for CPG, and word-of-mouth spread as customers recognized us as the go-to company for AI solutions. It’s tempting for startups to offer products for free in the hopes of gaining early traction with customers, but this approach doesn't work in the long run. Free offerings don’t establish the value of your product, and customers may not take them seriously. You should always charge for pilots, even if the fee is minimal, to ensure that the customer is serious about potentially working with you, and that they are committed and engaged with the product. Pilots/POCs/Demos should aim to give a "flavour" of what you can deliver A paid pilot/POC trial also gives you the opportunity to provide a “flavour” of what your product can deliver, helping to build confidence and trust with the client. It allows customers to experience a detailed preview of what your product can do, which builds anticipation and desire for the full functionality. During this phase, ensure your product is built to give them a taste of the value you can provide, which sets the stage for a broader, more impactful adoption down the line. Fundraising & Financial Management Leverage PR to generate inbound interest from VCs When it comes to fundraising, our approach was fairly traditional—we reached out to VCs and used connections from existing investors to make introductions. However, looking back, one thing that really helped us build momentum during our fundraising process was getting featured in Tech in Asia. This wasn’t planned; it just so happened that Tech in Asia was doing a series on AI startups in Southeast Asia and they reached out to us for an article. During the interview, they asked if we were fundraising, and we mentioned that we were. As a result, several VCs we hadn’t yet contacted reached out to us. This inbound interest was incredibly valuable, and we found it far more effective than our outbound efforts. So, if you can, try to generate some PR attention—it can help create inbound interest from VCs, and that interest is typically much stronger and more promising than any outbound strategies because they've gone out of their way to reach out to you. Be well-prepared and deliberate about fundraising. Keep trying and don't lose heart When pitching to VCs, it’s crucial to be thoroughly prepared, as you typically only get one shot at making an impression. If you mess up, it’s unlikely they’ll give you a second chance. You need to have key metrics at your fingertips, especially if you're running a SaaS company. Be ready to answer questions like: What’s your retention rate? What are your projections for the year? How much will you close? What’s your average contract value? These numbers should be at the top of your mind. Additionally, fundraising should be treated as a structured process, not something you do on the side while juggling other tasks. When you start, create a clear plan: identify 20 VCs to reach out to each week. By planning ahead, you’ll maintain momentum and speed up the process. Fundraising can be exhausting and disheartening, especially when you face multiple rejections. Remember, you just need one investor to say yes to make it all worthwhile. When using funds, prioritise profitability and grow only when necessary. Don't rely on funding to survive. In the past, the common advice for startups was to raise money, burn through it quickly, and use it to boost revenue numbers, even if that meant operating at a loss. The idea was that profitability wasn’t the main focus, and the goal was to show rapid growth for the next funding round. However, times have changed, especially with the shift from “funding summer” to “funding winter.” My advice now is to aim for profitability as soon as possible and grow only when it's truly needed. For example, it’s tempting to hire a large team when you have substantial funds in the bank, but ask yourself: Do you really need 10 new hires, or could you get by with just four? Growing too quickly can lead to unnecessary expenses, so focus on reaching profitability as soon as possible, rather than just inflating your team or burn rate. The key takeaway is to spend your funds wisely and only when absolutely necessary to reach profitability. You want to avoid becoming dependent on future VC investments to keep your company afloat. Instead, prioritize reaching break-even as quickly as you can, so you're not reliant on external funding to survive in the long run. Team-Building & Leadership Look for complementary skill sets in co-founders When choosing a co-founder, it’s important to find someone with a complementary skill set, not just someone you’re close to. For example, I come from a business and commercial background, so I needed someone with technical expertise. That’s when I found my co-founder, Himanshu, who had experience in machine learning and AI. He was a great match because his technical knowledge complemented my business skills, and together we formed a strong team. It might seem natural to choose your best friend as your co-founder, but this can often lead to conflict. Chances are, you and your best friend share similar interests, skills, and backgrounds, which doesn’t bring diversity to the table. If both of you come from the same industry or have the same strengths, you may end up butting heads on how things should be done. Having diverse skill sets helps avoid this and fosters a more collaborative working relationship. Himanshu (left) and Somsubhra (right) co-founded AI Palette in 2018 Define roles clearly to prevent co-founder conflict To avoid conflict, it’s essential that your roles as co-founders are clearly defined from the beginning. If your co-founder and you have distinct responsibilities, there is no room for overlap or disagreement. This ensures that both of you can work without stepping on each other's toes, and there’s mutual respect for each other’s expertise. This is another reason as to why it helps to have a co-founder with a complementary skillset to yours. Not only is having similar industry backgrounds and skillsets not particularly useful when building out your startup, it's also more likely to lead to conflicts since you both have similar subject expertise. On the other hand, if your co-founder is an expert in something that you're not, you're less likely to argue with them about their decisions regarding that aspect of the business and vice versa when it comes to your decisions. Look for employees who are driven by your mission, not salary For early-stage startups, the first hires are crucial. These employees need to be highly motivated and excited about the mission. Since the salary will likely be low and the work demanding, they must be driven by something beyond just the paycheck. The right employees are the swash-buckling pirates and romantics, i.e those who are genuinely passionate about the startup’s vision and want to be part of something impactful beyond material gains. When employees are motivated by the mission, they are more likely to stick around and help take the startup to greater heights. A litmus test for hiring: Would you be excited to work with them on a Sunday? One of the most important rounds in the hiring process is the culture fit round. This is where you assess whether a candidate shares the same values as you and your team. A key question to ask yourself is: "Would I be excited to work with this person on a Sunday?" If there’s any doubt about your answer, it’s likely not a good fit. The idea is that you want employees who align with the company's culture and values and who you would enjoy collaborating with even outside of regular work hours. How we structure the team at AI Palette We have three broad functions in our organization. The first two are the big ones: Technical Team – This is the core of our product and technology. This team is responsible for product development and incorporating customer feedback into improving the technology Commercial Team – This includes sales, marketing, customer service, account managers, and so on, handling everything related to business growth and customer relations. General and Administrative Team – This smaller team supports functions like finance, HR, and administration. As with almost all businesses, we have teams that address the two core tasks of building (technical team) and selling (commercial team), but given the size we're at now, having the administrative team helps smoothen operations. Set broad goals but let your teams decide on execution What I've done is recruit highly skilled people who don't need me to micromanage them on a day-to-day basis. They're experts in their roles, and as Steve Jobs said, when you hire the right person, you don't have to tell them what to do—they understand the purpose and tell you what to do. So, my job as the CEO is to set the broader goals for them, review the plans they have to achieve those goals, and periodically check in on progress. For example, if our broad goal is to meet a certain revenue target, I break it down across teams: For the sales team, I’ll look at how they plan to hit that target—how many customers they need to sell to, how many salespeople they need, and what tactics and strategies they plan to use. For the technical team, I’ll evaluate our product offerings—whether they think we need to build new products to attract more customers, and whether they think it's scalable for the number of customers we plan to serve. This way, the entire organization's tasks are cascaded in alignment with our overarching goals, with me setting the direction and leaving the details of execution to the skilled team members that I hire.

Should I Keep Iterating My Web Concept or Build an App to Attract Angel Investors?

Hi everyone, I’m building a start-up called Foodable, which takes your ingredients and leftovers and, using AI and the creator economy, provides personalised, user-generated, video-first recipes based on them and your preferences. Currently, I have a web concept that shows TikTok videos based on user-provided ingredients. It has over 2k people using it and some promising engagement. My next big step is to raise funding (starting with Angels) to take Foodable to the next level. However, I’m torn between two potential strategies and would love your advice. Option 1: Iterate the Web Concept Add 1-2 key features (e.g., dietary filters or improved video suggestions). Introduce a small paywall (e.g., £0.99/month) to validate whether people are willing to pay for what we’ve built. Use this validation to pitch Angels for funding, with the focus of building a more robust app version. Option 2: Build the App Version Bring someone on board to build the app (I have no coding experience). Shift away from TikTok videos and instead allow users to upload their own recipes. Use funding to iterate and improve the app after launch. I feel like validation is key to attracting Angels, but I’m not sure if it’s better to focus on proving willingness to pay with the web concept or build a more polished app version right away. What would you do in this situation?

Joined an AI Startup with Ex-ShipStation Team - Need Tips on Finding Early Users

Hey Reddit, My name’s Welcome (Yes, that’s really my name), and I’ve been in tech for most of my career, mostly at bigger companies with established brands and resources. But recently, I decided to join a small startup called BotDojo. It’s my first time being part of a small team, and it’s been a pretty eye-opening experience so far. But, like with anything new, I’ve hit a few bumps along the way, and I’m hoping you all might have some advice. A little backstory: BotDojo was started by some of the engineers who used to work together at ShipStation. After ShipStation sold, they spent some time experimenting with AI but kept running into the same problems—having to patch together tools, getting inconsistent results, handling data ingestion, and struggling to track performance. So, they decided to build a platform to help developers build, test, and deploy AI solutions. Since I came on board, my focus has been on finding early users, and it’s been a mixed bag of wins and frustrations. We’ve got a solid group of people using the free version (which is great), but only a few have upgraded to the paid plan so far (ranging from startups to large enterprises). The cool thing is that those who have become paying customers absolutely love the product. It’s just been hard getting more people to that point. We’ve tried a bunch of things: Attending industry events, doing cold email outreach, running social ads (the usual stuff). And while we’ve seen some interest, we’re running into a few challenges:   Learning curve: The software is really powerful, but it takes a week or two for users to really see what it can do. Without a dedicated sales team to walk them through it, it’s been tough getting people to stick around long enough to see the value. Standing out is hard: The AI space is super crowded right now. I think a lot of people see “AI tool” and assume it’s just like everything else out there (even though BotDojo has some awesome features that really set it apart).  Sign-ups, but limited engagement: We’re on a freemium model to make it easy for people to try it out, but that also means we get a lot of bots and people who sign up but don’t really dive in. So, I thought I’d reach out here and see if anyone has been through this early stage before. How did you manage to break through and find those first paying users who really saw the value in what you were building?  Are there any strategies, communities, or tactics that worked particularly well for you? And if you had to do it all over again, what would you focus on? I figure I’m not the only one trying to navigate these waters, so I’m hoping this can be a helpful thread for others too. Thanks so much for reading, and I’d be super grateful for any advice or insights you can share! 🙏

Behind the scene : fundraising pre-seed of an AI startup

A bit of feedback from our journey at our AI startup. We started prototyping stuff around agentic AI last winter with very cool underlying tech research based on some academic papers (I can send you links if you're interested in LLM orchestration). I'm a serial entrepreneur with 2x exits, nothing went fancy but enough to keep going into the next topic. This time, running an AI project has been a bit different and unique due to the huge interest around the topic. Here are a few insights. Jan \~ Mar: Research Nothing was serious, just a side project with a friend on weekends (the guy became our lead SWE). Market was promising and we had the convinction that our tech can be game changer in computer systems workflows. March \~ April: Market Waking Up Devin published their pre-seed $20m fundraising led by Founders Fund; they paved the market with legitimacy. I decided to launch some coffee meetings with a few angels in my network. Interest confirmed. Back to work on some more serious early prototyping; hard work started here. April \~ May: YC S24 (Fail) Pumped up by our prospective angels and the market waking up on the agentic topic, I applied to YC as a solo founder (was still looking for funds and co-founders). Eventually got rejected (no co-founder and not US-based). May \~ July: VC Dance (Momentum 1) Almost randomly at the same time we got rejected from YC, I got introduced to key members of the VC community by one of our prospective angels. Interest went crazy... tons of calls. Brace yourself here, we probably met 30\~40 funds (+ angels). Got strong interests from 4\~5 of them (3 to 5 meetings each), ultimately closed 1 and some interests which might convert later in the next stage. The legend of AI being hype is true. Majority of our calls went only by word of mouth, lots of inbounds, people even not having the deck would book us a call in the next 48h after saying hi. Also lots of "tourists," just looking because of AI but with no strong opinion on the subject to move further. The hearsay about 90% rejection is true. You'll have a lot of nos, ending some days exhausted and unmotivated. End July: Closing, the Hard Part The VC roadshow is kind of an art you need to master. You need to keep momentum high enough and looking over-subscribed. Good pre-seed VC deals are over-competitive, and good funds only focus on them; they will have opportunities to catch up on lost chances at the seed stage later. We succeeded (arduously) to close our 18\~24mo budget with 1 VC, a few angels, and some state-guaranteed debt. Cash in bank just on time for payday in August (don't under-estimate time of processing) Now: Launching and Prepping the Seed Round We're now in our first weeks of go-to-market with a lot of uncertainty but a very ambitious plan ahead. The good part of having met TONS of VCs during the pre-seed roadshow is that we met probably our future lead investors in these. What would look like a loss of time in the initial pre-seed VC meetings has been finally very prolific, helping us to refine our strategy, assessing more in-depth the market (investors have a lot of insights, they meet a lot of people... that's their full-time job). We now have clear milestones and are heading to raise our seed round by end of year/Q1 if stars stay aligned :) Don't give up, the show must go on.

I studied how 7 Founders found their first 100 customers for their businesses. Summarizing it here!

I am learning marketing, and so I combed through the internet to find specific advice that helped founders reach 100 users and not random Google answers. Here’s what I found: Llama Life by Marie Marie founder of Llama Life, a productivity app ($51.4K+ revenue) got her first 100 users using Snowballing effect. She shared great advice that I want to add here verbatim, “Need to think about what you have that you can leverage based on your current situation. eg..When you have no customers, think about where you can post to get the 1st customer eg Product Hunt. If you do well on PH, say you get #3 product of the day, then you post somewhere else saying ‘I got #3 product of the day’.. to get your next few customers. Maybe that post is on reddit with some learnings that you found. If the reddit post does well, then you might post it on Twitter, saying reddit did well and what learnings you got from that etc. or even if it doesn’t do well you can still post about it.” Another tip she shared is to build related products that get more viral than the product itself. These are small stand-alone sites that would appeal to the same target audience, but by nature, are more shareable. On these sites, you can mention your startup like: ‘brought to you by Llama Life’ and then provide a link to the main website if someone is interested. If one of those gets viral or ranks on Google, you’ll have a passive traffic source. Scraping bee by Pierre Pierre, founder of Scraping Bee, a web scraping tool has now reached $1.5M ARR. Pierre and his cofounder Kevin started with 10 Free Beta Users in 2019, and after 6 months asked them to take a paid subscription if they wanted to continue using the product. That’s how they got their first user within 50 minutes of that email. Then they listed it on dozens of startup directories but their core strategy was writing the best possible content for their target audience — Developers. 3 very successful pieces of content that worked were : A small tutorial on how to scrape single-page application An extensive general guide about web scraping without getting blocked A complete introduction to web scraping with Python They didn’t do content marketing for the sake of content marketing but deep-dived into the value they were providing their customer. One of these got 70K visits, and all this together got them to over 100 users. WePay by Bill Clerico Bill Clerico left his cushy corporate job to build WePay which was then acquired for $400M got his first users by using his app. He got his first users by using his app! The app was for group payments. So he hosted a Poker tournament at his house and collected payments only with his app. Then they hosted a barbecue for fraternity treasurers at San Jose State & helped them do their annual dues collection. Good old word-of-mouth marketing, that however, started with an event where they used what they made! RealWorld by Genevieve Genevieve — Founder and CEO of Realworld stands by the old-school advice of value giving. RealWorld is an app that helps GenZ navigate adulthood. So, before launching their direct-to-consumer platform, they had an educational course that they sold to college career centers and students. They already had a pipeline of adults who turned to Realworld for their adulting challenges. From there, she gained her first 100 followers. Saner dot ai by Austin Austin got 100 users from Reddit for his startup Saner.ai. Reddit hates advertising, and so his tips to market your startup on Reddit is to Write value-driven posts on your niche. Instead of writing posts, find posts where people are looking for solutions DM people facing problems that your SaaS solves. But instead of selling, ask about their problem to see if your product is a good fit Heartfelt posts about why you built it, aren’t gonna cut it To find posts and people, search Reddit with relevant keywords and join all the subreddits A Stock Portfolio Newsletter A financial investor got his first 100 paid newsletter subscribers for his stock portfolio newsletter. His tips : Don’t reinvent the wheel. Work what’s already working. He saw a company making $500M+ from stock picking newsletter, so decided to try that. Find the gaps in “already working” and leverage them. That newsletter did not have portfolios of advisors writing them. That was his USP. He added his own portfolio to his newsletter. Now to 100 users, he partnered with a guy running an investing website and getting good traffic. That guy got a cut of his revenue, in exchange. That one simple step got him to 100 users. Hypefury by Yannick and Samy Yannick and Samy from Hypefury, Twitter and Social Media Automation tool got their first beta testers and users from a paid community. They launched Hypefury there and asked if someone wanted to try it. A couple of people tried it and gave feedback. Samy conducted user interviews and product demos for them, And shared the reviews on Twitter. That alone, along with word-of-mouth marketing on Twitter got them their first 100 users. To conclude: Don’t reinvent the wheel, try what’s working. Find the gaps in what’s working, and leverage that. Instead of thinking about millions of customers, think about the first 10. Then first 100. Leverage what you have. Get the first 10 customers, then talk about this to get the next 100. Use your app. Find ways, events, and opportunities to use your app in front of people. And get them to use it. Write content not only for SEO but also to help people. It won’t work tomorrow, but it will work for years after it picks up. Leverage other sources of traffic by partnering up! Do things that don’t scale. I’m also doing SaaS marketing deep dives over 30 pieces of content. I'm posting here for the first time, so I'm not sure if it will stay or not, sorry if it doesn't. I've helped a SaaS grow from $19K to $100K MRR as a marketer in last 2 years, and now I wanna dive deep. Cheers! (1/30)

What if one founder in every startup became an influencer in their space? Will they bring in more business? (I will not promote)

I quit my last startup literally a week ago and I am already starting something new. I raised $2.7 million for my last company. But I feel like that the distribution was not strong enough. Hence I failed. Now as a second time founder distribution is the first thing I am going to focus on. So I have started doing physical events. The first event is IRL in San Francisco. I am inviting the CEO of Product Hunt for a fireside. The event is about how Ai agent founders can launch on Product Hunt. I will also start making videos everyday until the event to promote myself as a influencer in the space of AI agents + Product launches. Then use this momentum and newly created distribution to launch my first Ai agent. Let's see if the strategy works. I will keep people here posted!

No revenue for 6 months, then signed $10k MRR in 2 weeks with a new strategy. Here’s what I changed.

This is my first company so I made A LOT of mistakes when starting out. I'll explain everything I did that worked so you don't have to waste your time either. For context, I built a SaaS tool that helps companies scale their new client outreach 10x (at human quality with AI) so they can secure more sales meetings. Pricing I started out pricing it way too low (1/10 as much as competitors) so that it'd be easier to get customers in the beginning. This is a HUGE mistake and wasted me a bunch of time. First, this low pricing meant that I was unable to pay for the tools I needed to make sure my product could be great. I was forced to use low-quality databases, AI models, sending infrastructure -- you name it. Second, my customers were less invested in the product, and I received less input from them to make the product better. None ended up converting from my free trial because my product sucked, and I couldn't even get good feedback from them. I decided to price my product much higher, which allowed me to use best-in class tools to make my product actually work well. Outreach Approach The only issue is that it's a lot harder to get people to pay $500/month than $50/month. I watched every single video on the internet about cold email for getting B2B clients and built up an outbound MACHINE for sending thousands of emails a day. I tried all the top recommended sales email formats and tricks (intro, painpoint, testimonial, CTA, etc). Nothing. I could send 1k emails and get a few out of office responses and a handful of 'F off' responses. I felt bad and decided I couldn't just spam the entire world and expect to make any progress. I decided I needed to take a step back and learn from people who'd succeeded before in sales. I started manually emailing CEOs/founders that fit my customer profile with personal messages asking for feedback on my product -- not even trying to sell them anything. Suddenly I was getting 4-6 meetings a day and just trying to learn from them (turns out people love helping others). And without even prompting, many of them said 'hey, I actually could use this for my own sales' and asked how they could start trying it out. That week I signed 5 clients between $500-$4k/month (depending how many contacts they want to reach). I then taught my product to do outreach the same way I did that worked (include company signals, make sure the person is a great match with web research, and DONT TALK SALESY). Now, 6 of my first 10 clients (still figuring out who it works for, lol) have converted from the free trial and successfully used it to book sales meetings. I'm definitely still learning, but this one change in my sales approach changed everything for me, so I wanted to share. If anyone has any other tips/advice that changed their business's sales, would love to hear!

Hot take: AI will replace non-technical founders before technical founders [I will not promote]

I think the prevailing theory is AI is going to empower non-technical people to create complex systems just by writing a prompt or prompts. I think a variant of that is getting close which are agentic workflows where something triggers an agent and it does things autonomously. These sort of systems are starting to pop up everywhere (zapier, n8n, others...) however we're a ways off from these being able to respond in near real time. Long story short you'll still need to have code to run and someone to write that code (at least for a few more years) I've been using Deepresearch by OpenAI since Monday. I'm a technical founder without a formal business background. I've had it do product market fit analysis, sam/tam estimates, go to market strategies and it's producing fantastic reports. I could see it handling pretty much 90% of the non-technical business work that doesn't involve action in the physical world. It produced the content of a very well thought out pitch deck for one of my businesses. It's identifying potential customers. It's pretty damn crazy. Like right now I have it building a financial pro-forma for my data room. In fact it finished before I could write this post!

Thoughts on this market/build strategy? AI Martech SaaS

⁠Use Figma to mockup a prototype ⁠Use exports of the prototype on your Webflow site with a "sign up for waitlist" ⁠Share waitlist with your network or a network of people who might use it ⁠Interview your waitlist for input into what features are the most valuable ⁠Take this list of insights to work with someone who can help put together the MVP Very kindly advised to me by a member of this sub, thank you again if you see this Is this a decent way to roll? For someone with little to no chance of getting funding for devs and no coding experience My strategy up until now was going to be save up, spend on some code, save up, spend on some code - rinse and repeat until i have a full web app but then that leaves me with 0 marketing budget and also sounds kind of ridiculous when I say it outloud? I was planning on developing a chrome extension as an MVP test and seeing If i could get to 500 weekly users - this would act as a market test. Now I'm wondering if a waitlist is more accurate?

I just had my best month after 18 months as a solopreneur

Last month I reached important milestones both financially (60+ sales) and in terms of my personal brand (2.500+ new followers) But the most important part is that it has reinforced a belief in myself: it is possible, as long as I keep going, improving, learning and iterating. For the last year and a half, I've been grinding and launching project after project. But there was always something wrong: Product didn't solve a real problem Bad marketing (very often lol) Target market had low purchasing power Super-competitive niche (usually b2c) It's difficult to have failure after failure and keep going on. At times it would feel like everyone was making money, except for me. I was hacking on my projects every single day before and after my 9-5 and had mostly given up all my free time for this. But results were far from being what I wanted. So I would doubt myself all the time. One thing I had going for me is that I really enjoy building things - so that helped me a lot in staying consistent. I always knew this was a long-term thing and that I'd probably have to fail again and again before seeing some success. But even so, it was really hard to keep up the spirits at all time, especially after working so hard for so long. I wasn't going to give up but I also knew that continuing like this would lead nowhere. So I decided that for my next project I would do 2 things: 1) prioritize marketing and 2) build something strategic 1) Prioritize marketing I decided I was going to put in the same amount of effort into marketing as I put into building. Usually my time would be split 90% coding - 10% marketing. Now, for the first time ever it's probably 65% coding - 35% marketing. I organized myself and made an entire gameplan for it. This forced me to learn a lot about: Video editing Cold emails Copywriting Running ads Short-form content There are a lot of items I still need to execute on - but at least I have a good idea of how to approach most things. 2) Build something strategic I had to build something that I would be able to use even if nobody else did. For the last year and a half I had been building AI apps and my plan was to continue doing that. So I decided to leverage that and thought about how I could build something that would give me an unfair advantage + have a compounding effect over the long term: a) Unfair advantage Having AI demo apps that cover all type of AI functionalities would make my life easier & would allow me to ship new apps quickly, regardless of the required model/functionality So even if nobody bought this - I'd have built something really useful for myself & would have a slight edge over other people b) Compound over the long term Building "AnotherWrapper' (my new project) would have a good synergy with my future projects: It would allow me to build new projects faster While building new projects, I'd learn new things, which I would then be able to implement into AnotherWrapper and improve the product that way A win-win. Closing thoughts I did not expect things to go this well - it's been an amazing month and I'm truly grateful to everyone that has been supporting me. But at the end of the day, there is still a lot of work to be done. The initial 'hype' & effects from some viral tweets are starting to wear off. I still don't have a reliable distribution channel that guarantees me traffic. So I need to figure that out. I think the product has a lot of potential - it has been well received and has been a success so far, but my distribution is still lacking. The good thing is that I now have some extra cash to spend on things like ads, influencers, freelancers etc. So it opens some new doors that were previously closed! I also have some other projects down the pipeline which are coming soon. Will keep you guys updated!

From “Green” to “Smart” – Tom Gorski’s Word of Advice

Sharing this interview with entrepreneur Tom Gorski. I think it contains a few nice tips for beginner entrepreneurs. What is the problem with the term “Green?” what are the top 3 mistakes entrepreneurs make that can prevent them from enjoying the sweet taste of success? And what should young entrepreneurs always keep in mind? Continuing our expert interview series, we asked entrepreneur Tom Gorski to share some of his secrets to success with us. Gorski is the CEO and Co-Founder at SaaSGenius.com, and an Inbound Marketer & Growth Hacker at InboundWay.com. His career spans over 12 years of developing and implementing online marketing, SEO and conversion optimization campaigns. He defines his biggest accomplishment to date as “achieving 4500% growth for one of my clients over a three­year period.” logo-saasgenius Q: It’s no secret that the SaaS market is saturated, as new companies are having very hard time acquiring, retaining and monetizing users. In your view – what are the top 3 mistakes SaaS companies make? What are some key differentiators you recognize in a successful product? A: Mistake No. 1: Product-market fit is not good enough There are a number of reasons for this, including the fact that inertia, incumbency and bureaucracy are all working against you. For emerging companies, this means finding a way to be exponentially better with fewer resources. As a result, focus is key. Mistake No. 2: Not Specializing Your Sales Roles When you specialize your sales people, you allow them to focus, which creates greater output form your sales team. Mistake No. 3: You Need a Niche To be able to market and sell well, you need to have a niche. The world is noisy and messy, and you’ll struggle if you don’t have a sharp, direct message. When you try to speak to everyone, no one can hear you. Q: Which innovative trends do you recognize in the high tech world nowadays? A: “Green” was a mega trend of the last decade and while it will continue to be very important, there will be a shift towards “smart” solutions, which are intelligent, connected and have the ability to sense, report, and take the right action. Smart solutions will be everywhere around us from smart clothing, phones, to smart homes and smart cities. Q: What is the most significant advice you can give young entrepreneurs? A: Being very successful means learning from those who have already achieved success. Having a mentor is an amazing blessing to an entrepreneur, but not everyone can find one in person. My advice is to work smarter, not harder. This is the most non-intuitive observation I will probably make. If you want to compete in the arena, hard work isn’t enough. And judging yourself on how hard you work, rather than how smart you work can be fatal. Q: We are flooded with buzzwords lately – VR / AI / Bots… where do you think the software world is heading? A: AI and bots are a very hot topic in 2016 and it’s sometimes hard to distinguish the real potential behind the hype. My point of view is that, like with many things, there’s no revolution but evolution. It’s unrealistic to think that AI can become mainstream in SaaS products without proper AI infrastructure. SaaS delivery will significantly outpace traditional software product delivery, growing nearly five times faster than the traditional software market and will become a significant growth driver for all functional software markets. By 2019, the SaaS software model will account for $1 of every $4 spent on software. Q: Let us in on some of your secrets… where do you look for innovation? For inspiration and revolutionary ideas? A: Ideas for new startups often begin with a real problem that needs to be solved. And they don’t come while you’re sitting around sipping coffee and contemplating life. They tend to reveal themselves while you’re at work on something else. Start with brainstorming with problems that you are personally invested in. Building a business is hard and takes the kind of relentless dedication that comes from personal passion. Perhaps the greatest factor that determines whether or not an entrepreneur will be successful isn’t the business idea itself, but rather the entrepreneur’s willingness to try to turn the idea into reality. Great ideas are abundant, but it’s what we decide to do with them that counts. Original post: http://saasaddict.walkme.com/from-green-to-smart-tom-gorskis-words-of-advice/

Upselling from $8/mo to $2k/mo

I just closed a client for $1947/mo. But 5 months ago he was spending only $8/mo. Most customers have way more purchasing power than you think. Unlock it with the power of stacking. Here's my 3-steps stacking formula: Step 1 - Build trust with a low-ticket product In a world full of scams and deceit, building trust is damn hard. The best way to combat skepticism is through a free or low-ticket product, where you can go above and beyond to demonstrate your credibility. When I first onboarded this client onto my SaaS, an AI to help you with HARO link-building, my product was at a very early stage with many rough edges. He gave me lots of great feedback. I implemented his suggestions the same day and got more feedback from him. After a couple of back-and-forths, I established myself as a trustworthy hustler, instead of just a stranger online. This is easy to do for an agile startup but impossible for big companies, so make good use of opportunities like this to build long-term relationships. Turn your customers into raving fans. Step 2 - Validate a mid-ticket offer Three months into his subscription, he told me he wanted to cancel. When digging into the why, he suggested a performance-based DFY service to remove all the work on his end. Inspired by his suggestion, I took on him and 6 other clients for $237, a one-time package for 1 backlink. It's sold through my newsletter email blast to 300 subscribers, with a total CAC of $0. I wrote about the details of this launch in another long form. At this price range, impulsive purchases can still happen if you have a strong offer and good copywriting. Use this mid-ticket offer to validate your offer and positioning, build out a team, and establish trust. We went beyond the 1 link for almost all our clients, including this one in particular. For $237, we got him on Forbes, HubSpot, 2 DR50+ sites, and a few other smaller media outlets. By doing this, we further built trust into the relationship and established authority in what we do. Step 3 - Create a high-ticket subscription-based offer By now, you'll hopefully have built enough trust to get through the skepticism filter for something high-ticket. Now, it's time to develop an offer that amplifies your previous one. Something that allows you to let your clients achieve their goals to the maximum extent. For me, this is pitching every relevant media query on every platform for this client every day, to leverage HARO link-building to its full extent, all for a fixed price of $1947/mo. This customized offer is based on direct client feedback, isn't publicized on our website, but we're confident it will directly contribute to achieving this client's goal. A subscription-based offer is much superior because it allows you to create a stable source of revenue, especially at the early stage. That's how I created 3 different offers to solve the same problem for one client. By stacking each offer on top of the previous one, I was able to guide clients from one option to the next. This formula isn't some new rocket science I came up with. It's proven over and over again by other agency owners building in public, like Nick from Baked Design who started with a $9 design kit and now sells $9k/mo design subscriptions at $1M ARR. By stacking offers, you position yourself as a committed partner in your client's long-term success. Lastly, I want to address a common objection: "My customers can't afford $2k/month." But consider this: most people are reading your site on their $3000 MacBook or $1000 iPhone. It's not that they lack the funds, it's more likely that your service isn't meeting their expectations. Talk to them to discover the irresistible offer they'll gladly pay for. Update: lots of DM asking about more specifics so I wrote about it here. https://coldstartblueprint.com/p/ai-agent-email-list-building

Building in the open with Founder University - I will not promote

Published Oct 30, 2024 I am on my fifth startup. I ran the last one for a decade, that’s a whole story. A hell of a story. But a different story. I’ll tell it to you when I can, but not right now. The one before that was an e-commerce site that did pretty well but I didn’t love it. Before that were two service businesses. The first one I did for the love of the game, the second one was an attempt to make people stop asking me to fix their computer by charging them outrageous prices, which backfired horribly when they were eager to pay. None are relevant except to say I’ve been around the block and have the scars to prove it. When it was time to get back out there, I wanted to use all I’ve learned to do better. Before I talk about what those lessons produced, I’m going to talk about what those lessons were. Cause before effect, after all. One thing I wanted to do better this time was pattern matching - making the startup look the way that the industry and investors “expect” a startup to look. My last startup was an awesome idea with awesome tech (still is, but like I said, another story), but that one didn’t match patterns. It didn’t match investor patterns, industry buying patterns, patterns of existing, immediate, recognized and admitted needs. Because it didn’t “look” right to anyone, everything about it was way harder than necessary. The “make it look right” approach runs the risk of building a cargo cult, imitating the trappings of something but without understanding the essence of that something, but then again, a thing that looks like a knife is going to make a better knife that a thing that looks like a bowling ball, so sometimes just sharing apparent similarities can get you pretty far, even if it doesn’t get you all the way there. Like how mimicking someone’s accent makes it easier for them to understand you. For this one, I wanted to adopt every tool, method, and pattern that I knew “the industry” wanted to see to minimize the friction from development, go-to-market, scaling, adoption, and that would make investment optional (and, therefore, available if desired) instead of necessary (and, therefore, largely unavailable). That required establishing some expectations for successful patterns I could match against. What patterns am I matching to? Here’s a general sketch of my pattern matching thought process: Software first and software only. It’s the easiest industry to start a business in, lowest startup costs, and easiest customer acquisition. I wanted to build software for an element of the industry that’s actively emerging (and therefore has room to grow) and part of an optimistic investor thesis (and therefore has a cohort of people who are intent on injecting capital into the market to help it grow). It needs to fills a niche that is underexplored (low competition) and highly potent (lots of opportunity), while being aligned to recognized and emerging needs within the industry (readily adopted). I wanted it to have evidence supporting the business thesis that proves the demand exists, but demonstrates that the demand is unanswered (as of yet) by sufficient or adequate supply.* I wanted the lowest number of dominoes to line up and tip for everything to work correctly - the more dominoes in the line, the less likely the last one will fall. I wanted to implement modern toolsets for everything, wherever possible. I wanted to obey the maxim, “When there’s a gold rush, don’t mine the gold, sell the picks and shovels.” Whatever I chose would need to produce cash flow almost immediately with minimal development time or go-to-market delays, because the end of ZIRP killed the “trust me bro” investment thesis predominant over the last 15 years. I wanted to match to YC best practices, not because YC can predict what will definitely work, but because they’ve churned through so many startups in the last 15 years that they have a good sense of what will definitely not work. And I wanted to build client-centric, because if my intent is to to produce cash flow immediately, we need to get clients immediately, and if we need to get clients immediately, we need to focus on what clients need right now. Extra credit: What’s the difference between a customer and a client? Note: Competition is awesome! Competition is validating and not scary, because competition proves a market exists. But competition, especially mature competition against an immature startup, makes it harder to break into a space. A first mover advantage isn’t everything, but seeing demand before it’s sufficiently supplied is a great advantage if you’re capital constrained or otherwise unproven. Think about how much money the first guy to sell fidget spinners or Silly Bandz made versus how much money the last guy to order a pallet of each made. Finding demand that exists already but is as of yet insufficiently satisfied is a great place to start. What opportunity spaces are most relevant? The industries and markets I chose to observe were: AI, because if I’m following a theme & pattern for today, it’s AI. Fintech, because cash is king, and fintech puts your hands on cash flow. Crypto/blockchain, because that’s the “new” fintech (or maybe the “old-new” fintech?), and crypto creates powerful incentives and capital formation strategies, along with a lot of flexibility for transaction systems. Tools, particularly unmet demand in tools, that enable these industries. If you wanted to do some brief and simple homework, you could map each of those bullets to several of the numbered list items preceding them. The reasoning was pretty simplistic - AI is what people want to build and invest in now, while fintech and crypto/blockchain are what people were building and investing in for the last major investment thesis. That means that there’s demand in the market for AI and AI-adjacent startups, while there’s a glut of underutilized and highly developed tools within fintech and crypto/blockchain, with a lot of motivated capital behind the adoption. When someone is thinking “I built this thing and not enough people are using it”, and you then build something that uses it creates a great way to find allies. This rationale harnesses technology that is being built and financed now (which means it needs tools and support methods, and a lot of other “picks and shovels”), while leveraging technology that was recently built and financed and is eager for more widespread adoption of the existing toolkits, which makes it suitable for using to build the AI-adjacent tools that are in demand now. It’s like two harmonics producing constructive interference - it makes two waves into one larger wave, which gives me more momentum to surf against. This was a learning process, and I iterated against my general paradigm repeatedly as I learned more. Neither of us have the patience to go through that in excruciating detail, so I’ll cover the highlights in my next post. Extra credit answer: A customer gets a product, a client gets a service. Challenge: Is software a product or a service?

For the Herd-Investor(Formerly Me)

Hey guys. my friend and I developed a model that looks over SEC filings and instead of just summarizing what they say like the existing “AI” solutions do(which are really just read-write programs), it infers and reads between the lines and analyzes what type of strategy the company is using(revenue recognition timing, the company's history,etc.) and many other factors. We used a different approach. Instead of basically making a GPT wrapper, we trained it from scratch based on not only summarizing filings but inferring on key information that is glossed over a lot. We plan to scale this into a model that accounts for not only filings, but recent news, public sentiment, and other factors. And instead of people having to upload files to get analyzed, we plan to automatically aggregate files on all public companies on the US markets and train the model on those to provide a one- stop shop financial search engine platform for retail investors to access digestable financial information(like an AlphaSense but for retail investors) because right now, the average retail investor has to access on average 5 services to get this info and then has to interpret the info as well. Obviously, the retail investor these days is also tied to a sense of community so plan to implement a moderated almost newletter like platform where verified creators can publish posts regarding their interests to further serve the retail investor. The gist is basically simplifying high-level finance to the point where the beginner investor can understand while preserving the technical value. Do you guys have any extra thoughts on this? I am trying to ask if you guys would actually pay for a service like this, and what it should additionally offer to make it more valuable to the average retail investor. Thanks again!

New to Startups; Where do I start?

I have an idea for an specialized AI based software system in a particular market that I think, if done well, could be a very helpful and lucrative software/AI (both for its owners as well as its users). It hasn't been properly implemented into any form that I or my associates have been able to find and I believe that now is the perfect time to start its development. I'm an entrepreneur, have started several successful companies over the years and am well experienced in all things business. But, none of my companies have involved creating a brand new product or would fall into the "Startup" category. It's a whole new world to me. That being said, I'm not sure what the proper steps are to make this idea come to fruition and am hoping for a point in the right direction. How do people usually go from idea to launch? I imagine there are 2 distinct things I need right now, funding for the project and a partner to help create the software. Step 1 would be the partner. For this partner, I'm not sure where to start to find this person. I'd imagine I need someone that's experienced in machine learning, AI engineering, software development, programming, etc. Or a combination of people with those skills. Since none of my companies are startup or tech based, I don't have connections to anyone with those skills. If I go around looking for a partner with those skills, I'll surely need to explain my idea to them and will need to be able to protect my idea before hand. Do I copyright it? Make them sign an NDA? What's common business practice? Where do I go to look for a partner with those skills? For funding, I can fund the initial stages of the project for a handful of months. From there, I'd like to find some kind of investment. But that sounds like a bridge to cross when I get further down that road. Looking forward to starting down this road and hopefully making something that benefits and pushes forward this new world of AI!

There's a handful of frequent discussion/post types tanking this sub's overall quality

We've all seen them, here's a few that I've routinely noticed: Painfully obvious ChatGPT'd dos-and-donts list gurus Poorly veiled posts attempting to disguise crowdsourcing market research as random curiosity (e.g, what are your pain points with todo apps and what would it take for you to pay a million dollars for mine?) Delusions of grandeur - recruitment posts for taking down FAANG companies with no existing traction, moat, funding, team, or product Idea guys asking how get full time engineers to build massive products for free Seeking a tech founder with no details about the business and people in the comments begging to join despite knowing nothing about it Building an app like but with amateuraly implemented, needless AI that could easily do better in a week to sink us Asking for product validation, expecting a standing ovation and losing their cool when it's decidedly no good Did I miss anything?

Need advice: Getting first paid customers for our AI subtitle generator[i will not promote]

we've built an AI-animated subtitle generator that helps content creators and video editors make viral-ready short-form videos in just a few taps. Here's where we are right now: 4,400+ signups in our first month after launch 70%+ activation rate (people actually processing and exporting videos) Industry-best word-by-word timestamp accuracy Support for 100+ languages (while competitors offer only 58+) Currently getting about 10 new organic signups daily (zero marketing) Users create \~25 projects per day on average The problem? Zero paying customers so far. Despite solid engagement metrics and what seems like a product people actually use, we haven't converted anyone to a paid plan. I'm guessing our pricing, packaging, or conversion strategy needs work. For those who've been through this stage: what was your breakthrough moment in getting those first paid users? Did you have to change your pricing model, add specific features, or implement particular conversion tactics? Any advice from those who've successfully crossed this milestone would be incredibly helpful. Thanks in advance!

Content aggregation that acts as a middleman for content discovery via third-party marketplace & revenue sharing (i will not promote but I'm looking for fellow researchers)

High level I’m considering a content aggregation business model, but one that acts as an open marketplace where third party devs and where world class data scientists compete to build the best recommenders for different use cases. (E.g. the incentives can be ad revenue sharing or subscription based for niche professional markets.) The idea is to facilitate more bottom up innovation from third party data scientists. The platform itself just acts as the middleman. (Also something that strips out original ads and makes it easy to skip paid sponsorship sections would be great.)  I’ve seen startups building web crawlers and content aggregation systems for other AI startups. My proposal is better in the sense that third party devs are instead responsible for implementing whatever questionable hacks are necessarily to scrape platforms that don’t necessarily want to be scraped.  Personally, I’m more concerned about getting the right information than ever before, to this end I can’t rely on platform specific recommenders. The solution is more bottom up innovation in content promotion. More generally, if you’re also concerned about consuming game changing information that’s too easily missed: we need a platform that incentivizes bottom up innovation of content promotion. What we need is a platform that functions like a marketplace where third party devs and where world class data scientists compete to build the best recommenders for different use cases. Here’s some elevator pitches I’m considering:  Did you know that the magic behind YouTube is its recommendation engine? Now, imagine an open platform where independent engines compete to deliver the most personalized content feed—from news to local events—directly to you. Interested in rethinking how we find content? “In today’s fragmented digital landscape, a single platform no longer holds sway over content discovery. The Network Effect is dead: audiences are more mobile than ever; and big tech killed it. In such a fragmented landscape we’re building a bottom-up, decentralized marketplace for recommendation engines—a solution that taps into diverse revenue streams through subscriptions, ad revenue, and affiliate partnerships. Invest in the future of personalized content aggregation.” “Are you a developer passionate about algorithms and content discovery? Our open marketplace lets you build and monetize your own recommendation engine, competing to deliver the most engaging, personalized feeds. Join a revolution where your innovation can directly shape how the world finds content.” “Are you tired of being told what to watch or read by one mysterious algorithm? Imagine taking control—choosing from a marketplace of smart recommendation engines that curate content just for you. It’s a revolution in content discovery where you hold the power.” (As a Utahn this one is interesting because even mormons are talking about the dangers of “doom scrolling” though it’s seldom discussed in society at large.) As far as simple hooks I’m considering:  One platform to rule them all and in the darkness bind them.  Choose how you discover—content recommenders that work for you.  The area where recommender engines battle to win your feed. Request I would love to start prototyping this idea and see what else I can uncover from such preliminary research. But I want to get a couple other likeminded individuals onboard.  I'm the best when it comes to iOS/macOS development, but there's tons of backend work that needs to be done which I wouldn’t have the time for if i'm focused on the native clients. Who am I 'ideally' looking for?  I’ve heard of weird stats to the effect that if you scale up a population to billions of people, the number of life overlaps starts skyrocketing. Not just physical lookalikes, but people with eerily similar life paths, personalities, habits, and even thoughts — without ever knowing each other. Where are my clones? Such is whom I’m looking for in an ideal world.  Take a hunch  People nowadays have no concept of going out on a limb, taking a ‘hunch’, and backing their instincts. Everything has to be calculated, proven, and guaranteed before they make a move. In contrast consider the success of the Chinese DeepSeek project: According to Asianometry’s YouTube video on DeepSeek, their “memory-saving multi-head latent architecture” (whatever that means, just quoting the name) came about from a researchers ‘hunch’, which the company bet big on and the result was drastically improved performance on low end hardware…  Here in the west the idea of betting on a hunch is inconceivable. We have no balls to chase long term insights. My own instincts when it comes to software is such because I’ve wasted too much of my life on small scale projects. All I’m trying to do is attempt a more scaled up experiment based on some hunches with me and a few other likeminded individuals.  Just as the early oil prospectors didn’t have precise maps—just intuition and test drills. They had to drill, analyze the pressure, and adjust. The best oil fields weren’t found by foresight alone, but by adaptive exploration. The startup space itself is liken to the first prospectors who got the gold nuggets lying in the riverbed. In such an environment moving first has its advantages but nowadays I wish I could have all those shitty ‘engineers’ sent to their maker.  Today the reality is such that you’ve got to dig deep—where vast stores of wealth can be found—or go home, and those who dig into the depths cannot use mere forethought, for what lies beneath cannot be seen by the mind’s eye.  I will not promote but I'm looking for fellow research oriented minds.

Hot Take: Not all your startups need AI forced into them

I'm a final year Computer Engineering student, hence applying for jobs all around. There's this particular trend I've noticed with startups that are coming up these days. That is, even for the absolute basic stuff they'll use 'AI', and they'll think they built something 'revolutionary'. No. You're breaking your product in ways you don't realise. An example, that even some well established companies are guilty of: AI Chatbots You absolutely don't need them and it's an entire gimmick. If you really wanna implement a chatbot, connect the user to an actual person on your end, which I think is not possible if you're at a 'startup' stage. You'll need employees who can handle user queries in real time. If the user really is stuck let them use the 'Contact Us' page. A really close relative of mine is very vocal about the frustration he faces whenever he tries to use the AI Chatbot on any well known e-com website. The only case for AI Chatbot that makes sense is when it's directing the customer to an actual customer support rep if none of the AI's solutions is working for the customer. Even then, implementing a search page for FAQ is extremely easy and user friendly. Another example: AI Interviewer I recently interviewed for a startup, and their whole interviewing process was AI'zed?!?! No real person at the other end, I was answering to their questions which were in video format. They even had a 'mascot' / 'AI interviewer' avatar designed by an AI (AI-ception???). This mascot just text-to-speech'ed all the questions for me to rewind and hear what I missed again. And I had to record video and audio to answer these questions on their platform itself. The entire interview process just could've been a questionnaire, or if you're really concerned on the integrity of the interviewee, just take a few minutes out of your oh-so-busy schedule as a startup owner. Atleast for hiring employees who would make the most impact on your product going ahead. I say the most impact, because (atleast as a developer) the work done by these employees would define how robust your product is, and/or how easily other features can be integrated into the codebase. Trust me, refactoring code later on would only cost you time and money. These resources would rather be more useful in other departments of your startup. The only use case for an AI Interviewer I see is for preparing for an actual interview, provided that feedback is given to the user at the earliest, which you don't need to worry about as a startup owner. So yeah, you're probably better off without integrating AI in your product. Thank you for reading. TLDR; The title; I know AI is the new thing and gets everyone drooling and all, but for the love of God, just focus on what your startup does best and put real people behind it; Integrating AI without human intervention is as good as a broken product; Do your hiring yourself, or through real people, emphasizing on the fact that the people you hire at an early stage will define your growth ahead;

I spent 6 months on building a tool, and got 0 zero users. Here is my story.

Edit Thank you all so much for your time reading my story. Your support, feedback, criticism, and skepticism; all helped me a lot, and I couldn't appreciate it enough \^\_\^ TL;DR I spent 6 months on a tool that currently has 0 users. Below is what I learned during my journey, sharing because I believe most mistakes are easily avoidable. Do not overestimate your product and assume it will be an exception to fundamental principles. Principles are there for a reason. Always look for validation before you start. Avoid building products with a low money-to-effort ratio/in very competitive fields. Unless you have the means, you probably won't make it. Pick a problem space, pick your target audience, and talk to them before thinking about a solution. Identify and match their pain points. Only then should you think of a solution. If people are not overly excited or willing to pay in advance for a discounted price, it might be a sign to rethink. Sell one and only one feature at a time. Avoid everything else. If people don't pay for that one core feature, no secondary feature will change their mind. Always spend twice as much time marketing as you do building. You will not get users if they don't know it exists. Define success metrics ("1000 users in 3 months" or "$6000 in the account at the end of 6 months") before you start. If you don't meet them, strongly consider quitting the project. If you can't get enough users to keep going, nothing else matters. VALIDATION, VALIDATION, VALIDATION. Success is not random, but most of our first products will not make a success story. Know when to admit failure, and move on. Even if a product of yours doesn't succeed, what you learned during its journey will turn out to be invaluable for your future. My story So, this is the story of a product, Summ, that I’ve been working on for the last 6 months. As it's the first product I’ve ever built, after watching you all from the sidelines, I have learned a lot, made many mistakes, and did only a few things right. Just sharing what I’ve learned and some insights from my journey so far. I hope that this post will help you avoid the mistakes I made — most of which I consider easily avoidable — while you enjoy reading it, and get to know me a little bit more 🤓. A slow start after many years Summ isn’t the first product I really wanted to build. Lacking enough dev skills to even get started was a huge blocker for so many years. In fact, the first product I would’ve LOVED to build was a smart personal shopping assistant. I had this idea 4 years ago; but with no GPT, no coding skills, no technical co-founder, I didn’t have the means to make it happen. I still do not know if such a tool exists and is good enough. All I wanted was a tool that could make data-based predictions about when to buy stuff (“buy a new toothpaste every three months”) and suggest physical products that I might need or be strongly interested in. AFAIK, Amazon famously still struggles with the second one. Fast-forward a few years, I learned the very basics of HTML, CSS, and Vanilla JS. Still was not there to build a product; but good enough to code my design portfolio from scratch. Yet, I couldn’t imagine myself building a product using Vanilla JS. I really hated it, I really sucked at it. So, back to tutorial hell, and to learn about this framework I just heard about: React.React introduced so many new concepts to me. “Thinking in React” is a phrase we heard a lot, and with quite good reasons. After some time, I was able to build very basic tutorial apps, both in React, and React Native; but I have to say that I really hated coding for mobile. At this point, I was already a fan of productivity apps, and had a concept for a time management assistant app in my design portfolio. So, why not build one? Surely, it must be easy, since every coding tutorial starts with a todo app. ❌ WRONG! Building a basic todo app is easy enough, but building one good enough for a place in the market was a challenge I took and failed. I wasted one month on that until I abandoned the project for good. Even if I continued working on it, as the productivity landscape is overly competitive, I wouldn’t be able to make enough money to cover costs, assuming I make any. Since I was (and still am) in between jobs, I decided to abandon the project. 👉 What I learned: Do not start projects with a low ratio of money to effort and time. Example: Even if I get 500 monthly users, 200 of which are paid users (unrealistically high number), assuming an average subscription fee of $5/m (such apps are quite cheap, mostly due to the high competition), it would make me around $1000 minus any occurring costs. Any founder with a product that has 500 active users should make more. Even if it was relatively successful, due to the high competition, I wouldn’t make any meaningful money. PS: I use Todoist today. Due to local pricing, I pay less than $2/m. There is no way I could beat this competitive pricing, let alone the app itself. But, somehow, with a project that wasn’t even functional — let alone being an MVP — I made my first Wi-Fi money: Someone decided that the domain I preemptively purchased is worth something. By this point, I had already abandoned the project, certainly wasn’t going to renew the domain, was looking for a FT job, and a new project that I could work on. And out of nowhere, someone hands me some free money — who am I not to take it? Of course, I took it. The domain is still unused, no idea why 🤔. Ngl, I still hate the fact that my first Wi-Fi money came from this. A new idea worth pursuing? Fast-forward some weeks now. Around March, I got this crazy idea of building an email productivity tool. We all use emails, yet we all hate them. So, this must be fixed. Everyone uses emails, in fact everyone HAS TO use emails. So, I just needed to build a tool and wait for people to come. This was all, really. After all, the problem space is huge, there is enough room for another product, everyone uses emails, no need for any further validation, right? ❌ WRONG ONCE AGAIN! We all hear from the greatest in the startup landscape that we must validate our ideas with real people, yet at least some of us (guilty here 🥸) think that our product will be hugely successful and prove them to be an exception. Few might, but most are not. I certainly wasn't. 👉 Lesson learned: Always validate your ideas with real people. Ask them how much they’d pay for such a tool (not if they would). Much better if they are willing to pay upfront for a discount, etc. But even this comes later, keep reading. I think the difference between “How much” and “If” is huge for two reasons: (1) By asking them for “How much”, you force them to think in a more realistic setting. (2) You will have a more realistic idea on your profit margins. Based on my competitive analysis, I already had a solution in my mind to improve our email usage standards and email productivity (huge mistake), but I did my best to learn about their problems regarding those without pushing the idea too hard. The idea is this: Generate concise email summaries with suggested actions, combine them into one email, and send it at their preferred times. Save as much as time the AI you end up with allows. After all, everyone loves to save time. So, what kind of validation did I seek for? Talked with only a few people around me about this crazy, internet-breaking idea. The responses I got were, now I see, mediocre; no one got excited about it, just said things along the lines of “Cool idea, OK”. So, any reasonable person in this situation would think “Okay, not might not be working”, right? Well, I did not. I assumed that they were the wrong audience for this product, and there was this magical land of user segments waiting eagerly for my product, yet unknowingly. To this day, I still have not reached this magical place. Perhaps, it didn’t exist in the first place. If I cannot find it, whether it exists or not doesn’t matter. I am certainly searching for it. 👉 What I should have done: Once I decide on a problem space (time management, email productivity, etc.), I should decide on my potential user segments, people who I plan to sell my product to. Then I should go talk to those people, ask them about their pains, then get to the problem-solving/ideation phase only later. ❗️ VALIDATION COMES FROM THE REALITY OUTSIDE. What validation looks like might change from product to product; but what invalidation looks like is more or less the same for every product. Nico Jeannen told me yesterday “validation = money in the account” on Twitter. This is the ultimate form of validation your product could get. If your product doesn’t make any money, then something is invalidated by reality: Your product, you, your idea, who knows? So, at this point, I knew a little bit of Python from spending some time in tutorial hell a few years ago, some HTML/CSS/JS, barely enough React to build a working app. React could work for this project, but I needed easy-to-implement server interactivity. Luckily, around this time, I got to know about this new gen of indie hackers, and learned (but didn’t truly understand) about their approach to indie hacking, and this library called Nextjs. How good Next.js still blows my mind. So, I was back to tutorial hell once again. But, this time, with a promise to myself: This is the last time I would visit tutorial hell. Time to start building this "ground-breaking idea" Learning the fundamentals of Next.js was easier than learning of React unsurprisingly. Yet, the first time I managed to run server actions on Next.js was one of the rarest moments that completely blew my mind. To this day, I reject the idea that it is something else than pure magic under its hood. Did I absolutely need Nextjs for this project though? I do not think so. Did it save me lots of time? Absolutely. Furthermore, learning Nextjs will certainly be quite helpful for other projects that I will be tackling in the future. Already got a few ideas that might be worth pursuing in the head in case I decide to abandon Summ in the future. Fast-forward few weeks again: So, at this stage, I had a barely working MVP-like product. Since the very beginning, I spent every free hour (and more) on this project as speed is essential. But, I am not so sure it was worth it to overwork in retrospect. Yet, I know I couldn’t help myself. Everything is going kinda smooth, so what’s the worst thing that could ever happen? Well, both Apple and Google announced their AIs (Apple Intelligence and Google Gemini, respectively) will have email summarization features for their products. Summarizing singular emails is no big deal, after all there were already so many similar products in the market. I still think that what truly matters is a frictionless user experience, and this is why I built this product in a certain way: You spend less than a few minutes setting up your account, and you get to enjoy your email summaries, without ever visiting its website again. This is still a very cool concept I really like a lot. So, at this point: I had no other idea that could be pursued, already spent too much time on this project. Do I quit or not? This was the question. Of course not. I just have to launch this product as quickly as possible. So, I did something right, a quite rare occurrence I might say: Re-planned my product, dropped everything secondary to the core feature immediately (save time on reading emails), tried launching it asap. 👉 Insight: Sell only one core feature at one time. Drop anything secondary to this core feature. Well, my primary occupation is product design. So one would expect that a product I build must have stellar design. I considered any considerable time spent on design at this stage would be simply wasted. I still think this is both true and wrong: True, because if your product’s core benefits suck, no one will care about your design. False, because if your design looks amateurish, no one will trust you and your product. So, I always targeted an average level design with it and the way this tool works made it quite easy as I had to design only 2 primary pages: Landing page and user portal (which has only settings and analytics pages). However, even though I knew spending time on design was not worth much of my time, I got a bit “greedy”: In fact, I redesigned those pages three times, and still ended up with a so-so design that I am not proud of. 👉 What I would do differently: Unless absolutely necessary, only one iteration per stage as long as it works. This, in my mind, applies to everything. If your product’s A feature works, then no need to rewrite it from scratch for any reason, or even refactor it. When your product becomes a success, and you absolutely need that part of your codebase to be written, do so, but only then. Ready to launch, now is th etime for some marketing, right? By July 26, I already had a “launchable” product that barely works (I marked this date on a Notion docs, this is how I know). Yet, I had spent almost no time on marketing, sales, whatever. After all, “You build and they will come”. Did I know that I needed marketing? Of course I did, but knowingly didn’t. Why, you might ask. Well, from my perspective, it had to be a dev-heavy product; meaning that you spend most of your time on developing it, mostly coding skills. But, this is simply wrong. As a rule of thumb, as noted by one of the greatests, Marc Louvion, you should spend at least twice of the building time on marketing. ❗️ Time spent on building \* 2 people don’t know your product > they don’t use your product > you don’t get users > you don’t make money Easy as that. Following the same reasoning, a slightly different approach to planning a project is possible. Determine an approximate time to complete the project with a high level project plan. Let’s say 6 months. By the reasoning above, 2 months should go into building, and 4 into marketing. If you need 4 months for building instead of 2, then you need 8 months of marketing, which makes the time to complete the project 12 months. If you don’t have that much time, then quit the project. When does a project count as completed? Well, in reality, never. But, I think we have to define success conditions even before we start for indie projects and startups; so we know when to quit when they are not met. A success condition could look like “Make $6000 in 12 months” or “Have 3000 users in 6 months”. It all depends on the project. But, once you set it, it should be set in stone: You don’t change it unless absolutely necessary. I suspect there are few principles that make a solopreneur successful; and knowing when to quit and when to continue is definitely one of them. Marc Louvion is famously known for his success, but he got there after failing so many projects. To my knowledge, the same applies to Nico Jeannen, Pieter Levels, or almost everyone as well. ❗️ Determining when to continue even before you start will definitely help in the long run. A half-aed launch Time-leap again. Around mid August, I “soft launched” my product. By soft launch, I mean lazy marketing. Just tweeting about it, posting it on free directories. Did I get any traffic? Surely I did. Did I get any users? Nope. Only after this time, it hit me: “Either something is wrong with me, or with this product” Marketing might be a much bigger factor for a project’s success after all. Even though I get some traffic, not convincing enough for people to sign up even for a free trial. The product was still perfect in my eyes at the time (well, still is ^(\_),) so the right people are not finding my product, I thought. Then, a question that I should have been asking at the very first place, one that could prevent all these, comes to my mind: “How do even people search for such tools?” If we are to consider this whole journey of me and my so-far-failed product to be an already destined failure, one metric suffices to show why. Search volume: 30. Even if people have such a pain point, they are not looking for email summaries. So, almost no organic traffic coming from Google. But, as a person who did zero marketing on this or any product, who has zero marketing knowledge, who doesn’t have an audience on social media, there is not much I could do. Finally, it was time to give up. Or not… In my eyes, the most important element that makes a founder (solo or not) successful (this, I am not by any means) is to solve problems. ❗️ So, the problem was this: “People are not finding my product by organic search” How do I make sure I get some organic traffic and gets more visibility? Learn digital marketing and SEO as much as I can within very limited time. Thankfully, without spending much time, I came across Neil Patel's YT channel, and as I said many times, it is an absolute gold mine. I learned a lot, especially about the fundamentals, and surely it will be fruitful; but there is no magic trick that could make people visit your website. SEO certainly helps, but only when people are looking for your keywords. However, it is truly a magical solution to get in touch with REAL people that are in your user segments: 👉 Understand your pains, understand their problems, help them to solve them via building products. I did not do this so far, have to admit. But, in case you would like to have a chat about your email usage, and email productivity, just get in touch; I’d be delighted to hear about them. Getting ready for a ProductHunt launch The date was Sept 1. And I unlocked an impossible achievement: Running out of Supabase’s free plan’s Egres limit while having zero users. I was already considering moving out of their Cloud server and managing a Supabase CLI service on my Hetzner VPS for some time; but never ever suspected that I would have to do this quickly. The cheapest plan Supabase offers is $25/month; yet, at that point, I am in between jobs for such a long time, basically broke, and could barely afford that price. One or two months could be okay, but why pay for it if I will eventually move out of their Cloud service? So, instead of paying $25, I spent two days migrating out of Supabase Cloud. Worth my time? Definitely not. But, when you are broke, you gotta do stupid things. This was the first time that I felt lucky to have zero users: I have no idea how I would manage this migration if I had any. I think this is one of the core tenets of an indie hacker: Controlling their own environment. I can’t remember whose quote this is, but I suspect it was Naval: Entrepreneurs have an almost pathological need to control their own fate. They will take any suffering if they can be in charge of their destiny, and not have it in somebody else’s hands. What’s truly scary is, at least in my case, we make people around us suffer at the expense of our attempting to control our own fates. I know this period has been quite hard on my wife as well, as I neglected her quite a bit, but sadly, I know that this will happen again. It is something that I can barely help with. Still, so sorry. After working the last two weeks on a ProductHunt Launch, I finally launched it this Tuesday. Zero ranking, zero new users, but 36 kind people upvoted my product, and many commented and provided invaluable feedback. I couldn't be more grateful for each one of them 🙏. Considering all these, what lies in the future of Summ though? I have no idea, to be honest. On one hand, I have zero users, have no job, no income. So, I need a way to make money asap. On the other hand, the whole idea of it revolves around one core premise (not an assumption) that I am not so willing to share; and I couldn’t have more trust in it. This might not be the best iteration of it, however I certainly believe that email usage is one of the best problem spaces one could work on. 👉 But, one thing is for certain: I need to get in touch with people, and talk with them about this product I built so far. In fact, this is the only item on my agenda. Nothing else will save my brainchild <3. Below are some other insights and notes that I got during my journey; as they do not 100% fit into this story, I think it is more suitable to list them here. I hope you enjoyed reading this. Give Summ a try, it comes with a generous free trial, no credit card required. Some additional notes and insights: Project planning is one of the most underestimated skills for solopreneurs. It saves you enormous time, and helps you to keep your focus up. Building B2C products beats building B2B products. Businesses are very willing to pay big bucks if your product helps them. On the other hand, spending a few hours per user who would pay $5/m probably is not worth your time. It doesn’t matter how brilliant your product is if no one uses it. If you cannot sell a product in a certain category/niche (or do not know how to sell it), it might be a good idea not to start a project in it. Going after new ideas and ventures is quite risky, especially if you don’t know how to market it. On the other hand, an already established category means that there is already demand. Whether this demand is sufficient or not is another issue. As long as there is enough demand for your product to fit in, any category/niche is good. Some might be better, some might be worse. Unless you are going hardcore B2B, you will need people to find your product by means of organic search. Always conduct thorough keyword research as soon as possible.

AI will obsolete most young vertical SAAS startups, I will not promote

This is an unpopular opinion, but living in New York City and working with a ton of vertical SaaS startups, meaning basically database wrapper startups that engineer workflows for specific industries and specific users, what they built was at one point in time kind of innovative, or their edge was the fact that they built these like very specific workflows. And so a lot of venture capital and seed funding has gone into these types of startups. But with AI, those database wrapper startups are basically obsolete. I personally feel like all of these companies are going to have to shift like quickly to AI or watch all of their edge and what value they bring to the table absolutely evaporate. It's something that I feel like it's not currently being priced in and no one really knows how to price, but it's going to be really interesting to watch as more software becomes generated and workflows get generated. I’m not saying these companies are worth nothing, but their products need to be completely redone EDIT: for people not understanding: The UX is completely different from traditional vertical saas. Also in real world scenarios, AI does not call the same APIs as the front end. The data handling and validation is different. It’s 50% rebuild. Then add in the technical debt, the fact that they might need a different tech stack to build agents correctly, different experience in their engineers. the power struggles that occur inside companies that need a huge change like this could tank the whole thing alone. It can be done, but these companies are vulnerable. The edge they have is working with existing customers to get it right. But they basically blew millions on a tech implementation that’s not as relevant going forwards. Investors maybe better served putting money into a fresh cap table

I'm technical looking for non-technical co-founder with a good idea and good background.

Hi all! So things have fell through with my co-founder and I have decided to start looking for new opportunities. I'm a senior software engineer looking to work with someone who already has an idea. I've primarily worked on fintech during my career.  I've build payment systems, fraud prevention mechanisms, and arrear collections infrastructure. The products I've had a key role in developing have helped UK governments and banks save millions of pounds. I've built beautiful front end systems (web, android, and IOS) that are being used by thousands of people and have developed back end infrastructure that is currently servicing millions of requests per day. I'm open to working in most domains if the idea and the founder behind are great. I'm looking for a co-founder who is ideally an expert in there space and has a good idea. I'll try to get back to everyone who pings me. All the best!

Validate before building is no longer relevant - (I will not promote)

Change my mind: So many accelerators and guidance shouts about the mom test and validation, but I believe it's out of date. It all harks back to a time before you could build easily build in a week at no cost. Now, as a semi-technical but non coding founder, at no cost I can quickly test a thesis, using AI and a lightweight tech stack. Sure I'm not getting a blind interview about a problem, but the mom test really was about reducing the risk in an idea before committing to build, because building carries cost. But why waste the time? Sales & prospecting is so difficult, people aren't interested in taking interviews without a bit of meat, and instead of farting around asking questions, I think we're now in the era of testing thesis with a quick build, rather than extensive mom testing. After all: User feedback > Interview feedback P.s I will not promote

Marketing strategy for early-stage startup

Hi! I'm a first-time founder and now we with my co-founder are working on launching our solution. We are working on a b2c service that visualizes what people feel based on their notes. Our potential users are women 18-29 who are interested in feeling better. I'm non-technical so marketing is in my responsibilities. Now I am trying to create something like a marketing strategy for this early-stage launch, and I would like to know your opinions about it, maybe I missed something that could work for us. In my plan, we start by announcing in personal social networks, like LI, Ig and meeting new people on offline events. We also would try to have some paid or unpaid announcements in groups on Fb about health, well-being, new apps, AI (we use AI in our service), women entrepreneurs supportive communities. We were thinking about Tinder Ads, but I didn't have any reviews of it. We also plan to work with influencers on Ig and YT, maybe TikTok. And also would like to try Google Ads, IG ads, YT ads. &#x200B; Have you tried something of it? How it was? Maybe I missed something that worked for you in similar cases?

Hot take: AI will replace non-technical founders before technical founders [I will not promote]

I think the prevailing theory is AI is going to empower non-technical people to create complex systems just by writing a prompt or prompts. I think a variant of that is getting close which are agentic workflows where something triggers an agent and it does things autonomously. These sort of systems are starting to pop up everywhere (zapier, n8n, others...) however we're a ways off from these being able to respond in near real time. Long story short you'll still need to have code to run and someone to write that code (at least for a few more years) I've been using Deepresearch by OpenAI since Monday. I'm a technical founder without a formal business background. I've had it do product market fit analysis, sam/tam estimates, go to market strategies and it's producing fantastic reports. I could see it handling pretty much 90% of the non-technical business work that doesn't involve action in the physical world. It produced the content of a very well thought out pitch deck for one of my businesses. It's identifying potential customers. It's pretty damn crazy. Like right now I have it building a financial pro-forma for my data room. In fact it finished before I could write this post!

Looking for a non-technical co-founder (I will not promote)

Hey everyone, I've launched an AI networking agent designed to connect people based on specific prompts. You describe the type of person you're looking for, and it provides a relevant contact. This tool can be used for hiring, procuring services, selling services, and more. I'm currently seeking a highly motivated, high-energy non-technical co-founder to handle sales and marketing, conduct customer interviews to grow our user base. No experience is required, only a strong willingness to succeed. We're completely bootstrapped but plan to start fundraising after securing our first paying users. If you're interested, shoot me a DM. i will not promote

Best AI tools for non-technical founder to demonstrate the vision (I will not promote)

Hey all, I have an MVP nearly ready but when I speak to potential co-founders, customers and investors, I want to be able to show the vision of what it will look like and do in the future. Wondering if people have an opinion on the best tool(s) out there to sell this sort of vision? The output doesn't need to be usable, but I need the people who look at it to understand what the product will be in the future. It could be a bunch of nicely designed screens (something like Uizard or Visily seems to do this) or even a video explaining what it will do (don't think any of the video tools are at this level yet) or it may be piecing together a few tools. Keen to hear what others have done in this case!

Looking for a 3/4 Non-Technical Co-founders and 1 Technical co-founder

I have 3 startups that I would like to others to join. They are already up and running but I don't have the time to run all of them at once. Equity first then hopefully soon salary. Medical Recruitment in the UK - looking for Marketing and/or recruitment experience. You do not have to be in the UK and it can be alongside your current job. I already have 2000 nurses from overseas ready to come over. I have 2 pipelines involving education companies and IELTS training. Branding Company (UK and USA) - looking for marketers to push this company. This is in its infancy but I have a pool of 600 domain names along with a number of branding domains. I also have 2 trademarks pending in the UK. AI Saas - this is something I have been working on for a long time but cannot get off the ground myself. I would love the support of a technical co-founder but if I can get others to help it will be much faster. This software would also help support the other companies. This one is really just in my head and not reality yet but you never know. To clarify this is about people having fun, enjoying what they do and making money through this journey.

Does this sound useful? [I will not promote]

My idea is an AI model that helps business owner make smart decisions no matter their size. (Mentor in your pocket) No more spending ours researching, Validating, planning, time wasting decision discussions etc 🕑Save Time > Saving Money💰 ⬇️Read for a better understanding⬇️ 1) give it context about your business( the more specific the better) 2) ask it a question. E.g "I need a marketing strategy that appeals to the X audience more " E.g "At the current rate is my business dying?" E.g "give me a step by step guide using the resources I have that can get my business up and running" 3) results aren't just pulled out of the air but are pulled from a database with answers and case studies to back up the answer. E.g "company Y had competition with company X in [2012] to get a larger market share so company Y...[The decisions that company made to get the result similar to the problem your facing]" This would even be friendly for people who wish to start a new business. •E.g prompt: "[ input idea] please validate my idea, does it suck?" Result could even be from a specific entrepreneur. E.g • "Alex Hormozi states that ... in the book $100M Offers. And it seems you are missing ... from his framework." Here is what you can do to [Desired result]. (You can specify which entrepreneur or the AI will select the most relevant one to you.)

Finally Launched My First App Without Any Coding Experience

About Myself I am a structural engineer that are taught to design buildings in the day and I have been dreaming forever to build a SaaS business to get out of the rat race. However, as a structural engineer, coding is definitely not something I am capable of doing (I have some simple knowledge, but its no way close to building an app) The Journey As I've mentioned, I always wanted to build a SaaS business because in my mind the business model is most attractive to me, where you only need to build once and can sell to millions. So I started off searching and exploring on the internet and my first ever "SaaS" was from Wordpress. I am buying plugin from other user and then pluggin into my own Wordpress website. It was a project management tool SaaS. I was so excited about the website and can't even sleep well at night because I'm just so hype about it. But, the reality is because this is my first ever business, I totally didn't realise about the importance of UI UX or my business differentiation, thinking that everyone will be as excited as I am. Then, I went deeper and deeper into the journey (I can write more about this in another post if anyone is interested) and finally landed on Flutterflow to create my first ever app. No Code Journey Thanks to no code builder, I never thought that a non-coder like me can ever create an app and got accepted by the App Store/Play Store. Since that I am using a low-code builder, for any specific requirement that I need that are not covered natively, I will just talk to ChatGPT and boom I pretty much got most of the answer I needed. About The App As someone that always try to keep track of my expenses, I never able to find an app that are simple and interesting enough for me to continue on the journey. I realise that I could have incorporate AI into this journey and hence there go, I created an AI Money Tracker. Let me introduce Rolly: AI Money Tracker - a new AI expense tracker where you can easily record your transactions just by chatting with our bot Rolly and it will automatically record and categorise the transaction into the most suitable category (you can also create any of your own category and it will also take care of it in consideration). I am not sharing the app link here to avoid getting ban, but feel free to search up Rolly: AI Money Tracker on either App Store on Play Store. My Learnings As someone that can't code and never imagine that I could create a production app by myself and publish it on to the App Store and Play Store. Since I am not making any money yet and just at the beginning of my entrepreneur journey, I can't give any substantial advice, all I can say is just my own learnings and feelings. My advice is if you have a dream of building a business, just go for it, don't worry about all the problems that you can think of to convince yourself not making the start at all. From my point of view, as long as you're not giving up everything (eg, putting yourself in huge debt etc), why don't just go for it and you've got nothing much to lose. You'll only lose if you never even get started. And also, I believe that creating an app is always the easiest step out of the entreprenuership journey, marketing and distribution is the key to success. Even though you've spent days and nights on it and it might mean everything to you, the truth is people don't really cares and you'll need to market for it. I am still in journey to learn how to do marketing, content, building a business and everything. I think this is just a very beginning of my journey and hopefully there's more interesting one to share further down the road.

Why raise in 2025? - I will not promote

I will not promote Lately, I've been thinking about how AI tools are completely reshaping what it means to bootstrap a startup. It honestly feels like we're living through a golden age for entrepreneurs where you don't necessarily need venture capital to build something big or meaningful. At my company, we're a small team of just four people, bootstrapping our AI-focused startup. Thanks to AI-powered tools, we're able to keep our burn rate ridiculously low, quickly test new ideas, and scale our operations way faster than we ever expected. It’s honestly pretty incredible how accessible advanced technology has become, even compared to just a few years ago. Of course, bootstrapping definitely comes with its own share of headaches. For example, we've noticed that funded startups get significantly better access to cloud credits, advertising budgets, and enterprise-level tools. We do have access to some discounts and free resources, but it rarely compares to what funded startups enjoy. This can feel frustrating, especially when you know you're competing directly with businesses that have those extra advantages. Visibility is another major challenge we've noticed. Without big funding announcements or a well-connected investor backing us, getting attention from media or even early adopters can be tough. It's just harder to make a splash without someone else's endorsement. We've had to accept and work around creatively. That said, there's something genuinely empowering about staying bootstrapped, prioritizing profitability, and maintaining control over our vision. After speaking with several investors, we've become aware of how investors can significantly influence or even redirect the trajectory of a business. We've heard stories where investors gained enough leverage to replace the original founders or have killed perfectly profitable businesses that were not growing "fast enough", which certainly gave us pause. They can definitely be helpful but giving the control over the future of my business to someone else would definitely make me feel anxious. At this time, we simply don't feel raising external capital aligns with our current goals, but we're also aware that this could change in the future. For now, maintaining autonomy and staying close to our original vision remains a priority. I'm curious to hear from others here who've been through this. Have you successfully bootstrapped an AI a tech business? What obstacles did you encounter, and how did you overcome them? EDIT: To give you a bit of perspective, my company is a B2B SaaS in the finance industry based in Europe. We have received VC funding in the past but it was an exceptionally good deal and we don't plan to raise in the near future even-thought it may change if we see the need to help us scale. We have also raised a significant amount in soft funding. Right now, we are growing on our revenues, and we plan to continue this trajectory. Recently, one of our developers left, and although we are a small team, we noticed that it had little to no impact on our productivity.

16 years old and thinking about creating a startup

Hi to everyone, this is my first post on Reddit and r/Startups. Sorry in advance if there is any mistake. I'm 16 years old, and I'm already planning to create my startup. Growing up in the digital age has given me both inspiration and doubts. On one side, you hear advice like, “You need connections with powerful people to succeed.” On the other, there are stories of founders coming from poverty and now leading billion-dollar companies.That really sucks. I'm here because I believe this community offers honest and grounded insights. So you can analyze, I leave you my goals. I accept all the advice you have. I’ll finish high school in two years while using my free time to learn about AI, programming, agile methods, and business basics. After that, I plan to pursue a Systems Engineering degree, even though I’ve debated skipping university. My older siblings convinced me it’s worth it for the professional and technical foundation. During college, I aim to freelance, save money, and build connections with entrepreneurs and developers. Beyond that, my 15-year plan includes working in tech companies to gain experience, creating an MVP for my startup, and securing funding through investors or incubators. I want to solve real-world problems using tools that feel future-proof. While I sometimes feel behind, I’m determined to catch up and take advantage of the opportunities ahead. I know the startup journey is uncertain—like a vulnerable animal facing competition, funding issues, and market challenges. But I’m ready to adapt as my vision evolves. Like for example the time. Obviously I would like to keep it exactly but you never know what can happen along the way. I’d love to hear your thoughts or advice. Thanks in advance, and I apologize if anything is unclear

What are the latest areas you see tech entrepreneurs focusing on?

I’m interested in the “latest hot area.” For example, I see people developing offerings around bitcoin. Obviously “AI” is huge, but are there subsets of this such as cyber security, or productivity tools, or customer service chat, etc.? AI-powered consumer apps such as fitness or travel recommendations? In other words, what are the recent areas where people see opportunity and are doing startups around it?

Behind the scene : fundraising pre-seed of an AI startup

A bit of feedback from our journey at our AI startup. We started prototyping stuff around agentic AI last winter with very cool underlying tech research based on some academic papers (I can send you links if you're interested in LLM orchestration). I'm a serial entrepreneur with 2x exits, nothing went fancy but enough to keep going into the next topic. This time, running an AI project has been a bit different and unique due to the huge interest around the topic. Here are a few insights. Jan \~ Mar: Research Nothing was serious, just a side project with a friend on weekends (the guy became our lead SWE). Market was promising and we had the convinction that our tech can be game changer in computer systems workflows. March \~ April: Market Waking Up Devin published their pre-seed $20m fundraising led by Founders Fund; they paved the market with legitimacy. I decided to launch some coffee meetings with a few angels in my network. Interest confirmed. Back to work on some more serious early prototyping; hard work started here. April \~ May: YC S24 (Fail) Pumped up by our prospective angels and the market waking up on the agentic topic, I applied to YC as a solo founder (was still looking for funds and co-founders). Eventually got rejected (no co-founder and not US-based). May \~ July: VC Dance (Momentum 1) Almost randomly at the same time we got rejected from YC, I got introduced to key members of the VC community by one of our prospective angels. Interest went crazy... tons of calls. Brace yourself here, we probably met 30\~40 funds (+ angels). Got strong interests from 4\~5 of them (3 to 5 meetings each), ultimately closed 1 and some interests which might convert later in the next stage. The legend of AI being hype is true. Majority of our calls went only by word of mouth, lots of inbounds, people even not having the deck would book us a call in the next 48h after saying hi. Also lots of "tourists," just looking because of AI but with no strong opinion on the subject to move further. The hearsay about 90% rejection is true. You'll have a lot of nos, ending some days exhausted and unmotivated. End July: Closing, the Hard Part The VC roadshow is kind of an art you need to master. You need to keep momentum high enough and looking over-subscribed. Good pre-seed VC deals are over-competitive, and good funds only focus on them; they will have opportunities to catch up on lost chances at the seed stage later. We succeeded (arduously) to close our 18\~24mo budget with 1 VC, a few angels, and some state-guaranteed debt. Cash in bank just on time for payday in August (don't under-estimate time of processing) Now: Launching and Prepping the Seed Round We're now in our first weeks of go-to-market with a lot of uncertainty but a very ambitious plan ahead. The good part of having met TONS of VCs during the pre-seed roadshow is that we met probably our future lead investors in these. What would look like a loss of time in the initial pre-seed VC meetings has been finally very prolific, helping us to refine our strategy, assessing more in-depth the market (investors have a lot of insights, they meet a lot of people... that's their full-time job). We now have clear milestones and are heading to raise our seed round by end of year/Q1 if stars stay aligned :) Don't give up, the show must go on.

I spent 6 months on building a tool, and got 0 zero users. Here is my story.

Edit Thank you all so much for your time reading my story. Your support, feedback, criticism, and skepticism; all helped me a lot, and I couldn't appreciate it enough \^\_\^ TL;DR I spent 6 months on a tool that currently has 0 users. Below is what I learned during my journey, sharing because I believe most mistakes are easily avoidable. Do not overestimate your product and assume it will be an exception to fundamental principles. Principles are there for a reason. Always look for validation before you start. Avoid building products with a low money-to-effort ratio/in very competitive fields. Unless you have the means, you probably won't make it. Pick a problem space, pick your target audience, and talk to them before thinking about a solution. Identify and match their pain points. Only then should you think of a solution. If people are not overly excited or willing to pay in advance for a discounted price, it might be a sign to rethink. Sell one and only one feature at a time. Avoid everything else. If people don't pay for that one core feature, no secondary feature will change their mind. Always spend twice as much time marketing as you do building. You will not get users if they don't know it exists. Define success metrics ("1000 users in 3 months" or "$6000 in the account at the end of 6 months") before you start. If you don't meet them, strongly consider quitting the project. If you can't get enough users to keep going, nothing else matters. VALIDATION, VALIDATION, VALIDATION. Success is not random, but most of our first products will not make a success story. Know when to admit failure, and move on. Even if a product of yours doesn't succeed, what you learned during its journey will turn out to be invaluable for your future. My story So, this is the story of a product, Summ, that I’ve been working on for the last 6 months. As it's the first product I’ve ever built, after watching you all from the sidelines, I have learned a lot, made many mistakes, and did only a few things right. Just sharing what I’ve learned and some insights from my journey so far. I hope that this post will help you avoid the mistakes I made — most of which I consider easily avoidable — while you enjoy reading it, and get to know me a little bit more 🤓. A slow start after many years Summ isn’t the first product I really wanted to build. Lacking enough dev skills to even get started was a huge blocker for so many years. In fact, the first product I would’ve LOVED to build was a smart personal shopping assistant. I had this idea 4 years ago; but with no GPT, no coding skills, no technical co-founder, I didn’t have the means to make it happen. I still do not know if such a tool exists and is good enough. All I wanted was a tool that could make data-based predictions about when to buy stuff (“buy a new toothpaste every three months”) and suggest physical products that I might need or be strongly interested in. AFAIK, Amazon famously still struggles with the second one. Fast-forward a few years, I learned the very basics of HTML, CSS, and Vanilla JS. Still was not there to build a product; but good enough to code my design portfolio from scratch. Yet, I couldn’t imagine myself building a product using Vanilla JS. I really hated it, I really sucked at it. So, back to tutorial hell, and to learn about this framework I just heard about: React.React introduced so many new concepts to me. “Thinking in React” is a phrase we heard a lot, and with quite good reasons. After some time, I was able to build very basic tutorial apps, both in React, and React Native; but I have to say that I really hated coding for mobile. At this point, I was already a fan of productivity apps, and had a concept for a time management assistant app in my design portfolio. So, why not build one? Surely, it must be easy, since every coding tutorial starts with a todo app. ❌ WRONG! Building a basic todo app is easy enough, but building one good enough for a place in the market was a challenge I took and failed. I wasted one month on that until I abandoned the project for good. Even if I continued working on it, as the productivity landscape is overly competitive, I wouldn’t be able to make enough money to cover costs, assuming I make any. Since I was (and still am) in between jobs, I decided to abandon the project. 👉 What I learned: Do not start projects with a low ratio of money to effort and time. Example: Even if I get 500 monthly users, 200 of which are paid users (unrealistically high number), assuming an average subscription fee of $5/m (such apps are quite cheap, mostly due to the high competition), it would make me around $1000 minus any occurring costs. Any founder with a product that has 500 active users should make more. Even if it was relatively successful, due to the high competition, I wouldn’t make any meaningful money. PS: I use Todoist today. Due to local pricing, I pay less than $2/m. There is no way I could beat this competitive pricing, let alone the app itself. But, somehow, with a project that wasn’t even functional — let alone being an MVP — I made my first Wi-Fi money: Someone decided that the domain I preemptively purchased is worth something. By this point, I had already abandoned the project, certainly wasn’t going to renew the domain, was looking for a FT job, and a new project that I could work on. And out of nowhere, someone hands me some free money — who am I not to take it? Of course, I took it. The domain is still unused, no idea why 🤔. Ngl, I still hate the fact that my first Wi-Fi money came from this. A new idea worth pursuing? Fast-forward some weeks now. Around March, I got this crazy idea of building an email productivity tool. We all use emails, yet we all hate them. So, this must be fixed. Everyone uses emails, in fact everyone HAS TO use emails. So, I just needed to build a tool and wait for people to come. This was all, really. After all, the problem space is huge, there is enough room for another product, everyone uses emails, no need for any further validation, right? ❌ WRONG ONCE AGAIN! We all hear from the greatest in the startup landscape that we must validate our ideas with real people, yet at least some of us (guilty here 🥸) think that our product will be hugely successful and prove them to be an exception. Few might, but most are not. I certainly wasn't. 👉 Lesson learned: Always validate your ideas with real people. Ask them how much they’d pay for such a tool (not if they would). Much better if they are willing to pay upfront for a discount, etc. But even this comes later, keep reading. I think the difference between “How much” and “If” is huge for two reasons: (1) By asking them for “How much”, you force them to think in a more realistic setting. (2) You will have a more realistic idea on your profit margins. Based on my competitive analysis, I already had a solution in my mind to improve our email usage standards and email productivity (huge mistake), but I did my best to learn about their problems regarding those without pushing the idea too hard. The idea is this: Generate concise email summaries with suggested actions, combine them into one email, and send it at their preferred times. Save as much as time the AI you end up with allows. After all, everyone loves to save time. So, what kind of validation did I seek for? Talked with only a few people around me about this crazy, internet-breaking idea. The responses I got were, now I see, mediocre; no one got excited about it, just said things along the lines of “Cool idea, OK”. So, any reasonable person in this situation would think “Okay, not might not be working”, right? Well, I did not. I assumed that they were the wrong audience for this product, and there was this magical land of user segments waiting eagerly for my product, yet unknowingly. To this day, I still have not reached this magical place. Perhaps, it didn’t exist in the first place. If I cannot find it, whether it exists or not doesn’t matter. I am certainly searching for it. 👉 What I should have done: Once I decide on a problem space (time management, email productivity, etc.), I should decide on my potential user segments, people who I plan to sell my product to. Then I should go talk to those people, ask them about their pains, then get to the problem-solving/ideation phase only later. ❗️ VALIDATION COMES FROM THE REALITY OUTSIDE. What validation looks like might change from product to product; but what invalidation looks like is more or less the same for every product. Nico Jeannen told me yesterday “validation = money in the account” on Twitter. This is the ultimate form of validation your product could get. If your product doesn’t make any money, then something is invalidated by reality: Your product, you, your idea, who knows? So, at this point, I knew a little bit of Python from spending some time in tutorial hell a few years ago, some HTML/CSS/JS, barely enough React to build a working app. React could work for this project, but I needed easy-to-implement server interactivity. Luckily, around this time, I got to know about this new gen of indie hackers, and learned (but didn’t truly understand) about their approach to indie hacking, and this library called Nextjs. How good Next.js still blows my mind. So, I was back to tutorial hell once again. But, this time, with a promise to myself: This is the last time I would visit tutorial hell. Time to start building this "ground-breaking idea" Learning the fundamentals of Next.js was easier than learning of React unsurprisingly. Yet, the first time I managed to run server actions on Next.js was one of the rarest moments that completely blew my mind. To this day, I reject the idea that it is something else than pure magic under its hood. Did I absolutely need Nextjs for this project though? I do not think so. Did it save me lots of time? Absolutely. Furthermore, learning Nextjs will certainly be quite helpful for other projects that I will be tackling in the future. Already got a few ideas that might be worth pursuing in the head in case I decide to abandon Summ in the future. Fast-forward few weeks again: So, at this stage, I had a barely working MVP-like product. Since the very beginning, I spent every free hour (and more) on this project as speed is essential. But, I am not so sure it was worth it to overwork in retrospect. Yet, I know I couldn’t help myself. Everything is going kinda smooth, so what’s the worst thing that could ever happen? Well, both Apple and Google announced their AIs (Apple Intelligence and Google Gemini, respectively) will have email summarization features for their products. Summarizing singular emails is no big deal, after all there were already so many similar products in the market. I still think that what truly matters is a frictionless user experience, and this is why I built this product in a certain way: You spend less than a few minutes setting up your account, and you get to enjoy your email summaries, without ever visiting its website again. This is still a very cool concept I really like a lot. So, at this point: I had no other idea that could be pursued, already spent too much time on this project. Do I quit or not? This was the question. Of course not. I just have to launch this product as quickly as possible. So, I did something right, a quite rare occurrence I might say: Re-planned my product, dropped everything secondary to the core feature immediately (save time on reading emails), tried launching it asap. 👉 Insight: Sell only one core feature at one time. Drop anything secondary to this core feature. Well, my primary occupation is product design. So one would expect that a product I build must have stellar design. I considered any considerable time spent on design at this stage would be simply wasted. I still think this is both true and wrong: True, because if your product’s core benefits suck, no one will care about your design. False, because if your design looks amateurish, no one will trust you and your product. So, I always targeted an average level design with it and the way this tool works made it quite easy as I had to design only 2 primary pages: Landing page and user portal (which has only settings and analytics pages). However, even though I knew spending time on design was not worth much of my time, I got a bit “greedy”: In fact, I redesigned those pages three times, and still ended up with a so-so design that I am not proud of. 👉 What I would do differently: Unless absolutely necessary, only one iteration per stage as long as it works. This, in my mind, applies to everything. If your product’s A feature works, then no need to rewrite it from scratch for any reason, or even refactor it. When your product becomes a success, and you absolutely need that part of your codebase to be written, do so, but only then. Ready to launch, now is th etime for some marketing, right? By July 26, I already had a “launchable” product that barely works (I marked this date on a Notion docs, this is how I know). Yet, I had spent almost no time on marketing, sales, whatever. After all, “You build and they will come”. Did I know that I needed marketing? Of course I did, but knowingly didn’t. Why, you might ask. Well, from my perspective, it had to be a dev-heavy product; meaning that you spend most of your time on developing it, mostly coding skills. But, this is simply wrong. As a rule of thumb, as noted by one of the greatests, Marc Louvion, you should spend at least twice of the building time on marketing. ❗️ Time spent on building \* 2 people don’t know your product > they don’t use your product > you don’t get users > you don’t make money Easy as that. Following the same reasoning, a slightly different approach to planning a project is possible. Determine an approximate time to complete the project with a high level project plan. Let’s say 6 months. By the reasoning above, 2 months should go into building, and 4 into marketing. If you need 4 months for building instead of 2, then you need 8 months of marketing, which makes the time to complete the project 12 months. If you don’t have that much time, then quit the project. When does a project count as completed? Well, in reality, never. But, I think we have to define success conditions even before we start for indie projects and startups; so we know when to quit when they are not met. A success condition could look like “Make $6000 in 12 months” or “Have 3000 users in 6 months”. It all depends on the project. But, once you set it, it should be set in stone: You don’t change it unless absolutely necessary. I suspect there are few principles that make a solopreneur successful; and knowing when to quit and when to continue is definitely one of them. Marc Louvion is famously known for his success, but he got there after failing so many projects. To my knowledge, the same applies to Nico Jeannen, Pieter Levels, or almost everyone as well. ❗️ Determining when to continue even before you start will definitely help in the long run. A half-aed launch Time-leap again. Around mid August, I “soft launched” my product. By soft launch, I mean lazy marketing. Just tweeting about it, posting it on free directories. Did I get any traffic? Surely I did. Did I get any users? Nope. Only after this time, it hit me: “Either something is wrong with me, or with this product” Marketing might be a much bigger factor for a project’s success after all. Even though I get some traffic, not convincing enough for people to sign up even for a free trial. The product was still perfect in my eyes at the time (well, still is ^(\_),) so the right people are not finding my product, I thought. Then, a question that I should have been asking at the very first place, one that could prevent all these, comes to my mind: “How do even people search for such tools?” If we are to consider this whole journey of me and my so-far-failed product to be an already destined failure, one metric suffices to show why. Search volume: 30. Even if people have such a pain point, they are not looking for email summaries. So, almost no organic traffic coming from Google. But, as a person who did zero marketing on this or any product, who has zero marketing knowledge, who doesn’t have an audience on social media, there is not much I could do. Finally, it was time to give up. Or not… In my eyes, the most important element that makes a founder (solo or not) successful (this, I am not by any means) is to solve problems. ❗️ So, the problem was this: “People are not finding my product by organic search” How do I make sure I get some organic traffic and gets more visibility? Learn digital marketing and SEO as much as I can within very limited time. Thankfully, without spending much time, I came across Neil Patel's YT channel, and as I said many times, it is an absolute gold mine. I learned a lot, especially about the fundamentals, and surely it will be fruitful; but there is no magic trick that could make people visit your website. SEO certainly helps, but only when people are looking for your keywords. However, it is truly a magical solution to get in touch with REAL people that are in your user segments: 👉 Understand your pains, understand their problems, help them to solve them via building products. I did not do this so far, have to admit. But, in case you would like to have a chat about your email usage, and email productivity, just get in touch; I’d be delighted to hear about them. Getting ready for a ProductHunt launch The date was Sept 1. And I unlocked an impossible achievement: Running out of Supabase’s free plan’s Egres limit while having zero users. I was already considering moving out of their Cloud server and managing a Supabase CLI service on my Hetzner VPS for some time; but never ever suspected that I would have to do this quickly. The cheapest plan Supabase offers is $25/month; yet, at that point, I am in between jobs for such a long time, basically broke, and could barely afford that price. One or two months could be okay, but why pay for it if I will eventually move out of their Cloud service? So, instead of paying $25, I spent two days migrating out of Supabase Cloud. Worth my time? Definitely not. But, when you are broke, you gotta do stupid things. This was the first time that I felt lucky to have zero users: I have no idea how I would manage this migration if I had any. I think this is one of the core tenets of an indie hacker: Controlling their own environment. I can’t remember whose quote this is, but I suspect it was Naval: Entrepreneurs have an almost pathological need to control their own fate. They will take any suffering if they can be in charge of their destiny, and not have it in somebody else’s hands. What’s truly scary is, at least in my case, we make people around us suffer at the expense of our attempting to control our own fates. I know this period has been quite hard on my wife as well, as I neglected her quite a bit, but sadly, I know that this will happen again. It is something that I can barely help with. Still, so sorry. After working the last two weeks on a ProductHunt Launch, I finally launched it this Tuesday. Zero ranking, zero new users, but 36 kind people upvoted my product, and many commented and provided invaluable feedback. I couldn't be more grateful for each one of them 🙏. Considering all these, what lies in the future of Summ though? I have no idea, to be honest. On one hand, I have zero users, have no job, no income. So, I need a way to make money asap. On the other hand, the whole idea of it revolves around one core premise (not an assumption) that I am not so willing to share; and I couldn’t have more trust in it. This might not be the best iteration of it, however I certainly believe that email usage is one of the best problem spaces one could work on. 👉 But, one thing is for certain: I need to get in touch with people, and talk with them about this product I built so far. In fact, this is the only item on my agenda. Nothing else will save my brainchild <3. Below are some other insights and notes that I got during my journey; as they do not 100% fit into this story, I think it is more suitable to list them here. I hope you enjoyed reading this. Give Summ a try, it comes with a generous free trial, no credit card required. Some additional notes and insights: Project planning is one of the most underestimated skills for solopreneurs. It saves you enormous time, and helps you to keep your focus up. Building B2C products beats building B2B products. Businesses are very willing to pay big bucks if your product helps them. On the other hand, spending a few hours per user who would pay $5/m probably is not worth your time. It doesn’t matter how brilliant your product is if no one uses it. If you cannot sell a product in a certain category/niche (or do not know how to sell it), it might be a good idea not to start a project in it. Going after new ideas and ventures is quite risky, especially if you don’t know how to market it. On the other hand, an already established category means that there is already demand. Whether this demand is sufficient or not is another issue. As long as there is enough demand for your product to fit in, any category/niche is good. Some might be better, some might be worse. Unless you are going hardcore B2B, you will need people to find your product by means of organic search. Always conduct thorough keyword research as soon as possible.

How I made a high tech salary in my first selling month

For over 7 years I worked as a full-stack developer, helping other companies bring their ideas to life. But one day, I thought “Why not try making my own dream come true?”. That’s when I decided to quit my job and start my own journey to becoming an entrepreneur. At first, it wasn’t easy. I didn’t make any money for months and had no idea where to start. I felt lost. Then, I decided to focus on something popular and trending. AI was everywhere, and ChatGPT was the most used AI platform. So I looked into it and I found the OpenAI community forum where people had been asking for features that weren’t being added. That gave me an idea. Why not build those features myself? I created a Chrome extension and I worked on some of the most requested features, like: Downloading the advanced voice mode and messages as MP3 Adding folders to organize chats Saving and reusing prompts Pinning important chats Exporting chats to TXT/JSON files Deleting or archiving multiple chats at once Making chat history searches faster and better It took me about a week to build the first version, and when I published it, the response was incredible. People loved it! Some even said things like, “You’re a lifesaver!” That’s when I realized I had something that could not only help people but also turn into a real business. I kept the first version free to see how people would respond. Many users have been downloading my extension, which prompted Chrome to review it to determine if it qualified for the featured badge. I received the badge, and it has significantly boosted traffic to my extension ever since. After all the positive feedback, I launched a paid version one month ago. A few minutes after publishing it, I made my first sale! That moment was so exciting, and it motivated me to keep going. I already have over 4,000 users and have made more than $4,500 in my first selling month. I’ve decided to release 1-2 new features every month to keep improving the extension based on what users ask for. I also created the same extension for Firefox and Edge users because many people have been asking for it! I also started a Reddit community, where I share updates, sales, discount codes, and ideas for new features. It’s been awesome to connect with users directly and get their feedback. Additionally, I’ve started working on another extension for Claude, which I’m hoping will be as successful as this one. My message to you is this: never give up on your dreams. It might feel impossible at first, but with patience, hard work, and some creativity, you can make it happen. I hope this inspires you to go after what you want. Good luck to all of us!

How Do I Find My First Customers?

Hi r/startups, I've just launched a SAAS platform for ecommerce and digital advertising - automation without full black box campaign management or "AI" led decisions. My question is how do I go about getting people into my platform so I can get feedback/new ideas of things to add? I'm a one man band and am much more comfortable on the technical side than sales etc. I'm happy to offer a couple of months trial - but am lacking the confidence to do stuff like cold messages on LinkedIn (All I see from my connections is moaning about people selling on there) Any tips of how I should reach potential customers? Thanks!

West coast vs east coast investor attitude towards digital health and AI start-up

I am a neurologist and co-founder of a start-up company automating the detection of stroke in the home. We have been fundraising for the last few months and have had the experience of west coast investors telling us to ask for way more and east coast investors suggesting we ask for less. Many west coast investors seem excited by the AI component while many east coast investors see this aspect as a technical risk/a negative. Is this consistent with other people's experience and where on the east coast is the best place to try to fund-raise if you happen to be a start-up in the digital health space (unfortunately we are located in Virginia)? Thanks.

How to start online business in 7 days ?

Easy to do now. There are several tips that I can give you to start your own digital business. 1) Solve your own problem. If you use the Internet, you know that there are a lot of problems that need to be solved. But focus on your problem first. Once you can figure it out and solve your problem. You can move on to solving people's problems. Ideally, to use tools and technology you know. If you don't know, use NO-CODE tools to build it. For example, if you need to create a website, use landing page builder. If you want to automate your own work, like booking meetings, use Zapier to automate tasks. If you want to create a game, sure, use AI Tools to solve it. I don't care what you will use. Use whatever you want. All I want from you is to solve that problem. 2) After solving your own problem. You can focus on people's problems. Because if you can't solve your own shit, why do you want to solve others problems? Remember that always. If you need to build e-commerce, use Shopify. If you need to build a directory, use directory builder. If you need to build landing pages, use landing page builders. Rule of thumb: Niche, Niche, Niche. Try to focus on a specific niche, solve their problem, and make money on it. Then only thinking about exploring new opportunities. You can use No-Code builders or AI tools or hire developers or hire agencies to do it. It depends on your choice. If you are good at coding, build on your own or delegate to a developer or agency. If you have enough time, use AI Tools to build your own thing. If you want to solve a common problem but with a different perspective, yeah, sure, use No-Code builders for that. 3) Digital business works exactly the same as offline business with one difference. You can move a lot faster, build a lot faster, risk a lot faster, fail a lot faster, earn a lot faster, sell a lot faster, and scale a lot faster. In one week, you can build e-commerce. In the second week, you can build SaaS. In the third week, you can build an AI agent. In the fourth week, you can build your own channel on social media. 4) It gives more power. With great power comes great responsibility. From day one, invest in SEO, social media presence, traffic, and acquiring customers. Don't focus on tech stuff. Don't focus on tools. Focus on the real problem: • Traffic • Marketing • Sales • Conversion rate

10y of product development, 2 bankruptcies, and 1 Exit — what next? [Extended Story]

10 years of obsessive pursuit from the bottom to impressive product-market fit and exit. Bootstrapping tech products as Software Developer and 3x Startup Founder (2 bankruptcies and 1 exit). Hi everyone, your motivation has inspired me to delve deeper into my story. So, as promised to some of you, I've expanded on it a bit more, along with my brief reflections. There are many founders, product creators, and proactive individuals, I’ve read many of your crazy stories and lessons so I decided to share mine and the lessons I learned from the bottom to impressive product-market fit and exit. I've spent almost the past 10 years building tech products as a Corporate Team Leader, Senior Software Developer, Online Course Creator, Programming Tutor, Head of Development/CTO, and 3x Startup Founder (2 bankruptcies, and 1 exit). And what next? good question... A brief summary of my journey: Chapter 1: Software Developer / Team Leader / Senior Software Developer I’ve always wanted to create products that win over users’ hearts, carry value, and influence users. Ever since my school days, I’ve loved the tech part of building digital products. At the beginning of school, I started hosting servers for games, blogs and internet forums, and other things that did not require much programming knowledge. My classmates and later even over 100 people played on servers that I hosted on my home PC. Later, as the only person in school, I passed the final exam in computer science. During my computer science studies, I started my first job as a software developer. It was crazy, I was spending 200–300 hours a month in the office attending also to daily classes. Yes, I didn’t have a life, but it truly was the fulfillment of my dreams. I was able to earn good money doing what I love, and I devoted fully myself to it. My key to effectively studying IT and growing my knowledge at rocket speed was learning day by day reading guides, building products to the portfolio, watching youtube channels and attending conferences, and even watching them online, even if I didn’t understand everything at the beginning. In one year we’ve been to every possible event within 400km. We were building healthcare products that were actually used in hospitals and medical facilities. It was a beautiful adventure and tons of knowledge I took from this place. That time I built my first product teams, hired many great people, and over the years became a senior developer and team leader. Even I convinced my study mates to apply to this company and we studied together and worked as well. Finally, there were 4 of us, when I left a friend of mine took over my position and still works there. If you’re reading this, I’m sending you a flood of love and appreciation. I joined as the 8th person, and after around 4 years, when I left hungry for change, there were already over 30 of us, now around 100. It was a good time, greetings to everyone. I finished my Master’s and Engineering degrees in Computer Science, and it was time for changes. Chapter 2: 1st time as a Co-founder — Marketplace In the meantime, there was also my first startup (a marketplace) with four of my friends. We all worked on the product, each of us spent thousands of hours, after hours, entire weekends… and I think finally over a year of work. As you might guess, we lacked the most important things: sales, marketing, and product-market fit. We thought users think like us. We all also worked commercially, so the work went very smoothly, but we didn’t know what we should do next with it… Finally, we didn’t have any customers, but you know what, I don’t regret it, a lot of learning things which I used many times later. The first attempts at validating the idea with the market and business activities. In the end, the product was Airbnb-sized. Landing pages, listings, user panels, customer panels, admin site, notifications, caches, queues, load balancing, and much more. We wanted to publish the fully ready product to the market. It was a marketplace, so if you can guess, we had to attract both sides to be valuable. “Marketplace” — You can imagine something like Uber, if you don’t have passengers it was difficult to convince taxi drivers, if you don’t have a large number of taxi drivers you cannot attract passengers. After a year of development, we were overloaded, and without business, marketing, sales knowledge, and budget. Chapter 3: Corp Team Lead / Programming Tutor / Programming Architecture Workshop Leader Working in a corporation, a totally different environment, an international fintech, another learning experience, large products, and workmates who were waiting for 5 pm to finish — it wasn’t for me. Very slow product development, huge hierarchy, being an ant at the bottom, and low impact on the final product. At that time I understood that being a software developer is not anything special and I compared my work to factory worker. Sorry for that. High rates have been pumped only by high demand. Friends of mine from another industry do more difficult things and have a bigger responsibility for lower rates. That’s how the market works. This lower responsibility time allowed for building the first online course after hours, my own course platform, individual teaching newbies programming, and my first huge success — my first B2C customers, and B2B clients for workshops. I pivoted to full focus on sales, marketing, funnels, advertisements, demand, understanding the market, etc. It was 10x easier than startups but allowed me to learn and validate my conceptions and ideas on an easier market and showed me that it’s much easier to locate their problem/need/want and create a service/product that responds to it than to convince people of your innovative ideas. It’s just supply and demand, such a simple and basic statement, in reality, is very deep and difficult to understand without personal experience. If you’re inexperienced and you think you understand, you don’t. To this day, I love to analyze this catchword in relation to various industries / services / products and rediscover it again and again... While writing this sentence, I’m wondering if I’m not obsessed. Chapter 4: Next try — 2nd time as a founder — Edtech Drawing upon my experiences in selling services, offering trainings, and teaching programming, I wanted to broaden my horizons, delve into various fields of knowledge, involve more teachers, and so on. We started with simple services in different fields of knowledge, mainly relying on teaching in the local area (without online lessons). As I had already gathered some knowledge and experience in marketing and sales, things were going well and were moving in the right direction. The number of teachers in various fields was growing, as was the number of students. I don’t remember the exact statistics anymore, but it was another significant achievement that brought me a lot of satisfaction and new experiences. As you know, I’m a technology lover and couldn’t bear to look at manual processes — I wanted to automate everything: lessons, payments, invoices, customer service, etc. That’s when I hired our first developers (if you’re reading this, I’m sending you a flood of love — we spent a lot of time together and I remember it as a very fruitful and great year) and we began the process of tool and automation development. After a year we had really extended tools for students, teachers, franchise owners, etc. We had really big goals, we wanted to climb higher and higher. Maybe I wouldn’t even fully call it Startup, as the client was paying for the lessons, not for the software. But it gave us positive income, bootstrap financing, and tool development for services provided. Scaling this model was not as costless as SaaS because customer satisfaction was mainly on the side of the teacher, not the quality of the product (software). Finally, we grew to nearly 10 people and dozens of teachers, with zero external funding, and almost $50k monthly revenue. We worked very hard, day and night, and by November 2019, we were packed with clients to the brim. And as you know, that’s when the pandemic hit. It turned everything upside down by 180 degrees. Probably no one was ready for it. With a drastic drop in revenues, society started to save. Tired from the previous months, we had to work even harder. We had to reduce the team, change the model, and save what we had built. We stopped the tool’s development and sales, and with the developers, we started supporting other product teams to not fire them in difficult times. The tool worked passively for the next two years, reducing incomes month by month. With a smaller team providing programming services, we had full stability and earned more than relying only on educational services. At the peak of the pandemic, I promised myself that it was the last digital product I built… Never say never… Chapter 5: Time for fintech — Senior Software Developer / Team Lead / Head of Development I worked for small startups and companies. Building products from scratch, having a significant impact on the product, and complete fulfillment. Thousands of hours and sacrifices. This article mainly talks about startups that I built, so I don’t want to list all the companies, products, and applications that I supported as a technology consultant. These were mainly start-ups with a couple of people up to around 100 people on board. Some of the products were just a rescue mission, others were building an entire tech team. I was fully involved in all of them with the hope that we would work together for a long time, but I wasn’t the only one who made mistakes when looking for a product-market fit. One thing I fully understood: You can’t spend 8–15 hours a day writing code, managing a tech team, and still be able to help build an audience. In marketing and sales, you need to be rested and very creative to bring results and achieve further results and goals. If you have too many responsibilities related to technology, it becomes ineffective. I noticed that when I have more free time, more time to think, and more time to bounce the ball against the wall, I come up with really working marketing/sales strategies and solutions. It’s impossible when you are focused on code all day. You must know that this chapter of my life was long and has continued until now. Chapter 6: 3rd time as a founder — sold Never say never… right?\\ It was a time when the crypto market was really high and it was really trending topic. You know that I love technology right? So I cannot miss the blockchain world. I had experience in blockchain topics by learning on my own and from startups where I worked before. I was involved in crypto communities and I noticed a “starving crowd”. People who did things manually and earned money(crypto) on it.I found potential for building a small product that solves a technological problem. I said a few years before that I don’t want to start from scratch. I decided to share my observations and possibilities with my good friend. He said, “If you gonna built it, I’m in”. I couldn’t stop thinking about it. I had thought and planned every aspect of marketing and sales. And you know what. On this huge mindmap “product” was only one block. 90% of the mindmap was focused on marketing and sales. Now, writing this article, I understood what path I went from my first startup to this one. In the first (described earlier) 90% was the product, but in the last one 90% was sales and marketing. Many years later, I did this approach automatically. What has changed in my head over the years and so many mistakes? At that time, the company for which I provided services was acquired. The next day I got a thank you for my hard work and all my accounts were blocked. Life… I was shocked. We were simply replaced by their trusted technology managers. They wanted to get full control. They acted a bit unkindly, but I knew that they had all my knowledge about the product in the documentation, because I’m used to drawing everything so that in the moment of my weakness (illness, whatever) the team could handle it. That’s what solid leaders do, right? After a time, I know that these are normal procedures in financial companies, the point is that under the influence of emotions, do not do anything inappropriate. I quickly forgot about it, that I was brutally fired. All that mattered was to bring my plan to life. And it has been started, 15–20 hours a day every day. You have to believe me, getting back into the game was incredibly satisfying for me. I didn’t even know that I would be so excited. Then we also noticed that someone was starting to think about the same product as me. So the race began a game against time and the market. I assume that if you have reached this point, you are interested in product-market fit, marketing, and sales, so let me explain my assumptions to you: Product: A very very small tool that allowed you to automate proper tracking and creation of on-chain transactions. Literally, the whole app for the user was located on only three subpages. Starving Crowd: We tapped into an underserved market. The crypto market primarily operates via communities on platforms like Discord, Reddit, Twitter, Telegram, and so on. Therefore, our main strategy was directly communicating with users and demonstrating our tool. This was essentially “free marketing” (excluding the time we invested), as we did not need to invest in ads, promotional materials, or convince people about the efficacy of our tool. The community could directly observe on-chain transactions executed by our algorithms, which were processed at an exceptionally fast rate. This was something they couldn’t accomplish manually, so whenever someone conducted transactions using our algorithm, it was immediately noticeable and stirred a curiosity within the community (how did they do that!). Tests: I conducted the initial tests of the application on myself — we had already invested significantly in developing the product, but I preferred risking my own resources over that of the users. I provided the tool access to my wallet, containing 0.3ETH, and went to sleep. Upon waking up, I discovered that the transactions were successful and my wallet had grown to 0.99ETH. My excitement knew no bounds, it felt like a windfall. But, of course, there was a fair chance I could have lost it too. It worked. As we progressed, some users achieved higher results, but it largely hinged on the parameters set by them. As you can surmise, the strategy was simple — buy low, sell high. There was considerable risk involved. Churn: For those versed in marketing, the significance of repeat visitors cannot be overstated. Access to our tool was granted only after email verification and a special technique that I’d prefer to keep confidential. And this was all provided for free. While we had zero followers on social media, we saw an explosion in our email subscriber base and amassed a substantial number of users and advocates. Revenue Generation: Our product quickly gained popularity as we were effectively helping users earn — an undeniable value proposition. Now, it was time to capitalize on our efforts. We introduced a subscription model charging $300 per week or $1,000 per month — seemingly high rates, but the demand was so intense that it wasn’t an issue. Being a subscriber meant you were prioritized in the queue, ensuring you were among the first to reap benefits — thus adding more “value”. Marketing: The quality of our product and its ability to continually engage users contributed to it achieving what can best be described as viral. It was both a source of pride and astonishment to witness users sharing charts and analyses derived from our tool in forum discussions. They weren’t actively promoting our product but rather using screenshots from our application to illustrate certain aspects of the crypto world. By that stage, we had already assembled a team to assist with marketing, and programming, and to provide round-the-clock helpdesk support. Unforgettable Time: Despite the hype, my focus remained steadfast on monitoring our servers, their capacity, and speed. Considering we had only been on the market for a few weeks, we were yet to implement alerts, server scaling, etc. Our active user base spanned from Japan to the West Coast of the United States. Primarily, our application was used daily during the evenings, but considering the variety of time zones, the only time I could afford to sleep was during the evening hours in Far Eastern Europe, where we had the least users. However, someone always needed to be on guard, and as such, my phone was constantly by my side. After all, we couldn’t afford to let our users down. We found ourselves working 20 hours a day, catering to thousands of users, enduring physical fatigue, engaging in talks with VCs, and participating in conferences. Sudden Downturn: Our pinnacle was abruptly interrupted by the war in Ukraine (next macroeconomic shot straight in the face, lucky guy), a precipitous drop in cryptocurrency value, and swiftly emerging competition. By this time, there were 5–8 comparable tools had infiltrated the market. It was a challenging period as we continually stumbled upon new rivals. They immediately embarked on swift fundraising endeavors — a strategy we overlooked, which in retrospect was a mistake. Although our product was superior, the competitors’ rapid advancement and our insufficient funds for expeditious scaling posed significant challenges. Nonetheless, we made a good decision. We sold the product (exit) to competitors. The revenue from “exit” compensated for all the losses, leaving us with enough rest. We were a small team without substantial budgets for rapid development, and the risk of forming new teams without money to survive for more than 1–2 months was irresponsible. You have to believe me that this decision consumed us sleepless nights. Finally, we sold it. They turned off our app but took algorithms and users. Whether you believe it or not, after several months of toiling day and night, experiencing burnout, growing weary of the topic, and gaining an extra 15 kg in weight, we finally found our freedom… The exit wasn’t incredibly profitable, but we knew they had outdone us. The exit covered all our expenses and granted us a well-deserved rest for the subsequent quarter. It was an insane ride. Despite the uncertainty, stress, struggles, and sleepless nights, the story and experience will remain etched in my memory for the rest of my life. Swift Takeaways: Comprehending User Needs: Do you fully understand the product-market fit? Is your offering just an accessory or does it truly satisfy the user’s needs? The Power of Viral Marketing: Take inspiration from giants like Snapchat, ChatGPT, and Clubhouse. While your product might not attain the same scale (but remember, never say never…), the closer your concept is to theirs, the easier your journey will be. If your user is motivated to text a friend saying, “Hey, check out how cool this is” (like sharing ChatGPT), then you’re on the best track. Really. Even if it doesn’t seem immediately evident, there could be a way to incorporate this into your product. Keep looking until you find it. Niche targeting — the more specific and tailored your product is to a certain audience, the easier your journey will be People love buying from people — establishing a personal brand and associating yourself with the product can make things easier. Value: Seek to understand why users engage with your product and keep returning. The more specific and critical the issue you’re aiming to solve, the easier your path will be. Consider your offerings in terms of products and services and focus on sales and marketing, regardless of personal sentiments. These are just a few points, I plan to elaborate on all of them in a separate article. Many products undergo years of development in search of market fit, refining the user experience, and more. And guess what? There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. Each product and market follows its own rules. Many startups have extensive histories before they finally make their mark (for instance, OpenAI). This entire journey spanned maybe 6–8 months. I grasped and capitalized on the opportunity, but we understood from the start that establishing a startup carried a significant risk, and our crypto product was 10 times riskier. Was it worth it? Given my passion for product development — absolutely. Was it profitable? — No, considering the hours spent — we lose. Did it provide a stable, problem-free life — nope. Did this entire adventure offer a wealth of happiness, joy, and unforgettable experiences — definitely yes. One thing is certain — we’ve amassed substantial experience and it’s not over yet :) So, what lies ahead? Chapter 7: Reverting to the contractor, developing a product for a crypto StartupReturning to the past, we continue our journey… I had invested substantial time and passion into the tech rescue mission product. I came on board as the technical Team Leader of a startup that had garnered over $20M in seed round funding, affiliated with the realm of cryptocurrencies. The investors were individuals with extensive backgrounds in the crypto world. My role was primarily technical, and there was an abundance of work to tackle. I was fully immersed, and genuinely devoted to the role. I was striving for excellence, knowing that if we secured another round of financing, the startup would accelerate rapidly. As for the product and marketing, I was more of an observer. After all, there were marketing professionals with decades of experience on board. These were individuals recruited from large crypto-related firms. I had faith in them, kept an eye on their actions, and focused on my own responsibilities. However, the reality was far from satisfactory. On the last day, the principal investor for the Series A round withdrew. The board made the tough decision to shut down. It was a period of intense observation and gaining experience in product management. This was a very brief summary of the last 10 years. And what next? (Last) Chapter 8: To be announced — Product Owner / Product Consultant / Strategist / CTO After spending countless hours and days deliberating my next steps, one thing is clear: My aspiration is to continue traversing the path of software product development, with the hopeful anticipation that one day, I might ride the crest of the next big wave and ascend to the prestigious status of a unicorn company. I find myself drawn to the process of building products, exploring product-market fit, strategizing, engaging in software development, seeking out new opportunities, networking, attending conferences, and continuously challenging myself by understanding the market and its competitive landscape. Product Owner / Product Consultant / CTO / COO: I’m not entirely sure how to categorize this role, as I anticipate that it will largely depend on the product to which I will commit myself fully. My idea is to find one startup/company that wants to build a product / or already has a product, want to speed up, or simply doesn’t know what’s next. Alternatively, I could be a part of an established company with a rich business history, which intends to invest in digitization and technological advancements. The goal would be to enrich their customer experience by offering complementary digital products Rather than initiating a new venture from ground zero with the same team, I am receptive to new challenges. I am confident that my past experiences will prove highly beneficial for the founders of promising, burgeoning startups that already possess a product, or are in the initial phases of development. ‘Consultant’ — I reckon we interpret this term differently. My aim is to be completely absorbed in a single product, crafting funnels, niches, strategies, and all that is necessary to repeatedly achieve the ‘product-market fit’ and significant revenue. To me, ‘consultant’ resonates more akin to freelancing than being an employee. My current goal is to kickstart as a consultant and aide, dealing with facilitating startups in their journey from point A to B. Here are two theoretical scenarios to illustrate my approach: Scenario 1: (Starting from point A) You have a product but struggle with marketing, adoption, software, strategy, sales, fundraising, or something else. I conduct an analysis and develop a strategy to reach point B. I take on the “dirty work” and implement necessary changes, including potential pivots or shifts (going all-in) to guide the product to point B. The goal is to reach point B, which could involve achieving a higher valuation, expanding the user base, increasing sales, or generating monthly revenue, among other metrics. Scenario 2: (Starting from point A) You have a plan or idea but face challenges with marketing, adoption, strategy, software, sales, fundraising, or something else. I analyze the situation and devise a strategy to reach point B. I tackle the necessary tasks, build the team, and overcome obstacles to propel the product to point B. I have come across the view that finding the elusive product-market fit is the job of the founder, and it’s hard for me to disagree. However, I believe that my support and experiences can help save money, many failures, and most importantly, time. I have spent a great deal of time learning from my mistakes, enduring failure after failure, and even had no one to ask for support or opinion, which is why I offer my help. Saving even a couple of years, realistically speaking, seems like a value I’m eager to provide… I invite you to share your thoughts and insights on these scenarios :) Closing Remarks: I appreciate your time and effort in reaching this point. This has been my journey, and I wouldn’t change it for the world. I had an extraordinary adventure, and now I’m ready for the next exciting battle with the market and new software products. While my entire narrative is centered around startups, especially the ones I personally built, I’m planning to share more insights drawn from all of my experiences, not just those as a co-founder. If you’re currently developing your product or even just considering the idea, I urge you to reach out to me. Perhaps together, we can create something monumental :) Thank you for your time and insights. I eagerly look forward to engaging in discussions and hearing your viewpoints. Please remember to like and subscribe. Nothing motivates to write more than positive feedback :) Matt.

Am I on the right track?

This might be a little long for the average reader. But i'll do my best to format it so it's skimmable. Context I left my SaaS company 2 months ago. I was employee number 4 and helped them grow to 8 figures. I had a seat at the executive table and equity in the business. Burnt out and wanted to start my own thing. I forgot how hard it is to go from 0 👉 1 📚 Two schools of thought Build a product that solves your pain point and find others with that pain point Perform customer discovery calls until you get signal and start building + follow up with them 🥇 First approach For the last 45 days I built the product I wished I had when leading a 10 person marketing/sales team for the SaaS I was previously at. It checked all the boxes, pulled data, automated specific steps, showed the conversion tracking, data, etc. I launched it as a beta to my close network and the crowd went MILD. 😒 After some follow up - I realized I built something that already kind of exists and it's hard to convince others (even those who personally know me) that it's different or better. Undiscouraged, I am going to go back to the drawing board and try approach #2 above and schedule some customer discovery calls. 🥈 Second approach After trying and failing to turn the marketing numbers around at my last role I am convicted of 4 brutal truths about digital marketing today Truth #1 – AI-generated content is flooding the internet and ANYONE can and will be creating content with AI. Truth #2 – Ranking for high-volume keywords is harder than ever and probably not worth it anymore. Truth #3 – AI-driven efficiency is non-negotiable. If you haven’t installed AI in your business - you are WAY behind. Truth #4 – Most businesses are thinking about AI completely wrong. Easy button vs quality stair step. I have some early thoughts on how I would like to solve this (backed by data and some user stories). But my main question and the entire point of this post is.... ⁉️ Questions Before I schedule these product discovery calls should I make it clear where I am convicted and find those who want to talk (agree or disagree) with the above. Or just keep that out of the mix and ask them my product discovery questions regardless? I am probably overthinking it - but I just hit up my personal network with a beta launch, feels silly to go back with product discovery questions for them. Is there a good place (besides reddit) to pay people for product discovery calls? A quick Google Search and it's unclear to me.

36 startup ideas found by analyzing podcasts (problem, solution & source episode)

Hey, I've been a bit of a podcast nerd for a long time. Around a year ago I began experimenting with transcription of podcasts for a SaaS I was running. I realized pretty quickly that there's a lot of knowledge and value in podcast discussions that is for all intents and purposes entirely unsearchable or discoverable to most people. I ended up stopping work on that SaaS product (party for lack of product/market fit, and partly because podcasting was far more interesting), and focusing on the podcast technology full-time instead. I'm a long-time lurker and poster of r/startups and thought this would make for some interesting content and inspiration for folks. Given I'm in this space, have millions of transcripts, and transcribe thousands daily... I've been exploring fun ways to expose some of the interesting knowledge and conversations taking place that utilize our own data/API. I'm a big fan of the usual startup podcasts (My First Million, Greg Isenberg, etc. etc.) and so I built an automation that turns all of the startup ideas discussed into a weekly email digest. I always struggle to listen to as many episodes as I'd actually like to, so I thought I'd summarise the stuff I care about instead (startup opportunities being discussed). I thought it would be interesting to post some of the ideas extracted so far. They range from being completely whacky and blue sky, to pretty boring but realistic. A word of warning before anyone complains – this is a big mixture of tech, ai, non-tech, local services, etc. ideas: Some of the ideas are completely mundane, but realistic (e.g. local window cleaning service) Some of the ideas are completely insane, blue sky, but sound super interesting Here's the latest 36 ideas: |Idea Name|Problem|Solution|Source| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |SalesForce-as-a-Service - White Label Enterprise Sales Teams|White-label enterprise sales teams for B2B SaaS. Companies need sales but can't hire/train. Recruit retail sellers, train for tech, charge 30% of deals closed.|Create a white-label enterprise sales team by recruiting natural salespeople from retail and direct sales backgrounds (e.g. mall kiosks, cutco knives). Train them specifically in B2B SaaS sales techniques and processes. Offer this trained sales force to tech companies on a contract basis.|My First Million - "Life Hacks From The King of Introverts + 7 Business Ideas| |TechButler - Mobile Device Maintenance Service|Mobile tech maintenance service. Clean/optimize devices, improve WiFi, basic support. $100/visit to homes. Target affluent neighborhoods.|Mobile tech support service providing in-home device cleaning, optimization, and setup. Focus on common issues like WiFi improvement, device maintenance, and basic tech support.|My First Million - "Life Hacks From The King of Introverts + 7 Business Ideas| |MemoryBox - At-Home Video Digitization Service|Door-to-door VHS conversion service. Parents have boxes of old tapes. Pick up, digitize, deliver. $30/tape with minimum order. Going extinct.|Door-to-door VHS to digital conversion service that handles everything from pickup to digital delivery. Make it extremely convenient for customers to preserve their memories.|My First Million - "Life Hacks From The King of Introverts + 7 Business Ideas| |Elite Match Ventures - Success-Based Luxury Matchmaking|High-end matchmaking for 50M+ net worth individuals. Only charge $1M+ when they get married. No upfront fees. Extensive vetting process.|Premium matchmaking service exclusively for ultra-high net worth individuals with a pure contingency fee model - only get paid ($1M+) upon successful marriage. Focus on quality over quantity with extensive vetting and personalized matching.|My First Million - "Life Hacks From The King of Introverts + 7 Business Ideas| |LocalHost - Simple Small Business Websites|Simple WordPress sites for local businesses. $50/month includes hosting, updates, security. Target restaurants and shops. Recurring revenue play.|Simplified web hosting and WordPress management service targeting local small businesses. Focus on basic sites with standard templates, ongoing maintenance, and reliable support for a fixed monthly fee.|My First Million - "Life Hacks From The King of Introverts + 7 Business Ideas| |VoiceJournal AI - Voice-First Smart Journaling|Voice-to-text journaling app with AI insights. 8,100 monthly searches. $15/month subscription. Partners with journaling YouTubers.|AI-powered journaling app that combines voice recording, transcription, and intelligent insights. Users can speak their thoughts, which are automatically transcribed and analyzed for patterns, emotions, and actionable insights.|Where It Happens - "7 $1M+ AI startup ideas you can launch tomorrow with $0"| |AIGenAds - AI-Generated UGC Content Platform|AI platform turning product briefs into UGC-style video ads. Brands spending $500/video for human creators. Generate 100 variations for $99/month.|AI platform that generates UGC-style video ads using AI avatars and scripting. System would allow rapid generation of multiple ad variations at a fraction of the cost. Platform would use existing AI avatar technology combined with script generation to create authentic-looking testimonial-style content.|Where It Happens - "7 $1M+ AI startup ideas you can launch tomorrow with $0"| |InfographAI - Automated Infographic Generation Platform|AI turning blog posts into branded infographics. Marketers spending hours on design. $99/month unlimited generation.|AI-powered platform that automatically converts blog posts and articles into visually appealing infographics. System would analyze content, extract key points, and generate professional designs using predefined templates and brand colors.|Where It Happens - "7 $1M+ AI startup ideas you can launch tomorrow with $0"| |KidFinance - Children's Financial Education Entertainment|Children's media franchise teaching financial literacy. Former preschool teacher creating 'Dora for money'. Books, videos, merchandise potential.|Character-driven financial education content for kids, including books, videos, and potentially TV show. Focus on making money concepts fun and memorable.|The Side Hustle Show - "How a Free Challenge Turned Into a $500,000 a Year Business (Greatest Hits)"| |FinanceTasker - Daily Financial Task Challenge|Free 30-day financial challenge with daily action items. People overwhelmed by money management. Makes $500k/year through books, speaking, and premium membership.|A free 30-day financial challenge delivering one simple, actionable task per day via email. Each task includes detailed scripts and instructions. Participants join a Facebook community for support and accountability. The program focuses on quick wins to build momentum. Automated delivery allows scaling.|The Side Hustle Show - "How a Free Challenge Turned Into a $500,000 a Year Business (Greatest Hits)"| |FinanceAcademy - Expert Financial Training Platform|Premium financial education platform. $13/month for expert-led courses and live Q&As. 4000+ members generating $40k+/month.|Premium membership site with expert-led courses, live Q&As, and community support. Focus on specific topics like real estate investing, business creation, and advanced money management.|The Side Hustle Show - "How a Free Challenge Turned Into a $500,000 a Year Business (Greatest Hits)"| |SecurityFirst Compliance - Real Security + Compliance Platform|Security-first compliance platform built by hackers. Companies spending $50k+ on fake security. Making $7M/year showing why current solutions don't work.|A compliance platform built by security experts that combines mandatory compliance requirements with real security measures. The solution includes hands-on security testing, expert guidance, and a focus on actual threat prevention rather than just documentation. It merges traditional compliance workflows with practical security implementations.|In the Pit with Cody Schneider| |LinkedInbound - Automated Professional Visibility Engine|LinkedIn automation for inbound job offers. Professionals spending hours on manual outreach. $99/month per job seeker.|Automated system for creating visibility and generating inbound interest on LinkedIn through coordinated profile viewing and engagement. Uses multiple accounts to create visibility patterns that trigger curiosity and inbound messages.|In the Pit with Cody Schneider| |ConvoTracker - Community Discussion Monitoring Platform|Community discussion monitoring across Reddit, Twitter, HN. Companies missing sales opportunities. $499/month per brand tracked.|Comprehensive monitoring system that tracks competitor mentions and industry discussions across multiple platforms (Reddit, Twitter, Hacker News, etc.) with automated alerts and engagement suggestions.|In the Pit with Cody Schneider| |ContentAds Pro - Smart Display Ad Implementation|Display ad implementation service for content creators. Bloggers losing thousands in ad revenue monthly. Makes $3-5k per site setup plus ongoing optimization fees.|Implementation of professional display advertising through networks like Mediavine that specialize in optimizing ad placement and revenue while maintaining user experience. Include features like turning off ads for email subscribers and careful placement to minimize impact on core metrics.|The Side Hustle Show - "636: Is Business Coaching Worth It? A Look Inside the last 12 months of Side Hustle Nation"| |MoneyAppReviews - Professional Side Hustle App Testing|Professional testing service for money-making apps. People wasting time on low-paying apps. Makes $20k/month from affiliate commissions and ads.|Professional app testing service that systematically reviews money-making apps and creates detailed, honest reviews including actual earnings data, time investment, and practical tips.|The Side Hustle Show - "636: Is Business Coaching Worth It? A Look Inside the last 12 months of Side Hustle Nation"| |LightPro - Holiday Light Installation Service|Professional Christmas light installation service. Homeowners afraid of ladders. $500-2000 per house plus storage.|Professional Christmas light installation service targeting residential and commercial properties. Full-service offering including design, installation, maintenance, removal and storage. Focus on safety and premium aesthetic results.|The Side Hustle Show - "639: 30 Ways to Make Extra Money for the Holidays"| |FocusMatch - Research Participant Marketplace|Marketplace connecting companies to paid research participants. Companies spending weeks finding people. $50-150/hour per study.|Online platform connecting companies directly with paid research participants. Participants create detailed profiles and get matched to relevant studies. Companies get faster access to their target demographic while participants earn money sharing opinions.|The Side Hustle Show - "639: 30 Ways to Make Extra Money for the Holidays"| |SolarShine Pro - Specialized Solar Panel Cleaning Service|Solar panel cleaning service using specialized equipment. Panels lose 50% efficiency when dirty. $650 per job, automated scheduling generates $18k/month from repeat customers.|Professional solar panel cleaning service using specialized deionized water system and European cleaning equipment. Includes automated 6-month scheduling, professional liability coverage, and warranty-safe cleaning processes. Service is bundled with inspection and performance monitoring.|The UpFlip Podcast - "156. $18K/Month with This ONE Service — Niche Business Idea"| |ExteriorCare Complete - One-Stop Exterior Maintenance Service|One-stop exterior home cleaning service (solar, windows, gutters, bird proofing). Automated scheduling. $650 average ticket. 60% repeat customers on 6-month contracts.|All-in-one exterior cleaning service offering comprehensive maintenance packages including solar, windows, gutters, roof cleaning and bird proofing. Single point of contact, consistent quality, and automated scheduling for all services.|The UpFlip Podcast - "156. $18K/Month with This ONE Service — Niche Business Idea"| |ContentMorph - Automated Cross-Platform Content Adaptation|AI platform converting blog posts into platform-optimized social content. Marketing teams spending 5hrs/post on manual adaptation. $199/mo per brand with 50% margins.|An AI-powered platform that automatically transforms long-form content (blog posts, podcasts, videos) into platform-specific formats (Instagram reels, TikToks, tweets). The system would preserve brand voice while optimizing for each platform's unique requirements and best practices.|Entrepreneurs on Fire - "Digital Threads: The Entrepreneur Playbook for Digital-First Marketing with Neal Schaffer"| |MarketerMatch - Verified Digital Marketing Talent Marketplace|Marketplace for pre-vetted digital marketing specialists. Entrepreneurs spending 15hrs/week on marketing tasks. Platform takes 15% commission averaging $900/month per active client.|A specialized marketplace exclusively for digital marketing professionals, pre-vetted for specific skills (video editing, social media, SEO, etc.). Platform includes skill verification, portfolio review, and specialization matching.|Entrepreneurs on Fire - "Digital Threads: The Entrepreneur Playbook for Digital-First Marketing with Neal Schaffer"| |Tiger Window Cleaning - Premium Local Window Service|Local window cleaning service targeting homeowners. Traditional companies charging 2x market rate. Making $10k/month from $200 initial investment.|Local window cleaning service combining competitive pricing ($5/pane), excellent customer service, and quality guarantees. Uses modern tools like water-fed poles for efficiency. Implements systematic approach to customer communication and follow-up.|The Side Hustle Show - "630: How this College Student’s Side Hustle Brings in $10k a Month"| |RealViz3D - Real Estate Visualization Platform|3D visualization service turning architectural plans into photorealistic renderings for real estate agents. Agents struggling with unbuilt property sales. Making $30-40k/year per operator.|Professional 3D modeling and rendering service that creates photorealistic visualizations of properties before they're built or renovated. The service transforms architectural plans into immersive 3D representations that show lighting, textures, and realistic details. This helps potential buyers fully understand and connect with the space before it physically exists.|Side Hustle School - "#2861 - TBT: An Architect’s Side Hustle in 3D Real Estate Modeling"| |Somewhere - Global Talent Marketplace|Platform connecting US companies with vetted overseas talent. Tech roles costing $150k locally filled for 50% less. Grew from $15M to $52M valuation in 9 months.|Platform connecting US companies with pre-vetted overseas talent at significantly lower rates while maintaining high quality. Handles payments, contracts, and quality assurance to remove friction from global hiring.|My First Million - "I Lost Everything Twice… Then Made $26M In 18 Months| |GymLaunch - Rapid Gym Turnaround Service|Consultants flying to struggling gyms to implement proven member acquisition systems. Gym owners lacking sales expertise. Made $100k in first 21 days.|Expert consultants fly in to implement proven member acquisition systems, train staff, and rapidly fill gyms with new members. The service combines sales training, marketing automation, and proven conversion tactics to transform struggling gyms into profitable businesses within weeks.|My First Million - "I Lost Everything Twice… Then Made $26M In 18 Months| |PublishPlus - Publishing Backend Monetization|Backend monetization system for publishing companies. One-time customers becoming recurring revenue. Grew business from $2M to $110M revenue.|Add complementary backend products and services to increase customer lifetime value. Develop software tools and additional services that natural extend from initial publishing product. Focus on high-margin recurring revenue streams.|My First Million - "I Lost Everything Twice… Then Made $26M In 18 Months| |WelcomeBot - Automated Employee Onboarding Platform|Automated employee welcome platform. HR teams struggling with consistent onboarding. $99/month per 100 employees.|An automated onboarding platform that creates personalized welcome experiences through pre-recorded video messages, scheduled check-ins, and automated swag delivery. The platform would ensure consistent high-quality onboarding regardless of timing or location.|Entrepreneurs on Fire - "Free Training on Building Systems and Processes to Scale Your Business with Chris Ronzio: An EOFire Classic from 2021"| |ProcessBrain - Business Knowledge Documentation Platform|SaaS platform turning tribal knowledge into documented processes. Business owners spending hours training new hires. $199/month per company.|A software platform that makes it easy to document and delegate business processes and procedures. The platform would include templates, guided documentation flows, and tools to easily share and update procedures. It would help businesses create a comprehensive playbook of their operations.|Entrepreneurs on Fire - "Free Training on Building Systems and Processes to Scale Your Business with Chris Ronzio: An EOFire Classic from 2021"| |TradeMatch - Modern Manufacturing Job Marketplace|Modern job board making manufacturing sexy again. Factory jobs paying $40/hr but can't recruit. $500 per successful referral.|A specialized job marketplace and recruitment platform focused exclusively on modern manufacturing and trade jobs. The platform would combine TikTok-style content marketing, referral programs, and modern UX to make manufacturing jobs appealing to Gen Z and young workers. Would leverage existing $500 referral fees and industry demand.|My First Million - "He Sold His Company For $15M, Then Got A Job At McDonald’s"| |GroundLevel - Executive Immersion Program|Structured program putting CEOs in front-line jobs. Executives disconnected from workers. $25k per placement.|A structured program that places executives and founders in front-line jobs (retail, warehouse, service) for 2-4 weeks with documentation and learning framework. Similar to Scott Heiferman's McDonald's experience but productized.|My First Million - "He Sold His Company For $15M, Then Got A Job At McDonald’s"| |OneStepAhead - Micro-Mentorship Marketplace|Marketplace for 30-min mentorship calls with people one step ahead. Professionals seeking specific guidance. Takes 15% of session fees.|MicroMentor Marketplace - Platform connecting people with mentors who are just one step ahead in their journey for focused, affordable micro-mentorship sessions.|Entrepreneurs on Fire - "How to Create an Unbroken Business with Michael Unbroken: An EOFire Classic from 2021"| |VulnerableLeader - Leadership Authenticity Training Platform|Leadership vulnerability training platform. Leaders struggling with authentic communication. $2k/month per company subscription.|Leadership Vulnerability Platform - A digital training platform combining assessment tools, guided exercises, and peer support to help leaders develop authentic communication skills. The platform would include real-world scenarios, video coaching, and measurable metrics for tracking leadership growth through vulnerability.|Entrepreneurs on Fire - "How to Create an Unbroken Business with Michael Unbroken: An EOFire Classic from 2021"| |NetworkAI - Smart Network Intelligence Platform|AI analyzing your network to find hidden valuable connections. Professionals missing opportunities in existing contacts. $49/month per user.|AI Network Navigator - Smart tool that analyzes your professional network across platforms, identifies valuable hidden connections, and suggests specific actionable ways to leverage relationships for mutual benefit.|Entrepreneurs on Fire - "How to Create an Unbroken Business with Michael Unbroken: An EOFire Classic from 2021"| |Porch Pumpkins - Seasonal Decoration Service|Full-service porch pumpkin decoration. Homeowners spend $300-1350 per season. One operator making $1M in 8 weeks seasonal revenue.|Full-service seasonal porch decoration service focused on autumn/Halloween, including design, installation, maintenance, and removal. Offering premium curated pumpkin arrangements with various package tiers.|My First Million - "The guy who gets paid $80K/yr to do nothing"| |Silent Companion - Professional Presence Service|Professional silent companions for lonely people. Huge problem in Japan/globally. $68/session, $80k/year per companion. Non-sexual, just presence.|A professional companion service where individuals can rent a non-judgmental, quiet presence for various activities. The companion provides silent company without the pressure of conversation or social performance. They accompany clients to events, meals, or just sit quietly together.|My First Million - "The guy who gets paid $80K/yr to do nothing"| Hope this is useful. If anyone would like to ensure I include any particular podcasts or episodes etc. in future posts, very happy to do so. I'll generally send \~5 ideas per week in a short weekly digest format (you can see the format I'd usually use in here: podcastmarketwatch.beehiiv.com). I find it mindblowing that the latest models with large context windows make it even possible to analyze full transcripts at such scale. It's a very exciting time we're living through! Would love some feedback on this stuff, happy to iterate and improve the analysis/ideas... or create a new newsletter on a different topic if anyone would like. Cheers!

The Cold-Calling AI Project I'm Working On Just Got Some Angel Investment!

Hey y'all. The AI cold calling startup I've been working on for 3-4 months now just got a $2,500 angel investment, and we have 2 current customers, a credit card processing broker and a hospital equipment rental company based out of Texas. We have around $1,500 revenue so far, but we're having lots of trouble fulfilling the contracts because our tech just isn't "there" yet. I'm the Chief Tech Officer, and I'm also running some operations. The other main person in this is the CEO who has a strong sales background and came up with the idea. I've been working purely remotely, and it's great having some income because I'm stuck at home because I'm disabled, basically... &#x200B; We're using 11labs, openai, google speech to text, and a sh\*tty online dialer right now to run the first MVP which runs locally on our "botrunners" computers, and we're developing a web app with django python + javascript react. Our plan is, after we get the webapp working better, to hire more botrunners for $3 per hour from countries like Phillipines and India, and we're going to try to track all the actions the botrunners take to be able to train the AI to run it fully automated. The biggest problem we're facing right now with the tech is reducing latency, it started at 27 seconds to get a response and I've been able to get it down to 6 seconds, but people are still hanging up. We're trying several ways to mitigate this, including having pre-rendered speech playing something like "Okay" or "As an artificial representative, I'm still learning to be quicker on the pickup. We appreciate your patience." One of the industries we want to target is international web development and digital marketing companies, and we want to use the bot to cold-call businesses to pitch them our services. The goal is to replace $30 an hour cold-callers from the USA with $3 per hour total-cost automation. Apparently the CEO was given a $5 million valuation from the strength of the MVP from a VC. Our investment so far was at a $300k valuation tho. It's exciting. Trying to get Twilio working to be able to make calls programmatically instead of using our hacky workaround. Let me know if you have any questions. I just wanted to share this awesome news!

From "There's an App for that" to "There's YOUR App for that" - AI workflows will transform generic apps into deeply personalized experiences

I will not promote. For the past decade mobile apps were a core element of daily life for entertainment, productivity and connectivity. However, as the ecosystem saturated the general desire to download "just one more app" became apprehensive. There were clear monopolistic winners in different categories, such as Instagram and TikTok, which completely captured the majority of people's screentime. The golden age of creating indie apps and becoming a millionaire from them was dead. Conceptual models of these popular apps became ingrained in the general consciousness, and downloading new apps where re-learning new UI layouts was required, became a major friction point. There is high reluctance to download a new app rather than just utilizing the tooling of the growing market share of the existing winners. Content marketing and white labeled apps saw a resurgence of new app downloads, as users with parasympathetic relationships with influencers could be more easily persuaded to download them. However, this has led to a series of genericized tooling that lacks the soul of the early indie developer apps from the 2010s (Flappy bird comes to mind). A seemingly grim spot to be in, until everything changed on November 30th 2022. Sam Altman, Ilya Sutskever and team announced chatGPT, a Large Language Model that was the first publicly available generative AI tool. The first non-deterministic tool that could reason probablisitically in a similar (if flawed) way, to the human mind. At first, it was a clear paradigm shift in the world of computing, this was obvious from the fact that it climbed to 1 Million users within the first 5 days of its launch. However, despite the insane hype around the AI, its utility was constrained to chatbot interfaces for another year or more. As the models reasoning abilities got better and better, engineers began to look for other ways of utilizing this new paradigm shift, beyond chatbots. It became clear that, despite the powerful abilities to generate responses to prompts, the LLMs suffered from false hallucinations with extreme confidence, significantly impacting the reliability of their use, in search, coding and general utility. Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) was coined to provide a solution to this. Now, the LLM would apply a traditional search for data, via a database, a browser or other source of truth, and then feed that information into the prompt as it generates, allowing for more accurate results. Furthermore, it became clear that you could enhance an LLM by providing them metadata to interact with tools such as APIs for other services, allowing LLMs to perform actions typically reserved for humans, like fetching data, manipulating it and acting as an independent Agent. This prompted engineers to start treating LLMs, not as a database and a search engine, but rather a reasoning system, that could be part of a larger system of inputs and feedback to handle workflows independently. These "AI Agents" are poised to become the core technology in the next few years for hyper-personalizing and automating processes for specific users. Rather than having a generic B2B SaaS product that is somewhat useful for a team, one could standup a modular system of Agents that can handle the exactly specified workflow for that team. Frameworks such as LlangChain and LLamaIndex will help enable this for companies worldwide. The power is back in the hands of the people. However, it's not just big tech that is going to benefit from this revolution. AI Agentic workflows will allow for a resurgence in personalized applications that work like personal digital employee's. One could have a Personal Finance agent keeping track of their budgets, a Personal Trainer accountability coaching you making sure you meet your goals, or even a silly companion that roasts you when you're procrastinating. The options are endless ! At the core of this technology is the fact that these agents will be able to recall all of your previous data and actions, so they will get better at understanding you and your needs as a function of time. We are at the beginning of an exciting period in history, and I'm looking forward to this new period of deeply personalized experiences. What are your thoughts ? Let me know in the comments !

A Structured Approach to Ideation and Validation (I will not promote)

Hi all, I used to work in VC and wanted to share some startup knowledge and insights from startup founders I know. Recently, I interviewed a friend of mine who built an AI Robotics startup ("Hivebotics") that creates automated toilet-cleaning robots. I can't post the full article because of Reddit's word limit, so I'll be posting it in sections here instead. This first section of the transcript goes through his approach to ideation and validation. Enjoy and let me know what you think! (I will not promote) \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (1) Ideation and Validation Problem-Market-Solution Framework I like to think of startup ideation and validation using this framework: Problem– What exactly are you solving? Observation– How you identify a problem to work on User Research– How you further understand that problem Market– Is there a large enough market for solving this problem? Size– How many people experience this same problem? Demand– How many of those people are willing to pay for the solution? Solution– Your answer to the problem Desirability– Whether people actually want your solution Feasibility– Whether building the solution is practical and realistic Viability– Whether your solution can generate revenue Problem You always need to start problem-first, which is something that was really drilled into me during my time at Stanford. Too often, founders rush to build solutions first—apps or products they find exciting—without confirming whether there's any real demand for it. The first step is always to identify a specific problem, then further understand its scale, urgency and further details by talking to potential users. Observation– To find problems, observation is key. People may not even realise the inefficiencies in their processes until you point them out. That’s why interviews and field research are so important. There are problems all around us, so it's simply a matter of going out, paying attention and being attuned to them as they occur. User Research– To further understand the problem, conducting user research by interviewing potential customers is essential. Personally, I like to use the "Mom Test" when I conduct interviews to avoid biased and generic feedback. Don’t just ask theoretical questions and avoid being too specific—observe how your potential users work, ask about pain points, and use broad, open-ended questions to ensure you aren't leading them to a specific answer. Market Once you've found an actual problem and talked to enough potential users to really understand its specific pain points, the next step is to determine the market size and demand for a solution. Size– Determining the market size is essential because it determines whether or not it's commercially worthwhile to pursue the problem and develop a solution for it. You need to determine if there are enough potential customers out there experiencing this problem to gauge the market size. There's no secret strategy for this; you have to interview as many potential users as possible to confirm that it's a widespread problem in the industry. Demand– Make sure that you're working on a problem that people will gladly pay to have solved. Even if the problem is large enough, you have to make sure it's painful enough to warrant a paid solution. If many people experience the same problem, but aren't willing to pay for a solution, then you don't have a market and should look for a different problem to validate. Another way of looking at it is that your true market size is the number of potential customers actually willing to pay* for the solution to the problem, not the number of people simply experiencing the same problem. Solution When validating a potential solution to the problem, I would look at the 3 factors of desirability, feasibility and viability. Desirability– the degree to which a solution appeals to people and fulfills their wants and needs. Without strong desirability, even the most technically advanced or economically practical product is unlikely to succeed. The best way to test this is to secure financial commitments early on during the proof-of-concept stage. Most people are polite, so they may simply tell you that your startup's product is good even if it's not. However, if they're actually willing to pay for the solution, this is actual evidence of your product's desirability. Don't just ask people if they would pay for it; actually see whether they will pay for it. Feasibility– whether a product can be built using existing technical capabilities. A lack of feasibility makes it challenging or impossible to develop the product, no matter how appealing it might be to users or how promising its financial prospects are. This is just a matter of conducting initial research and actually trying to build a prototype, which will inform you whether the fully-realised product is truly feasible. Viability– the product's ability to generate sustainable financial returns. Without financial viability, the business supporting the product cannot endure, even if the product is highly appealing to users and technically achievable. Here, you need to look at your unit economics, development costs and other expenses to determine the viability of your solution. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Hope you enjoyed reading this; let me know your honest thoughts in the comments and I'll try to improve how I interview founders based on those!

Online Reputation AI - Startup got stuck

Hi, I‘m one of 3 co-founders of a startup that built an AI-driven SaaS and App product this year. We‘re coming from an SaaS background, two of us senior developers (in the 3% of highest earning freelancers in Germany) and expert in our fields. The third is a seasoned sales strategist. We have a minor 4th co-founder (legal advisor). The company is self-funded, no investors. Our tech is owned by us, built by us and the product was already operational after a few months. We basically solve three data science/NLP issues in a generalized way: understand customer feedback to improve your business. Analyzes online review with context and explains it with a drill down, aggregation, charts (AI insights, timeframe reports); evidence driven, agentic LLM and ETL processes drive this. respond to customer feedback, half-automated, human in the loop, but AI supported. In the tone of your brand, any language. And context-aware, with your customer support signature etc. competitor analysis. Because we do 1 for you, we can do 1. for all of your competitors and compare the results, yielding insights like „oh, this happens to everyone in November to December, so I should focus on something else“ — etc. Now, after a huge sales effort we got only one paying customer. This customer is petty happy with the product. They tell us that they use our product daily, it‘s better than all the other solutions out there (better than TrustYou, etc.) However, after cold calling/emailing hundreds of leads, we almost always hear that „what we have is good enough“. Or that they don‘t have budget. I‘m the introverted tech part of the startup. I‘m good with algorithms. Give me any tech issue and I will solve it for you quickly and efficiently. I make stuff work. But with my startups I never had commercial luck. People always tell me about my stellar potential, because I can build things almost nobody else can. I come from a poor families background, worked my way up the very hard way. I just love tech and programming. I wrote a book for O’Reilly once. I‘m not doing bad economically, but I‘m probably not the best sales person. After founding a few startups with amazing tech, people using the products and loving them, but no commercial success, I truly question myself and if I‘m just unlucky with the fact that I‘m located in Europe, targeting the wrong industries, or are just unlucky somehow? I won‘t blame my co-founders here. They definitely did the best they could. I‘m just a bit resignated. I recently thought about valuing my own lifetime more and only building software for myself anymore. Basically not focusing on what problems other people face and trying to solve them, but solely focusing on what I enjoy doing most — e.g. coding algorithms for a music visualizer. Because in the end, my time is my most valuable resource. If I waste any second on something that isn‘t contributing to „my life“ and how I define success, then it would be a rather stupid deed? I don‘t want to derail too much here. I‘m confused and seeking for advice. Burn me if you like, but please be aware that you are talking to a broadly educated nerd.

How a founder built a B2B AI startup to serve with 65+ global brands (including Fortune500 companies) (I will not promote)

AI Palette is an AI-driven platform that helps food and beverage companies predict emerging product trends. I had the opportunity recently to sit down with the founder to get his advice on building an AI-first startup, which he'll be going through in this post. (I will not promote) About AI Palette: Co-founders: >!2 (Somsubhra GanChoudhuri, Himanshu Upreti)!!100+!!$12.7M USD!!AI-powered predictive analytics for the CPG (Consumer Packaged Goods) industry!!Signed first paying customer in the first year!!65+ global brands, including Cargill, Diageo, Ajinomoto, Symrise, Mondelez, and L’Oréal, use AI Palette!!Every new product launched has secured a paying client within months!!Expanded into Beauty & Personal Care (BPC), onboarding one of India’s largest BPC companies within weeks!!Launched multiple new product lines in the last two years, creating a unified suite for brand innovation!Identify the pain points in your industry for ideas* When I was working in the flavour and fragrance industry, I noticed a major issue CPG companies faced: launching a product took at least one to two years. For instance, if a company decided today to launch a new juice, it wouldn’t hit the market until 2027. This long timeline made it difficult to stay relevant and on top of trends. Another big problem I noticed was that companies relied heavily on market research to determine what products to launch. While this might work for current consumer preferences, it was highly inefficient since the product wouldn’t actually reach the market for several years. By the time the product launched, the consumer trends had already shifted, making that research outdated. That’s where AI can play a crucial role. Instead of looking at what consumers like today, we realised that companies should use AI to predict what they will want next. This allows businesses to create products that are ahead of the curve. Right now, the failure rate for new product launches is alarmingly high, with 8 out of 10 products failing. By leveraging AI, companies can avoid wasting resources on products that won’t succeed, leading to better, more successful launches. Start by talking to as many industry experts as possible to identify the real problems When we first had the idea for AI Palette, it was just a hunch, a gut feeling—we had no idea whether people would actually pay for it. To validate the idea, we reached out to as many people as we could within the industry. Since our focus area was all about consumer insights, we spoke to professionals in the CPG sector, particularly those in the insights departments of CPG companies. Through these early conversations, we began to see a common pattern emerge and identified the exact problem we wanted to solve. Don’t tell people what you’re building—listen to their frustrations and challenges first. Going into these early customer conversations, our goal was to listen and understand their challenges without telling them what we were trying to build. This is crucial as it ensures that you can gather as much data about the problem to truly understand it and that you aren't biasing their answers by showing your solution. This process helped us in two key ways: First, it validated that there was a real problem in the industry through the number of people who spoke about experiencing the same problem. Second, it allowed us to understand the exact scale and depth of the problem—e.g., how much money companies were spending on consumer research, what kind of tools they were currently using, etc. Narrow down your focus to a small, actionable area to solve initially. Once we were certain that there was a clear problem worth solving, we didn’t try to tackle everything at once. As a small team of two people, we started by focusing on a specific area of the problem—something big enough to matter but small enough for us to handle. Then, we approached customers with a potential solution and asked them for feedback. We learnt that our solution seemed promising, but we wanted to validate it further. If customers are willing to pay you for the solution, it’s a strong validation signal for market demand. One of our early customer interviewees even asked us to deliver the solution, which we did manually at first. We used machine learning models to analyse the data and presented the results in a slide deck. They paid us for the work, which was a critical moment. It meant we had something with real potential, and we had customers willing to pay us before we had even built the full product. This was the key validation that we needed. By the time we were ready to build the product, we had already gathered crucial insights from our early customers. We understood the specific information they wanted and how they wanted the results to be presented. This input was invaluable in shaping the development of our final product. Building & Product Development Start with a simple concept/design to validate with customers before building When we realised the problem and solution, we began by designing the product, but not by jumping straight into coding. Instead, we created wireframes and user interfaces using tools like InVision and Figma. This allowed us to visually represent the product without the need for backend or frontend development at first. The goal was to showcase how the product would look and feel, helping potential customers understand its value before we even started building. We showed these designs to potential customers and asked for feedback. Would they want to buy this product? Would they pay for it? We didn’t dive into actual development until we found a customer willing to pay a significant amount for the solution. This approach helped us ensure we were on the right track and didn’t waste time or resources building something customers didn’t actually want. Deliver your solution using a manual consulting approach before developing an automated product Initially, we solved problems for customers in a more "consulting" manner, delivering insights manually. Recall how I mentioned that when one of our early customer interviewees asked us to deliver the solution, we initially did it manually by using machine learning models to analyse the data and presenting the results to them in a slide deck. This works for the initial stages of validating your solution, as you don't want to invest too much time into building a full-blown MVP before understanding the exact features and functionalities that your users want. However, after confirming that customers were willing to pay for what we provided, we moved forward with actual product development. This shift from a manual service to product development was key to scaling in a sustainable manner, as our building was guided by real-world feedback and insights rather than intuition. Let ongoing customer feedback drive iteration and the product roadmap Once we built the first version of the product, it was basic, solving only one problem. But as we worked closely with customers, they requested additional features and functionalities to make it more useful. As a result, we continued to evolve the product to handle more complex use cases, gradually developing new modules based on customer feedback. Product development is a continuous process. Our early customers pushed us to expand features and modules, from solving just 20% of their problems to tackling 50–60% of their needs. These demands shaped our product roadmap and guided the development of new features, ultimately resulting in a more complete solution. Revenue and user numbers are key metrics for assessing product-market fit. However, critical mass varies across industries Product-market fit (PMF) can often be gauged by looking at the size of your revenue and the number of customers you're serving. Once you've reached a certain critical mass of customers, you can usually tell that you're starting to hit product-market fit. However, this critical mass varies by industry and the type of customers you're targeting. For example, if you're building an app for a broad consumer market, you may need thousands of users. But for enterprise software, product-market fit may be reached with just a few dozen key customers. Compare customer engagement and retention with other available solutions on the market for product-market fit Revenue and the number of customers alone isn't always enough to determine if you're reaching product-market fit. The type of customer and the use case for your product also matter. The level of engagement with your product—how much time users are spending on the platform—is also an important metric to track. The more time they spend, the more likely it is that your product is meeting a crucial need. Another way to evaluate product-market fit is by assessing retention, i.e whether users are returning to your platform and relying on it consistently, as compared to other solutions available. That's another key indication that your solution is gaining traction in the market. Business Model & Monetisation Prioritise scalability Initially, we started with a consulting-type model where we tailor-made specific solutions for each customer use-case we encountered and delivered the CPG insights manually, but we soon realized that this wasn't scalable. The problem with consulting is that you need to do the same work repeatedly for every new project, which requires a large team to handle the workload. That is not how you sustain a high-growth startup. To solve this, we focused on building a product that would address the most common problems faced by our customers. Once built, this product could be sold to thousands of customers without significant overheads, making the business scalable. With this in mind, we decided on a SaaS (Software as a Service) business model. The benefit of SaaS is that once you create the software, you can sell it to many customers without adding extra overhead. This results in a business with higher margins, where the same product can serve many customers simultaneously, making it much more efficient than the consulting model. Adopt a predictable, simplistic business model for efficiency. Look to industry practices for guidance When it came to monetisation, we considered the needs of our CPG customers, who I knew from experience were already accustomed to paying annual subscriptions for sales databases and other software services. We decided to adopt the same model and charge our customers an annual upfront fee. This model worked well for our target market, aligning with industry standards and ensuring stable, recurring revenue. Moreover, our target CPG customers were already used to this business model and didn't have to choose from a huge variety of payment options, making closing sales a straightforward and efficient process. Marketing & Sales Educate the market to position yourself as a thought leader When we started, AI was not widely understood, especially in the CPG industry. We had to create awareness around both AI and its potential value. Our strategy focused on educating potential users and customers about AI, its relevance, and why they should invest in it. This education was crucial to the success of our marketing efforts. To establish credibility, we adopted a thought leadership approach. We wrote blogs on the importance of AI and how it could solve problems for CPG companies. We also participated in events and conferences to demonstrate our expertise in applying AI to the industry. This helped us build our brand and reputation as leaders in the AI space for CPG, and word-of-mouth spread as customers recognized us as the go-to company for AI solutions. It’s tempting for startups to offer products for free in the hopes of gaining early traction with customers, but this approach doesn't work in the long run. Free offerings don’t establish the value of your product, and customers may not take them seriously. You should always charge for pilots, even if the fee is minimal, to ensure that the customer is serious about potentially working with you, and that they are committed and engaged with the product. Pilots/POCs/Demos should aim to give a "flavour" of what you can deliver A paid pilot/POC trial also gives you the opportunity to provide a “flavour” of what your product can deliver, helping to build confidence and trust with the client. It allows customers to experience a detailed preview of what your product can do, which builds anticipation and desire for the full functionality. During this phase, ensure your product is built to give them a taste of the value you can provide, which sets the stage for a broader, more impactful adoption down the line. Fundraising & Financial Management Leverage PR to generate inbound interest from VCs When it comes to fundraising, our approach was fairly traditional—we reached out to VCs and used connections from existing investors to make introductions. However, looking back, one thing that really helped us build momentum during our fundraising process was getting featured in Tech in Asia. This wasn’t planned; it just so happened that Tech in Asia was doing a series on AI startups in Southeast Asia and they reached out to us for an article. During the interview, they asked if we were fundraising, and we mentioned that we were. As a result, several VCs we hadn’t yet contacted reached out to us. This inbound interest was incredibly valuable, and we found it far more effective than our outbound efforts. So, if you can, try to generate some PR attention—it can help create inbound interest from VCs, and that interest is typically much stronger and more promising than any outbound strategies because they've gone out of their way to reach out to you. Be well-prepared and deliberate about fundraising. Keep trying and don't lose heart When pitching to VCs, it’s crucial to be thoroughly prepared, as you typically only get one shot at making an impression. If you mess up, it’s unlikely they’ll give you a second chance. You need to have key metrics at your fingertips, especially if you're running a SaaS company. Be ready to answer questions like: What’s your retention rate? What are your projections for the year? How much will you close? What’s your average contract value? These numbers should be at the top of your mind. Additionally, fundraising should be treated as a structured process, not something you do on the side while juggling other tasks. When you start, create a clear plan: identify 20 VCs to reach out to each week. By planning ahead, you’ll maintain momentum and speed up the process. Fundraising can be exhausting and disheartening, especially when you face multiple rejections. Remember, you just need one investor to say yes to make it all worthwhile. When using funds, prioritise profitability and grow only when necessary. Don't rely on funding to survive. In the past, the common advice for startups was to raise money, burn through it quickly, and use it to boost revenue numbers, even if that meant operating at a loss. The idea was that profitability wasn’t the main focus, and the goal was to show rapid growth for the next funding round. However, times have changed, especially with the shift from “funding summer” to “funding winter.” My advice now is to aim for profitability as soon as possible and grow only when it's truly needed. For example, it’s tempting to hire a large team when you have substantial funds in the bank, but ask yourself: Do you really need 10 new hires, or could you get by with just four? Growing too quickly can lead to unnecessary expenses, so focus on reaching profitability as soon as possible, rather than just inflating your team or burn rate. The key takeaway is to spend your funds wisely and only when absolutely necessary to reach profitability. You want to avoid becoming dependent on future VC investments to keep your company afloat. Instead, prioritize reaching break-even as quickly as you can, so you're not reliant on external funding to survive in the long run. Team-Building & Leadership Look for complementary skill sets in co-founders When choosing a co-founder, it’s important to find someone with a complementary skill set, not just someone you’re close to. For example, I come from a business and commercial background, so I needed someone with technical expertise. That’s when I found my co-founder, Himanshu, who had experience in machine learning and AI. He was a great match because his technical knowledge complemented my business skills, and together we formed a strong team. It might seem natural to choose your best friend as your co-founder, but this can often lead to conflict. Chances are, you and your best friend share similar interests, skills, and backgrounds, which doesn’t bring diversity to the table. If both of you come from the same industry or have the same strengths, you may end up butting heads on how things should be done. Having diverse skill sets helps avoid this and fosters a more collaborative working relationship. Himanshu (left) and Somsubhra (right) co-founded AI Palette in 2018 Define roles clearly to prevent co-founder conflict To avoid conflict, it’s essential that your roles as co-founders are clearly defined from the beginning. If your co-founder and you have distinct responsibilities, there is no room for overlap or disagreement. This ensures that both of you can work without stepping on each other's toes, and there’s mutual respect for each other’s expertise. This is another reason as to why it helps to have a co-founder with a complementary skillset to yours. Not only is having similar industry backgrounds and skillsets not particularly useful when building out your startup, it's also more likely to lead to conflicts since you both have similar subject expertise. On the other hand, if your co-founder is an expert in something that you're not, you're less likely to argue with them about their decisions regarding that aspect of the business and vice versa when it comes to your decisions. Look for employees who are driven by your mission, not salary For early-stage startups, the first hires are crucial. These employees need to be highly motivated and excited about the mission. Since the salary will likely be low and the work demanding, they must be driven by something beyond just the paycheck. The right employees are the swash-buckling pirates and romantics, i.e those who are genuinely passionate about the startup’s vision and want to be part of something impactful beyond material gains. When employees are motivated by the mission, they are more likely to stick around and help take the startup to greater heights. A litmus test for hiring: Would you be excited to work with them on a Sunday? One of the most important rounds in the hiring process is the culture fit round. This is where you assess whether a candidate shares the same values as you and your team. A key question to ask yourself is: "Would I be excited to work with this person on a Sunday?" If there’s any doubt about your answer, it’s likely not a good fit. The idea is that you want employees who align with the company's culture and values and who you would enjoy collaborating with even outside of regular work hours. How we structure the team at AI Palette We have three broad functions in our organization. The first two are the big ones: Technical Team – This is the core of our product and technology. This team is responsible for product development and incorporating customer feedback into improving the technology Commercial Team – This includes sales, marketing, customer service, account managers, and so on, handling everything related to business growth and customer relations. General and Administrative Team – This smaller team supports functions like finance, HR, and administration. As with almost all businesses, we have teams that address the two core tasks of building (technical team) and selling (commercial team), but given the size we're at now, having the administrative team helps smoothen operations. Set broad goals but let your teams decide on execution What I've done is recruit highly skilled people who don't need me to micromanage them on a day-to-day basis. They're experts in their roles, and as Steve Jobs said, when you hire the right person, you don't have to tell them what to do—they understand the purpose and tell you what to do. So, my job as the CEO is to set the broader goals for them, review the plans they have to achieve those goals, and periodically check in on progress. For example, if our broad goal is to meet a certain revenue target, I break it down across teams: For the sales team, I’ll look at how they plan to hit that target—how many customers they need to sell to, how many salespeople they need, and what tactics and strategies they plan to use. For the technical team, I’ll evaluate our product offerings—whether they think we need to build new products to attract more customers, and whether they think it's scalable for the number of customers we plan to serve. This way, the entire organization's tasks are cascaded in alignment with our overarching goals, with me setting the direction and leaving the details of execution to the skilled team members that I hire.

Serious B2B businesses will not try to create a solution using AI - This is why. [i will not promote]

After architecting and developing multiple B2B SaaS platforms and resolving countless challenges, here's why I don't think a proper B2B solution can be developed using AI. You must have senior tech-folks in your teams - even if you choose to leverage AI for expediting some code generation. This isn't theory - this is battle-tested reality. You can use this as a template if you're building one. Core Considerations: Multi-Tenancy Foundation (B2B) Proper tenant isolation at every layer (data, compute, networking) Flexible deployment models (pooled vs. silo) based on customer tier Tenant-aware everything (logging, metrics, tracing) Identity & Security (B2B/Standalone) Enterprise-grade authentication, often with SSO support Role-based access control (RBAC) at tenant level (may need dynamic policy generation for resource access) Audit trails for all system actions (specially if you're in a regulated domain) Client/Tenant Management (B2B) Self-service onboarding with admin approval workflows Automated tenant provisioning/deprovisioning Tenant-specific configurations and customizations Cross-tenant analytics and administration Operational Excellence (B2B/Standalone) Zero-downtime deployments (helps with canary releases) Tenant-isolated debugging capabilities Resource quotas and throttling by tenant tier Automated backup and disaster recovery per tenant Scalability Architecture (B2B) Independent scaling of tenant workloads Resource isolation for "noisy neighbor" prevention Tier-based performance guarantees (SLAs) Dynamic resource allocation Each of these topics can be as complicated as you can think of - depends on the solution you're building. I have seen many seasoned architects and developers struggle also because of their "single-tenant" mindset. Here are some common pitfalls to avoid (B2B/Standalone): Standalone - mindset in database design Hard-coded configurations Lack of context in logging/monitoring Insufficient tenant isolation in shared services (B2B) Missing tenant-aware cost allocation (B2B) You need people great with infrastructure as well. They need to consider: Tenant-aware routing (API Gateway or whatever you're using) Code with isolation when/if required Data storage with proper partitioning Shared services vs. dedicated services strategy There are a number of common problems I have seen people often make. Often it's because of a pressure from high above. But every architectural decision must considered in terms of the solution you're building. In many cases, security cannot be bolted on later, observability must be tenant-aware from day one, operations must scale. This is just the foundation. Your actual business logic sits ON TOP of all this. Now, would you think these can be done by AI? I'll be waiting for that day. :-)

Billion Dollar industries beyond the shiny objects

this isn’t targeted towards anyone so keep reading or don’t… idc beyond the AI hype, the not so complex industries/solutions (whatever that might be), and the need to work on shiny objects, lay great opportunities for massive businesses. I have worked in manufacturing as an engineer and encountered many problems that can be solved with technology. I have investigated opportunities within supply chain, healthcare, defense, and pharmacy management. From my conclusions, there’s definitely great opportunities for the ones who are willing to deliver solutions to the deep rooted problems within these industries. to give an example, there’s a major demand for skilled machinists within all sectors manufacturing. At my previous job, we had about 12 machinists running 12 machines. Imagine the cost associated with that. Now imagine automation reducing the number of machinists needed by automating some of the tasks. Imagine if you could predict drug shortages using pharmacy data? Imagine if you could increase visibility within the supply chain by leveraging data, determined bottlenecks, and reduced costs? too many smart people seem to be working on things that do not deliver much value. Seriously, how many damn AI assistants do we need? Go beyond the shiny objects and dig for the gold.

The Cold-Calling AI Project I'm Working On Just Got Some Angel Investment!

Hey y'all. The AI cold calling startup I've been working on for 3-4 months now just got a $2,500 angel investment, and we have 2 current customers, a credit card processing broker and a hospital equipment rental company based out of Texas. We have around $1,500 revenue so far, but we're having lots of trouble fulfilling the contracts because our tech just isn't "there" yet. I'm the Chief Tech Officer, and I'm also running some operations. The other main person in this is the CEO who has a strong sales background and came up with the idea. I've been working purely remotely, and it's great having some income because I'm stuck at home because I'm disabled, basically... &#x200B; We're using 11labs, openai, google speech to text, and a sh\*tty online dialer right now to run the first MVP which runs locally on our "botrunners" computers, and we're developing a web app with django python + javascript react. Our plan is, after we get the webapp working better, to hire more botrunners for $3 per hour from countries like Phillipines and India, and we're going to try to track all the actions the botrunners take to be able to train the AI to run it fully automated. The biggest problem we're facing right now with the tech is reducing latency, it started at 27 seconds to get a response and I've been able to get it down to 6 seconds, but people are still hanging up. We're trying several ways to mitigate this, including having pre-rendered speech playing something like "Okay" or "As an artificial representative, I'm still learning to be quicker on the pickup. We appreciate your patience." One of the industries we want to target is international web development and digital marketing companies, and we want to use the bot to cold-call businesses to pitch them our services. The goal is to replace $30 an hour cold-callers from the USA with $3 per hour total-cost automation. Apparently the CEO was given a $5 million valuation from the strength of the MVP from a VC. Our investment so far was at a $300k valuation tho. It's exciting. Trying to get Twilio working to be able to make calls programmatically instead of using our hacky workaround. Let me know if you have any questions. I just wanted to share this awesome news!

I started a Tech Startup, and I feel totally STUCK.

I made "Visual Love," a Computer Vision/AI-driven matchmaking platform. The idea is that although appearance is one of the biggest factors for starting a relationship, current matchmaking services and dating apps do not have the capability to search for people based on appearance. On Visual Love, you can find your ideal match simply by uploading a picture of your "ideal type." Also, you can connect with someone who thinks of you as their ideal type, simply by uploading your own picture. Or, there might be a perfect (mutually ideal) match. I made this CV/AI algorithm to scan faces, retrieve facial features, and make it possible to find the closest match among millions of others in a second. On average, regular dating app users swipe 8000 times over 8 months until they find their love. On Visual Love, users can find one in a million just in a second. You can try the tech demo on the website if you want to (find the link through my LinkedIn at the bottom of the post; I have to follow the "I will not promote" rule.) I thought this app would have the best chance in Asia, as people care a lot more about appearance in Asia (especially Korea and Japan). Also, my nationality is Korean, and I speak both Korean and Japanese as fluently as I speak English. So I came to Korea, and pitched to a number of VC/AC firms in Korea and Japan, and two of them were typically intersted in making investment. However, they both required me to provide market validation: how much it would cost per user acquisition, how much each user would pay on average, and etc, even after I provided them with a 3-years financial projection including market research based on other dating apps. &#x200B; Everything might be going just as expected, or even better than anticipated, but I'm feeling very stuck now. I am not a business expert, and I don't have much idea on how to proceed from here. The problem is, it wouldn't quite work as expected when there are not many users. If I start with a small group of users, it's not any better than any other dating app. Matching users within a small group doesn't quite reflect the values of Visual Love. So I figured a way around: making a game version of Visual Love targeting 100k to 500k users to work as an initial distribution channel. This version will include finding look-alike celebrities, and solving look-alike face puzzles, and etc. But now, the problem is, I cannot continue this project by myself. I have no social/financial support, and I'm running low on cash. Also, although I'm from Korea, I lived in many different countries. I did my undergraduate in New York (Columbia University) and all my friends are in the US. I don't feel very included here. I can't stop feeling frustrated and distressed :( I'm sure Visual Love can reshape the future of the matchmaking market. But, only if I can continue this project by getting the fund I require. I'm open to any advice, and if you're interested in providing any help or working with me, please contact me through LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/in/don-lee-3853b1264/

Solo technical founders, has not having a business cofounder even screwed you up? "I will not promote"

I’m creating an AI startup; a reinforcement learning model designed to do a certain thing in a big field. I’ve basically developed code for a prototype (I hope to start training in two weeks) I do believe YC advice for taking a cofounder, but risk of getting a bad one is too high. In my life I also haven't met people with my grit, at least from my countries, so I'll have to "date down", I guess. At least in technical sense. So, has not having a business cofounder actually screwed anyone up badly?  (Looking at people who are doing ventures with $20m+ potential/real ARR,)

Hot Take: Not all your startups need AI forced into them

I'm a final year Computer Engineering student, hence applying for jobs all around. There's this particular trend I've noticed with startups that are coming up these days. That is, even for the absolute basic stuff they'll use 'AI', and they'll think they built something 'revolutionary'. No. You're breaking your product in ways you don't realise. An example, that even some well established companies are guilty of: AI Chatbots You absolutely don't need them and it's an entire gimmick. If you really wanna implement a chatbot, connect the user to an actual person on your end, which I think is not possible if you're at a 'startup' stage. You'll need employees who can handle user queries in real time. If the user really is stuck let them use the 'Contact Us' page. A really close relative of mine is very vocal about the frustration he faces whenever he tries to use the AI Chatbot on any well known e-com website. The only case for AI Chatbot that makes sense is when it's directing the customer to an actual customer support rep if none of the AI's solutions is working for the customer. Even then, implementing a search page for FAQ is extremely easy and user friendly. Another example: AI Interviewer I recently interviewed for a startup, and their whole interviewing process was AI'zed?!?! No real person at the other end, I was answering to their questions which were in video format. They even had a 'mascot' / 'AI interviewer' avatar designed by an AI (AI-ception???). This mascot just text-to-speech'ed all the questions for me to rewind and hear what I missed again. And I had to record video and audio to answer these questions on their platform itself. The entire interview process just could've been a questionnaire, or if you're really concerned on the integrity of the interviewee, just take a few minutes out of your oh-so-busy schedule as a startup owner. Atleast for hiring employees who would make the most impact on your product going ahead. I say the most impact, because (atleast as a developer) the work done by these employees would define how robust your product is, and/or how easily other features can be integrated into the codebase. Trust me, refactoring code later on would only cost you time and money. These resources would rather be more useful in other departments of your startup. The only use case for an AI Interviewer I see is for preparing for an actual interview, provided that feedback is given to the user at the earliest, which you don't need to worry about as a startup owner. So yeah, you're probably better off without integrating AI in your product. Thank you for reading. TLDR; The title; I know AI is the new thing and gets everyone drooling and all, but for the love of God, just focus on what your startup does best and put real people behind it; Integrating AI without human intervention is as good as a broken product; Do your hiring yourself, or through real people, emphasizing on the fact that the people you hire at an early stage will define your growth ahead;

I spent 6 months on building a tool, and got 0 zero users. Here is my story.

Edit Thank you all so much for your time reading my story. Your support, feedback, criticism, and skepticism; all helped me a lot, and I couldn't appreciate it enough \^\_\^ TL;DR I spent 6 months on a tool that currently has 0 users. Below is what I learned during my journey, sharing because I believe most mistakes are easily avoidable. Do not overestimate your product and assume it will be an exception to fundamental principles. Principles are there for a reason. Always look for validation before you start. Avoid building products with a low money-to-effort ratio/in very competitive fields. Unless you have the means, you probably won't make it. Pick a problem space, pick your target audience, and talk to them before thinking about a solution. Identify and match their pain points. Only then should you think of a solution. If people are not overly excited or willing to pay in advance for a discounted price, it might be a sign to rethink. Sell one and only one feature at a time. Avoid everything else. If people don't pay for that one core feature, no secondary feature will change their mind. Always spend twice as much time marketing as you do building. You will not get users if they don't know it exists. Define success metrics ("1000 users in 3 months" or "$6000 in the account at the end of 6 months") before you start. If you don't meet them, strongly consider quitting the project. If you can't get enough users to keep going, nothing else matters. VALIDATION, VALIDATION, VALIDATION. Success is not random, but most of our first products will not make a success story. Know when to admit failure, and move on. Even if a product of yours doesn't succeed, what you learned during its journey will turn out to be invaluable for your future. My story So, this is the story of a product, Summ, that I’ve been working on for the last 6 months. As it's the first product I’ve ever built, after watching you all from the sidelines, I have learned a lot, made many mistakes, and did only a few things right. Just sharing what I’ve learned and some insights from my journey so far. I hope that this post will help you avoid the mistakes I made — most of which I consider easily avoidable — while you enjoy reading it, and get to know me a little bit more 🤓. A slow start after many years Summ isn’t the first product I really wanted to build. Lacking enough dev skills to even get started was a huge blocker for so many years. In fact, the first product I would’ve LOVED to build was a smart personal shopping assistant. I had this idea 4 years ago; but with no GPT, no coding skills, no technical co-founder, I didn’t have the means to make it happen. I still do not know if such a tool exists and is good enough. All I wanted was a tool that could make data-based predictions about when to buy stuff (“buy a new toothpaste every three months”) and suggest physical products that I might need or be strongly interested in. AFAIK, Amazon famously still struggles with the second one. Fast-forward a few years, I learned the very basics of HTML, CSS, and Vanilla JS. Still was not there to build a product; but good enough to code my design portfolio from scratch. Yet, I couldn’t imagine myself building a product using Vanilla JS. I really hated it, I really sucked at it. So, back to tutorial hell, and to learn about this framework I just heard about: React.React introduced so many new concepts to me. “Thinking in React” is a phrase we heard a lot, and with quite good reasons. After some time, I was able to build very basic tutorial apps, both in React, and React Native; but I have to say that I really hated coding for mobile. At this point, I was already a fan of productivity apps, and had a concept for a time management assistant app in my design portfolio. So, why not build one? Surely, it must be easy, since every coding tutorial starts with a todo app. ❌ WRONG! Building a basic todo app is easy enough, but building one good enough for a place in the market was a challenge I took and failed. I wasted one month on that until I abandoned the project for good. Even if I continued working on it, as the productivity landscape is overly competitive, I wouldn’t be able to make enough money to cover costs, assuming I make any. Since I was (and still am) in between jobs, I decided to abandon the project. 👉 What I learned: Do not start projects with a low ratio of money to effort and time. Example: Even if I get 500 monthly users, 200 of which are paid users (unrealistically high number), assuming an average subscription fee of $5/m (such apps are quite cheap, mostly due to the high competition), it would make me around $1000 minus any occurring costs. Any founder with a product that has 500 active users should make more. Even if it was relatively successful, due to the high competition, I wouldn’t make any meaningful money. PS: I use Todoist today. Due to local pricing, I pay less than $2/m. There is no way I could beat this competitive pricing, let alone the app itself. But, somehow, with a project that wasn’t even functional — let alone being an MVP — I made my first Wi-Fi money: Someone decided that the domain I preemptively purchased is worth something. By this point, I had already abandoned the project, certainly wasn’t going to renew the domain, was looking for a FT job, and a new project that I could work on. And out of nowhere, someone hands me some free money — who am I not to take it? Of course, I took it. The domain is still unused, no idea why 🤔. Ngl, I still hate the fact that my first Wi-Fi money came from this. A new idea worth pursuing? Fast-forward some weeks now. Around March, I got this crazy idea of building an email productivity tool. We all use emails, yet we all hate them. So, this must be fixed. Everyone uses emails, in fact everyone HAS TO use emails. So, I just needed to build a tool and wait for people to come. This was all, really. After all, the problem space is huge, there is enough room for another product, everyone uses emails, no need for any further validation, right? ❌ WRONG ONCE AGAIN! We all hear from the greatest in the startup landscape that we must validate our ideas with real people, yet at least some of us (guilty here 🥸) think that our product will be hugely successful and prove them to be an exception. Few might, but most are not. I certainly wasn't. 👉 Lesson learned: Always validate your ideas with real people. Ask them how much they’d pay for such a tool (not if they would). Much better if they are willing to pay upfront for a discount, etc. But even this comes later, keep reading. I think the difference between “How much” and “If” is huge for two reasons: (1) By asking them for “How much”, you force them to think in a more realistic setting. (2) You will have a more realistic idea on your profit margins. Based on my competitive analysis, I already had a solution in my mind to improve our email usage standards and email productivity (huge mistake), but I did my best to learn about their problems regarding those without pushing the idea too hard. The idea is this: Generate concise email summaries with suggested actions, combine them into one email, and send it at their preferred times. Save as much as time the AI you end up with allows. After all, everyone loves to save time. So, what kind of validation did I seek for? Talked with only a few people around me about this crazy, internet-breaking idea. The responses I got were, now I see, mediocre; no one got excited about it, just said things along the lines of “Cool idea, OK”. So, any reasonable person in this situation would think “Okay, not might not be working”, right? Well, I did not. I assumed that they were the wrong audience for this product, and there was this magical land of user segments waiting eagerly for my product, yet unknowingly. To this day, I still have not reached this magical place. Perhaps, it didn’t exist in the first place. If I cannot find it, whether it exists or not doesn’t matter. I am certainly searching for it. 👉 What I should have done: Once I decide on a problem space (time management, email productivity, etc.), I should decide on my potential user segments, people who I plan to sell my product to. Then I should go talk to those people, ask them about their pains, then get to the problem-solving/ideation phase only later. ❗️ VALIDATION COMES FROM THE REALITY OUTSIDE. What validation looks like might change from product to product; but what invalidation looks like is more or less the same for every product. Nico Jeannen told me yesterday “validation = money in the account” on Twitter. This is the ultimate form of validation your product could get. If your product doesn’t make any money, then something is invalidated by reality: Your product, you, your idea, who knows? So, at this point, I knew a little bit of Python from spending some time in tutorial hell a few years ago, some HTML/CSS/JS, barely enough React to build a working app. React could work for this project, but I needed easy-to-implement server interactivity. Luckily, around this time, I got to know about this new gen of indie hackers, and learned (but didn’t truly understand) about their approach to indie hacking, and this library called Nextjs. How good Next.js still blows my mind. So, I was back to tutorial hell once again. But, this time, with a promise to myself: This is the last time I would visit tutorial hell. Time to start building this "ground-breaking idea" Learning the fundamentals of Next.js was easier than learning of React unsurprisingly. Yet, the first time I managed to run server actions on Next.js was one of the rarest moments that completely blew my mind. To this day, I reject the idea that it is something else than pure magic under its hood. Did I absolutely need Nextjs for this project though? I do not think so. Did it save me lots of time? Absolutely. Furthermore, learning Nextjs will certainly be quite helpful for other projects that I will be tackling in the future. Already got a few ideas that might be worth pursuing in the head in case I decide to abandon Summ in the future. Fast-forward few weeks again: So, at this stage, I had a barely working MVP-like product. Since the very beginning, I spent every free hour (and more) on this project as speed is essential. But, I am not so sure it was worth it to overwork in retrospect. Yet, I know I couldn’t help myself. Everything is going kinda smooth, so what’s the worst thing that could ever happen? Well, both Apple and Google announced their AIs (Apple Intelligence and Google Gemini, respectively) will have email summarization features for their products. Summarizing singular emails is no big deal, after all there were already so many similar products in the market. I still think that what truly matters is a frictionless user experience, and this is why I built this product in a certain way: You spend less than a few minutes setting up your account, and you get to enjoy your email summaries, without ever visiting its website again. This is still a very cool concept I really like a lot. So, at this point: I had no other idea that could be pursued, already spent too much time on this project. Do I quit or not? This was the question. Of course not. I just have to launch this product as quickly as possible. So, I did something right, a quite rare occurrence I might say: Re-planned my product, dropped everything secondary to the core feature immediately (save time on reading emails), tried launching it asap. 👉 Insight: Sell only one core feature at one time. Drop anything secondary to this core feature. Well, my primary occupation is product design. So one would expect that a product I build must have stellar design. I considered any considerable time spent on design at this stage would be simply wasted. I still think this is both true and wrong: True, because if your product’s core benefits suck, no one will care about your design. False, because if your design looks amateurish, no one will trust you and your product. So, I always targeted an average level design with it and the way this tool works made it quite easy as I had to design only 2 primary pages: Landing page and user portal (which has only settings and analytics pages). However, even though I knew spending time on design was not worth much of my time, I got a bit “greedy”: In fact, I redesigned those pages three times, and still ended up with a so-so design that I am not proud of. 👉 What I would do differently: Unless absolutely necessary, only one iteration per stage as long as it works. This, in my mind, applies to everything. If your product’s A feature works, then no need to rewrite it from scratch for any reason, or even refactor it. When your product becomes a success, and you absolutely need that part of your codebase to be written, do so, but only then. Ready to launch, now is th etime for some marketing, right? By July 26, I already had a “launchable” product that barely works (I marked this date on a Notion docs, this is how I know). Yet, I had spent almost no time on marketing, sales, whatever. After all, “You build and they will come”. Did I know that I needed marketing? Of course I did, but knowingly didn’t. Why, you might ask. Well, from my perspective, it had to be a dev-heavy product; meaning that you spend most of your time on developing it, mostly coding skills. But, this is simply wrong. As a rule of thumb, as noted by one of the greatests, Marc Louvion, you should spend at least twice of the building time on marketing. ❗️ Time spent on building \* 2 people don’t know your product > they don’t use your product > you don’t get users > you don’t make money Easy as that. Following the same reasoning, a slightly different approach to planning a project is possible. Determine an approximate time to complete the project with a high level project plan. Let’s say 6 months. By the reasoning above, 2 months should go into building, and 4 into marketing. If you need 4 months for building instead of 2, then you need 8 months of marketing, which makes the time to complete the project 12 months. If you don’t have that much time, then quit the project. When does a project count as completed? Well, in reality, never. But, I think we have to define success conditions even before we start for indie projects and startups; so we know when to quit when they are not met. A success condition could look like “Make $6000 in 12 months” or “Have 3000 users in 6 months”. It all depends on the project. But, once you set it, it should be set in stone: You don’t change it unless absolutely necessary. I suspect there are few principles that make a solopreneur successful; and knowing when to quit and when to continue is definitely one of them. Marc Louvion is famously known for his success, but he got there after failing so many projects. To my knowledge, the same applies to Nico Jeannen, Pieter Levels, or almost everyone as well. ❗️ Determining when to continue even before you start will definitely help in the long run. A half-aed launch Time-leap again. Around mid August, I “soft launched” my product. By soft launch, I mean lazy marketing. Just tweeting about it, posting it on free directories. Did I get any traffic? Surely I did. Did I get any users? Nope. Only after this time, it hit me: “Either something is wrong with me, or with this product” Marketing might be a much bigger factor for a project’s success after all. Even though I get some traffic, not convincing enough for people to sign up even for a free trial. The product was still perfect in my eyes at the time (well, still is ^(\_),) so the right people are not finding my product, I thought. Then, a question that I should have been asking at the very first place, one that could prevent all these, comes to my mind: “How do even people search for such tools?” If we are to consider this whole journey of me and my so-far-failed product to be an already destined failure, one metric suffices to show why. Search volume: 30. Even if people have such a pain point, they are not looking for email summaries. So, almost no organic traffic coming from Google. But, as a person who did zero marketing on this or any product, who has zero marketing knowledge, who doesn’t have an audience on social media, there is not much I could do. Finally, it was time to give up. Or not… In my eyes, the most important element that makes a founder (solo or not) successful (this, I am not by any means) is to solve problems. ❗️ So, the problem was this: “People are not finding my product by organic search” How do I make sure I get some organic traffic and gets more visibility? Learn digital marketing and SEO as much as I can within very limited time. Thankfully, without spending much time, I came across Neil Patel's YT channel, and as I said many times, it is an absolute gold mine. I learned a lot, especially about the fundamentals, and surely it will be fruitful; but there is no magic trick that could make people visit your website. SEO certainly helps, but only when people are looking for your keywords. However, it is truly a magical solution to get in touch with REAL people that are in your user segments: 👉 Understand your pains, understand their problems, help them to solve them via building products. I did not do this so far, have to admit. But, in case you would like to have a chat about your email usage, and email productivity, just get in touch; I’d be delighted to hear about them. Getting ready for a ProductHunt launch The date was Sept 1. And I unlocked an impossible achievement: Running out of Supabase’s free plan’s Egres limit while having zero users. I was already considering moving out of their Cloud server and managing a Supabase CLI service on my Hetzner VPS for some time; but never ever suspected that I would have to do this quickly. The cheapest plan Supabase offers is $25/month; yet, at that point, I am in between jobs for such a long time, basically broke, and could barely afford that price. One or two months could be okay, but why pay for it if I will eventually move out of their Cloud service? So, instead of paying $25, I spent two days migrating out of Supabase Cloud. Worth my time? Definitely not. But, when you are broke, you gotta do stupid things. This was the first time that I felt lucky to have zero users: I have no idea how I would manage this migration if I had any. I think this is one of the core tenets of an indie hacker: Controlling their own environment. I can’t remember whose quote this is, but I suspect it was Naval: Entrepreneurs have an almost pathological need to control their own fate. They will take any suffering if they can be in charge of their destiny, and not have it in somebody else’s hands. What’s truly scary is, at least in my case, we make people around us suffer at the expense of our attempting to control our own fates. I know this period has been quite hard on my wife as well, as I neglected her quite a bit, but sadly, I know that this will happen again. It is something that I can barely help with. Still, so sorry. After working the last two weeks on a ProductHunt Launch, I finally launched it this Tuesday. Zero ranking, zero new users, but 36 kind people upvoted my product, and many commented and provided invaluable feedback. I couldn't be more grateful for each one of them 🙏. Considering all these, what lies in the future of Summ though? I have no idea, to be honest. On one hand, I have zero users, have no job, no income. So, I need a way to make money asap. On the other hand, the whole idea of it revolves around one core premise (not an assumption) that I am not so willing to share; and I couldn’t have more trust in it. This might not be the best iteration of it, however I certainly believe that email usage is one of the best problem spaces one could work on. 👉 But, one thing is for certain: I need to get in touch with people, and talk with them about this product I built so far. In fact, this is the only item on my agenda. Nothing else will save my brainchild <3. Below are some other insights and notes that I got during my journey; as they do not 100% fit into this story, I think it is more suitable to list them here. I hope you enjoyed reading this. Give Summ a try, it comes with a generous free trial, no credit card required. Some additional notes and insights: Project planning is one of the most underestimated skills for solopreneurs. It saves you enormous time, and helps you to keep your focus up. Building B2C products beats building B2B products. Businesses are very willing to pay big bucks if your product helps them. On the other hand, spending a few hours per user who would pay $5/m probably is not worth your time. It doesn’t matter how brilliant your product is if no one uses it. If you cannot sell a product in a certain category/niche (or do not know how to sell it), it might be a good idea not to start a project in it. Going after new ideas and ventures is quite risky, especially if you don’t know how to market it. On the other hand, an already established category means that there is already demand. Whether this demand is sufficient or not is another issue. As long as there is enough demand for your product to fit in, any category/niche is good. Some might be better, some might be worse. Unless you are going hardcore B2B, you will need people to find your product by means of organic search. Always conduct thorough keyword research as soon as possible.

I feel Ai is mostly marketing - I will not promote

I run into this on X an made me think about it… the post says “AI is effectively ‘useless’ and it’s created a ‘fake it till you make it’ bubble that could end in disaster”. I think this is true. I haven't seen a product that really solves anything specifically except for the gimmicks. It needs a product normally people can use. Also the AI startups have cash burn rates 3x to 10x their revenue. No business model. It's very focused on getting acquired.

Hot take: AI will replace non-technical founders before technical founders [I will not promote]

I think the prevailing theory is AI is going to empower non-technical people to create complex systems just by writing a prompt or prompts. I think a variant of that is getting close which are agentic workflows where something triggers an agent and it does things autonomously. These sort of systems are starting to pop up everywhere (zapier, n8n, others...) however we're a ways off from these being able to respond in near real time. Long story short you'll still need to have code to run and someone to write that code (at least for a few more years) I've been using Deepresearch by OpenAI since Monday. I'm a technical founder without a formal business background. I've had it do product market fit analysis, sam/tam estimates, go to market strategies and it's producing fantastic reports. I could see it handling pretty much 90% of the non-technical business work that doesn't involve action in the physical world. It produced the content of a very well thought out pitch deck for one of my businesses. It's identifying potential customers. It's pretty damn crazy. Like right now I have it building a financial pro-forma for my data room. In fact it finished before I could write this post!

How I made a high tech salary in my first selling month

For over 7 years I worked as a full-stack developer, helping other companies bring their ideas to life. But one day, I thought “Why not try making my own dream come true?”. That’s when I decided to quit my job and start my own journey to becoming an entrepreneur. At first, it wasn’t easy. I didn’t make any money for months and had no idea where to start. I felt lost. Then, I decided to focus on something popular and trending. AI was everywhere, and ChatGPT was the most used AI platform. So I looked into it and I found the OpenAI community forum where people had been asking for features that weren’t being added. That gave me an idea. Why not build those features myself? I created a Chrome extension and I worked on some of the most requested features, like: Downloading the advanced voice mode and messages as MP3 Adding folders to organize chats Saving and reusing prompts Pinning important chats Exporting chats to TXT/JSON files Deleting or archiving multiple chats at once Making chat history searches faster and better It took me about a week to build the first version, and when I published it, the response was incredible. People loved it! Some even said things like, “You’re a lifesaver!” That’s when I realized I had something that could not only help people but also turn into a real business. I kept the first version free to see how people would respond. Many users have been downloading my extension, which prompted Chrome to review it to determine if it qualified for the featured badge. I received the badge, and it has significantly boosted traffic to my extension ever since. After all the positive feedback, I launched a paid version one month ago. A few minutes after publishing it, I made my first sale! That moment was so exciting, and it motivated me to keep going. I already have over 4,000 users and have made more than $4,500 in my first selling month. I’ve decided to release 1-2 new features every month to keep improving the extension based on what users ask for. I also created the same extension for Firefox and Edge users because many people have been asking for it! I also started a Reddit community, where I share updates, sales, discount codes, and ideas for new features. It’s been awesome to connect with users directly and get their feedback. Additionally, I’ve started working on another extension for Claude, which I’m hoping will be as successful as this one. My message to you is this: never give up on your dreams. It might feel impossible at first, but with patience, hard work, and some creativity, you can make it happen. I hope this inspires you to go after what you want. Good luck to all of us!

From Running a $350M Startup to Failing Big and Rediscovering What Really Matters in Life ❤️

This is my story. I’ve always been a hustler. I don’t remember a time I wasn’t working since I was 14. Barely slept 4 hours a night, always busy—solving problems, putting out fires. After college (LLB and MBA), I was lost. I tried regular jobs but couldn’t get excited, and when I’m not excited, I spiral. But I knew entrepreneurship; I just didn’t realize it was an option for adults. Then, in 2017 a friend asked me to help with their startup. “Cool,” I thought. Finally, a place where I could solve problems all day. It was a small e-commerce idea, tackling an interesting angle. I worked 17-hour days, delivering on a bike, talking to customers, vendors, and even random people on the street. Things moved fast. We applied to Y Combinator, got in, and raised $18M before Demo Day even started. We grew 100% month-over-month. Then came another $40M, and I moved to NYC. Before I knew it, we had 1,000 employees and raised $80M more. I was COO, managing 17 direct reports (VPs of Ops, Finance, HR, Data, and more) and 800 indirect employees. On the surface, I was on top of the world. But in reality, I was at rock bottom. I couldn’t sleep, drowning in anxiety, and eventually ended up on antidepressants. Then 2022 hit. We needed to raise $100M, but we couldn’t. In three brutal months, we laid off 900 people. It was the darkest period of my life. I felt like I’d failed everyone—myself, investors, my company, and my team. I took a year off. Packed up the car with my wife and drove across Europe, staying in remote places, just trying to calm my nervous system. I couldn’t speak to anyone, felt ashamed, and battled deep depression. It took over a year, therapy, plant medicine, intense morning routines, and a workout regimen to get back on my feet, physically and mentally. Now, I’m on the other side. In the past 6 months, I’ve been regaining my mojo, with a new respect for who I am and why I’m here. I made peace with what I went through over those 7 years—the lessons, the people, the experiences. I started reconnecting with my community, giving back. Every week, I have conversations with young founders, offering direction, or even jumping in to help with their operations. It’s been a huge gift. I also began exploring side projects. I never knew how to code, but I’ve always had ideas. Recent advances in AI gave me the push I needed. I built my first app, as my first attempt at my true passion—consumer products for kids. Today, I feel wholesome about my journey. I hope others can see that too. ❤️ EDIT: Wow, I didn’t expect this post to resonate with so many people. A lot of you have DM’d me, and I’ll try to respond. Just a heads-up, though—I’m juggling consulting and new projects, so I can’t jump on too many calls. Since I’m not promoting anything, I won’t be funneling folks to my page, so forgive me if I don’t get back to everyone. Anyway, it’s amazing to connect with so many of you. I’d love to write more, so let me know what topics you’d be interested in!

One post gave us another 5 solopreneurs on our waitlist, how to speed this up?

Firstly, thank you guys for all the feedback (implemented it to our v1.0 and even waitlist).  Every time I post here I receive another 3-5 new subscribers. I'd like to speed this up but I don't have an idea how to hook up right people yet. Here are the things I do: posting on big subreddits - doesn't blow up yet post under niche subreddits - in order to get specific traffic, does anyone tried that before? any recommendations? tech directories to get backlinks - AI directories, automation directories, solopreneurs directories, sidehustle directories, SMB directories - got me traffic, not a lot signups. Any best practises here? (I even asked another hacker for help optimizing that; read almost everything from cover to cover) Linkedin direct messages and conversations among our network no X, no Linkedin, no paid ads yet, no other content YET Since our tool is for solopreneurs and small teams, I'm looking for places they get their knowledge. Much appreciate any feedback on the points above! Pls share some best practises on getting early users. And again, thanks for your feedback!

I studied how 7 Founders found their first 100 customers for their businesses. Summarizing it here!

I am learning marketing, and so I combed through the internet to find specific advice that helped founders reach 100 users and not random Google answers. Here’s what I found: Llama Life by Marie Marie founder of Llama Life, a productivity app ($51.4K+ revenue) got her first 100 users using Snowballing effect. She shared great advice that I want to add here verbatim, “Need to think about what you have that you can leverage based on your current situation. eg..When you have no customers, think about where you can post to get the 1st customer eg Product Hunt. If you do well on PH, say you get #3 product of the day, then you post somewhere else saying ‘I got #3 product of the day’.. to get your next few customers. Maybe that post is on reddit with some learnings that you found. If the reddit post does well, then you might post it on Twitter, saying reddit did well and what learnings you got from that etc. or even if it doesn’t do well you can still post about it.” Another tip she shared is to build related products that get more viral than the product itself. These are small stand-alone sites that would appeal to the same target audience, but by nature, are more shareable. On these sites, you can mention your startup like: ‘brought to you by Llama Life’ and then provide a link to the main website if someone is interested. If one of those gets viral or ranks on Google, you’ll have a passive traffic source. Scraping bee by Pierre Pierre, founder of Scraping Bee, a web scraping tool has now reached $1.5M ARR. Pierre and his cofounder Kevin started with 10 Free Beta Users in 2019, and after 6 months asked them to take a paid subscription if they wanted to continue using the product. That’s how they got their first user within 50 minutes of that email. Then they listed it on dozens of startup directories but their core strategy was writing the best possible content for their target audience — Developers. 3 very successful pieces of content that worked were : A small tutorial on how to scrape single-page application An extensive general guide about web scraping without getting blocked A complete introduction to web scraping with Python They didn’t do content marketing for the sake of content marketing but deep-dived into the value they were providing their customer. One of these got 70K visits, and all this together got them to over 100 users. WePay by Bill Clerico Bill Clerico left his cushy corporate job to build WePay which was then acquired for $400M got his first users by using his app. He got his first users by using his app! The app was for group payments. So he hosted a Poker tournament at his house and collected payments only with his app. Then they hosted a barbecue for fraternity treasurers at San Jose State & helped them do their annual dues collection. Good old word-of-mouth marketing, that however, started with an event where they used what they made! RealWorld by Genevieve Genevieve — Founder and CEO of Realworld stands by the old-school advice of value giving. RealWorld is an app that helps GenZ navigate adulthood. So, before launching their direct-to-consumer platform, they had an educational course that they sold to college career centers and students. They already had a pipeline of adults who turned to Realworld for their adulting challenges. From there, she gained her first 100 followers. Saner dot ai by Austin Austin got 100 users from Reddit for his startup Saner.ai. Reddit hates advertising, and so his tips to market your startup on Reddit is to Write value-driven posts on your niche. Instead of writing posts, find posts where people are looking for solutions DM people facing problems that your SaaS solves. But instead of selling, ask about their problem to see if your product is a good fit Heartfelt posts about why you built it, aren’t gonna cut it To find posts and people, search Reddit with relevant keywords and join all the subreddits A Stock Portfolio Newsletter A financial investor got his first 100 paid newsletter subscribers for his stock portfolio newsletter. His tips : Don’t reinvent the wheel. Work what’s already working. He saw a company making $500M+ from stock picking newsletter, so decided to try that. Find the gaps in “already working” and leverage them. That newsletter did not have portfolios of advisors writing them. That was his USP. He added his own portfolio to his newsletter. Now to 100 users, he partnered with a guy running an investing website and getting good traffic. That guy got a cut of his revenue, in exchange. That one simple step got him to 100 users. Hypefury by Yannick and Samy Yannick and Samy from Hypefury, Twitter and Social Media Automation tool got their first beta testers and users from a paid community. They launched Hypefury there and asked if someone wanted to try it. A couple of people tried it and gave feedback. Samy conducted user interviews and product demos for them, And shared the reviews on Twitter. That alone, along with word-of-mouth marketing on Twitter got them their first 100 users. To conclude: Don’t reinvent the wheel, try what’s working. Find the gaps in what’s working, and leverage that. Instead of thinking about millions of customers, think about the first 10. Then first 100. Leverage what you have. Get the first 10 customers, then talk about this to get the next 100. Use your app. Find ways, events, and opportunities to use your app in front of people. And get them to use it. Write content not only for SEO but also to help people. It won’t work tomorrow, but it will work for years after it picks up. Leverage other sources of traffic by partnering up! Do things that don’t scale. I’m also doing SaaS marketing deep dives over 30 pieces of content. I'm posting here for the first time, so I'm not sure if it will stay or not, sorry if it doesn't. I've helped a SaaS grow from $19K to $100K MRR as a marketer in last 2 years, and now I wanna dive deep. Cheers! (1/30)

Consistency problem? I will not promote

I am struggling with being consistent. I know that as a startup founder, I am supposed to do a few things everyday and that's when compounding effect will kick in. However, everyday, I am missing few important tasks. These tasks are like posting on twitter or reaching out to 5 new people on linkedin. How do you guys manage it? I am not looking for ai tools suggestions to automate these as I won't learn anything in the process if I rely on such tools.

Honest thoughts on our startup

Hey y'all, we've recently started a marking push, overhauled the website, and our machine learning team has done drastic work to improve the reviews & auto pr descriptions. That being said, would love some candid feedback if you or your team members would consider using a tool like ours and if not, why not. Our company is Korbit AI and we do context based, AI code reviews and automated PR descriptions. While we have been getting more traction since some of the updates and larger companies are starting to sign up, I would really appreciate some honest opinions on why you \wouldn't\ try a tool like this in hopes we can use that info to alter marketing etc. This is not meant to be a promotion post, and legitimately looking to learn from other people rocking startups trying to build up a larger customer base etc. Any feedback is very much appreciated Thank you in advanced, Riley

I will not promote. I am looking for a collaborator to develop an AI agent.

Hi, I got an Idea and I am looking for someone to collaborate to develop an MVP. I am from Algeria (North Africa), I recently graduated from a university abroad. During my years of study a lot of people (mainly from non-western countries) reached out to me for helping them gather information about enrolling to universities. I helped a lot of the students, and a lot of them were available to pay me for it. There is a huge market for people from non-western countries wanting to study in western countries, and people in my country are available to pay 500 dollars for just getting the chance to get an admission and a visa to study aborad. We are talking generally about sons of rich dads who are lazy or lack information to do the procedure. The procedure to get enrolled is pretty repetitive, meaning that it can be replicated, and generally the universities ask for the same documents, with slightly different requirements. Based on this, I was thinking: Why not automating this? I already have a network of people that can test whatever this AI agent will look like. Now I am in a state in which I need a tech person (I am a techie too) to collaborate. I am serious, and I have personal savings that can be used for tech tools and frameworks to develop an MVP.

Should we give up?

I'm currently very demotivated because we're working on our SaaS startup since 1,5 years and we still haven't found active users, let alone a customer. We're building an AI-first tool that automates user research analysis. We've released two MVPs so far and are planning to build a third. People respond well to outreach (5-7% book a demo from those who received a first message) but then they fail to use it. We are talking with users a lot so we are aware of the problems, and we might be able to solve them if we continue building and testing. I find it hard though to solve these problems efficiently, because there are no similar established AI-first products on the market and it feels like we have to create a new UX standard. Some problems might be very hard to be solved, e.g. there are high cost of switching products for many of our potential users. Also, my time is limited, as I recently (5 months ago) became a mother. I can only work 30 hours per week. It's a competitive area we're in and our competitors have gradually developed into the same direction and it's getting harder to position ourselves. Also, GPTs might soon be able to do what we're doing - for free. I feel like AI tools are generally expected by many to be free. The price we're expecting to be able to bill is getting lower and lower and our finance plan is already looking tight. However, there are adjacent audiences which we could target as well, but none of us knows them. Is it normal as a founder to struggle so much at the beginning? I've read that it took established SaaS 2,5 years on average from founding to first revenue. We haven't founded so far so you could say we're not behind \sarcasm\ Shall we keep pushing? My tech co-founder is optimistic and thinks this is where the wheat is separated from the chaff. We're currently supported financially by a government fund so we haven't spent much private money. However, I feel like my career outlook gets worse with each day that I unsuccessfully try to raise this startup.

Nuts and bolts AI implementation for small business

How can small businesses use AI to increase sales or decrease expenses without massive disruption? One way for us is using AI to process our email history to identify patterns and write personalized messages based on past correspondence. According to legal advice in which I have confidence, email that is personalized for each recipient (and meets other standards) does not need to be opt in. If you disagree - understood - but spam morality is not the topic here. Bottom line - obviously a game changer. Knowing phrases people have used before becoming clients - and all of the possible permutations of those phrases, and detecting where those phrases show up will make our sales and marketing many times more effective for a fraction of the cost. There's a reason big corps. record calls, and now small business can leverage the same technology. We are setting up a process that yields accurate, up to date, comprehensive data for our own business operations. Our clients - who are they and how has their demographic changed over time? To answer this question and for email personalization, we also need access to external data sources e.g. like accurate up to date company demographics. IMO - the leader in company data in the US? THEY SUCK. We found there is no magic fairy who is going to make good data appear for our AI. The process of applying our own proprietary knowledge to code and categorize the data is just as important, and obviously highly sensitive. How do we leverage the AI technologies of companies like Google and Microsoft (or anyone else) without being their bitch? Below is a list of some of the sources of my business's data: Data sources: PST/OST/Other Email data files Microsoft data from Windows/O365 Windows/Linux/Android/IOS application logs and other data Web server logs for the company website. SEO/Analytics Data Google data export Google voice/VOIP logs OneDrive/G drive Other Phone system/cell service logs Other SAAS and in-house application data. Facebook/social media data for company pages. QuickBooks/other accounting systems/business bank account logs POS/Credit card processing systems/PayPal, etc. OSINT to fill in the blanks

Good at coding, bad at marketing. Summary

Hello. I posted a question on what to do if you are good at coding but bad at marketing four days ago, and I received so many responses and tips. The original post is here. I was really glad and excited to read comments. To return the favor to the community and add some more value, I’ve summarized all the comments I got on the original post. Here are they, with my personal comments on some of the advice I got. You’ll never believe it, but the most common advice was to learn. Really, the first and only thing you should start with if you’re bad at marketing is learning. Yet learning could be different. I highlighted 5 main areas. Educate yourself on general questions. Learn more about some basics. For example, start by finding out what the 4P’s of marketing are, and afterward, you’ll inevitably run into YouTube videos, seminars, Udemy courses, or any other resource that resonates with you on some ideas/avenues you could pursue. Read books and watch videos. There are tons of books on marketing and sales. People shared in the comments books by Dan Kennedy and “Cashvertising”, written by Drew Eric Whitman. (I’ve never heard of them, but already ordered on Amazon). For sales, the most common idea was to start with YouTube videos. For example, Alex Hormozi videos and Startup school delivered by Ycombinator videos. Check out Indie Hackers and scrutinize it for a piece of good advice from developers in the same situation. Also, there was advice to follow up and read some guy on Twitter. (Don't want to get unfairly banned from here, so won't post it) Educate yourself and hire a professional or find a co-founder to help you: Hire a seasoned marketer in this field to help you out. He will help you achieve cost-efficient scales. But it could be a real problem to find the right person. Marketing agencies are expensive. Try to look on LinkedIn or among your acquaintances. Look for professionals with credentials or extensive experience. Seek marketing referrals from startups of a similar size/industry. If you don't have those, try to bring a trusted/experienced marketer friend into the intro meetings to help assess whether the service provider knows what they are doing. Talented freelancers can often get the job done for less than hiring an entire agency. Look for a co-founder who is savvy in marketing, passionate, and ready to work hard towards mutual success. Educate and DIY Being the face of your business is way better than having faceless communication. The startup checklist is made based on the comments is next: At least have your product defined. Define your target audience. Set up the goals you want to achieve. Make domain expertise and understand the market and the direction of its development. The next stage is answering tricky questions: Have you created a business model? How do you plan to compete? What’s your unique selling point? How much do you plan to budget for marketing? Are you planning to work alone, or will you need other devs? Then you start thinking about clients… You need the exposure to truly understand the customer's pain points and build a product that they love. You need to think about how your clients would think, and you should tailor each step you take for them. Get feedback from your early users if you already have a product. Interview your potential customers to learn how they buy. This will help you narrow your choice of marketing channels. Get your product or service used by several startups and help them achieve their goals. Endorsements are very valuable marketing assets. You need a landing to validate your value proposition and start sending traffic, or you can run meta instant form campaigns... It would depend on the category of your startup. You need a benchmark of the competition's ads both in Meta and Google, blog posts, domain authority, their landing page, and average search volumes. Do affiliate marketing for your product since it's an effective strategy. Educate and use AI tools for dealing with marketing. Build an LLM-based product to automate marketing. (Sounds like an idea for a startup, right?) Learn following ChatGPT advice. In 1–3 months, you will be another updated person. Look at marketowl, an AI marketing department for startups and microbusinesses that have no budget or time to do marketing. It will automate the basic tasks your business needs, but it doesn't require your marketing expertise. Check out AI tools that are delivering very good marketing content (gocharlie, jasper, copyai). Educate yourself and run socials Start a blog or YouTube channel where you can share your expertise in coding or anything else you are good at and how your product simplifies life. Engage with your audience on social media platforms like Instagram and LinkedIn, where you can showcase your industry knowledge. Start a page on Twitter and an account on Reddit. Follow and read subreddits and pages where your potential customers are. Learn the pain from the inside. Do not simply promote, people will lose interest immediately. Start by taking focused time to create informational content, so people will eventually be naturally intrigued by what you do and want to support you when they start to “know” you. Educate your potential users about the value of your product. Create content based on what ideal customers are asking at the various stages of marketing. e.g., if they are at the beginning of the process, they may use basic language; if they are further down the process, maybe they’ll be specific. Try to get on podcasts and build as many social links as you can. In other words, don’t live in a shell! Post regularly, and eventually you’ll find sites or people that are willing to promote for you. I omitted here all personal help offers and newsletters, however you could find them in the original post. Hope that will be helpful!

30K MRR from a huge barbershop - 100 automated lost meaning

Hello So in the past 2 years I have developed a sort of a beauty hub in Transylvania where I have about 30-35 people working every day. I am not a programmer but I have some skills in a few NO CODE platforms and managed to develop the entire system 100% automated and for a very low cost. When I say 100% automated I mean that I rarely even show up there and things work perfectly.I had a big dream in this industry but along the way I lost interest and decided 6 months ago that this is it. I will no longer do anything that is not necessary and pivot to other industryThe AI era popped up. The problem with me is that I just can't do meaningless stuff like most of the products out there. Tried a couple of things but lots interest very fast. For example I was able to build a sort of a kids app where I generated stories based on parents input where the kid was the super hero in 3 days. Lost interest even faster. I am in a confort zone producing good cash with zero effort. This is a dangerous area since I do not have the ability to scale so I can grow, simply because I decided I want to do something else. I would really like to use my time in something meaningful, creating something that would really help people or businesses.What are you guys building? Did you ever feel this way after you scaled or sold your business?

Seeking advice from every type of business owner - if you have a moment & an opinion please chime in.

Hello everyone. I haven't started selling yet and wanted to get some insight from the community I'm trying to serve (that makes the most sense to me). So over the past couple months I've gotten into AI & Automation. I got a HighLevel account and went to town learning new things. I learned how to make automations and workflows that make running a business easier (my dad has been letting me use his concrete business as a guinea pig). I also learned how to build and train AI Chat Assistants. I want to start a service based business that uses AI & workflows to automate some of the customer service tasks & lead generation for business. What I'm seeking advice about are as follows: NICHE SELECTION: Part of me thinks I shouldn't niche down in the beginning and just take whoever comes and niche down once I find an industry I'm comfortable with. Another side thinks I should choose one. What is your opinion on niche selection in the beginning? PRICING: I know that pricing largely depends on the value I bring to the client, but I've seen people doing the same or similar things as I want to do and charging vastly different prices. From $300- $2,000. While I think these solutions could absolutely help companies get and retain new business and reduce some of the workload of their staff -- I'm not comfortable charging a high price until I've got enough experience and data to justify that. &#x200B; THESE ARE THE SERVICES I'M THINKING OF OFFERING: Customer Service Chat Assistant. This will be on the website as a "Live Chat". It also connects to Facebook Messenger & Google Business Chat. I'd train the chat assistant on everything related to the company; pertinent info (NAP, company mission, industry background), contact info, services / products / pricing, FAQs, current specials &/or discount codes (this can be changed monthly), how to handle upset clients, etc. It can also connect to a calendar like Google or Calendly so customers can make an appointment or schedule a call directly from the conversation. Missed Call Follow Up. If you're familiar with the platform HighLevel it's commonly called "Missed Call Text Back". The idea is that when a call is missed a text message is automatically fired to the prospect's phone saying something along the lines of "Hey this is \\\\\\ from \\\\\\\_. How can I help you?" and the business owner is alerted to the missed call via text notification. People have said they see a lot of success for their clients with this alone due to the instant follow up. I see a lot of people charging $300 /m. for this. My issues with this are: 1). The text fires automatically when the call is missed, but if the business owner isn't available to actually follow up and keep texting after the customer texts back, they will look inconsistent and bothersome. 2). Without context a prospect may wonder why you didn't answer when they called, but texted them instead. So my answer to these problems are #3. SMS Answering Service. It is essentially taking 2 + 1 and combining them. The missed call text goes out to the prospect, but with context on why they're being texted (because no one is available to take the call at the moment) and IF the prospect responds, a Customer Service Chat Assistant will take over the conversation with the goal of answering their questions and either getting them on the phone with the company via a call back OR helping them schedule an appointment. This offers a more consistent solution than just a text to the business owner / team & the prospect is contacted and helped (hopefully) before they have a chance to start calling a competitor. Lead Nurture / Lead Qualifying Sales Funnel. This one is more than just AI & automation. It's a full funnel. It can be for either Facebook or Google. The process is AD -> Landing Page -> AI Text Message Convo -> Booking/Schedule Call/ Appointment. Typically the ad will offer a lead magnet which they will claim on the LP by giving their information. After the form is submitted, they get a text message and begin a conversation with the AI. It can be trained to just walk them through a booking process, nurture a sale by answering questions and handling objections or to qualify leads. Lead qualification via text works well if you want to weed out who is serious versus who is curious. To be clear; I'd be making the ad, landing page & training the AI -- all parts of the funnel. For whichever service a few things are universal: \- All conversations; no matter what platform they're had on, all go to one inbox which is pretty helpful to see them all in one place. \- When scheduling / booking these can also collect payment. \- Tags can be added to keep track of how they came into the business and where they are in a sales pipeline. There are a lot of fun things I can do with these automations and I'm excited about learning more everyday. I'd really like to know what you think these services could be worth to a business. If you do reply please tell me what type of business you're in so I have an idea of what industries I should be looking towards. Thank you for any response I get as I know this was a long read! SN: I currently do digital marketing & web design as a freelancer.

Could you guys help me fill up my research form to help me with better business research insights ?

hello everyone! I’m working on a new iOS app idea that uses AI to create custom automation templates for Make.com, based on your business struggles or time-wasting tasks. Example: You type “I waste too much time scheduling meetings” → boom, it gives you a plug-and-play Make.com automation. No coding needed. I made a short survey (3–5 mins) to see if this concept actually helps people or if I’m just building in a vacuum 😅 Would love your honest thoughts — and I’ll share the results with anyone who opts in! Here’s the link: 👉 https://forms.gle/kZf2LkRbre46KYKZ7 Big thanks in advance to anyone who takes a minute to help! 🙏

I spent 6 months on building a web product, and got zero users. Here is my story.

Edit Thank you all so much for your time reading my story. Your support, feedback, criticism, and skepticism; all helped me a lot, and I couldn't appreciate it enough \^\_\^ I have stuff to post on Reddit very rarely, but I share how my project is going on, random stuff, and memes on X. Just in case few might want to keep in touch 👀 TL;DR I spent 6 months on a tool that currently has 0 users. Below is what I learned during my journey, sharing because I believe most mistakes are easily avoidable. Do not overestimate your product and assume it will be an exception to fundamental principles. Principles are there for a reason. Always look for validation before you start. Avoid building products with a low money-to-effort ratio/in very competitive fields. Unless you have the means, you probably won't make it. Pick a problem space, pick your target audience, and talk to them before thinking about a solution. Identify and match their pain points. Only then should you think of a solution. If people are not overly excited or willing to pay in advance for a discounted price, it might be a sign to rethink. Sell one and only one feature at a time. Avoid everything else. If people don't pay for that one core feature, no secondary feature will change their mind. Always spend twice as much time marketing as you do building. You will not get users if they don't know it exists. Define success metrics ("1000 users in 3 months" or "$6000 in the account at the end of 6 months") before you start. If you don't meet them, strongly consider quitting the project. If you can't get enough users to keep going, nothing else matters. VALIDATION, VALIDATION, VALIDATION. Success is not random, but most of our first products will not make a success story. Know when to admit failure, and move on. Even if a product of yours doesn't succeed, what you learned during its journey will turn out to be invaluable for your future. My story So, this is the story of a product that I’ve been working on for the last 6 months. As it's the first product I’ve ever built, after watching you all from the sidelines, I have learned a lot, made many mistakes, and did only a few things right. Just sharing what I’ve learned and some insights from my journey so far. I hope that this post will help you avoid the mistakes I made — most of which I consider easily avoidable — while you enjoy reading it, and get to know me a little bit more 🤓. A slow start after many years Summ isn’t the first product I really wanted to build. Lacking enough dev skills to even get started was a huge blocker for so many years. In fact, the first product I would’ve LOVED to build was a smart personal shopping assistant. I had this idea 4 years ago; but with no GPT, no coding skills, no technical co-founder, I didn’t have the means to make it happen. I still do not know if such a tool exists and is good enough. All I wanted was a tool that could make data-based predictions about when to buy stuff (“buy a new toothpaste every three months”) and suggest physical products that I might need or be strongly interested in. AFAIK, Amazon famously still struggles with the second one. Fast-forward a few years, I learned the very basics of HTML, CSS, and Vanilla JS. Still was not there to build a product; but good enough to code my design portfolio from scratch. Yet, I couldn’t imagine myself building a product using Vanilla JS. I really hated it, I really sucked at it. So, back to tutorial hell, and to learn about this framework I just heard about: React.React introduced so many new concepts to me. “Thinking in React” is a phrase we heard a lot, and with quite good reasons. After some time, I was able to build very basic tutorial apps, both in React, and React Native; but I have to say that I really hated coding for mobile. At this point, I was already a fan of productivity apps, and had a concept for a time management assistant app in my design portfolio. So, why not build one? Surely, it must be easy, since every coding tutorial starts with a todo app. ❌ WRONG! Building a basic todo app is easy enough, but building one good enough for a place in the market was a challenge I took and failed. I wasted one month on that until I abandoned the project for good. Even if I continued working on it, as the productivity landscape is overly competitive, I wouldn’t be able to make enough money to cover costs, assuming I make any. Since I was (and still am) in between jobs, I decided to abandon the project. 👉 What I learned: Do not start projects with a low ratio of money to effort and time. Example: Even if I get 500 monthly users, 200 of which are paid users (unrealistically high number), assuming an average subscription fee of $5/m (such apps are quite cheap, mostly due to the high competition), it would make me around $1000 minus any occurring costs. Any founder with a product that has 500 active users should make more. Even if it was relatively successful, due to the high competition, I wouldn’t make any meaningful money. PS: I use Todoist today. Due to local pricing, I pay less than $2/m. There is no way I could beat this competitive pricing, let alone the app itself. But, somehow, with a project that wasn’t even functional — let alone being an MVP — I made my first Wi-Fi money: Someone decided that the domain I preemptively purchased is worth something. By this point, I had already abandoned the project, certainly wasn’t going to renew the domain, was looking for a FT job, and a new project that I could work on. And out of nowhere, someone hands me some free money — who am I not to take it? Of course, I took it. The domain is still unused, no idea why 🤔. Ngl, I still hate the fact that my first Wi-Fi money came from this. A new idea worth pursuing? Fast-forward some weeks now. Around March, I got this crazy idea of building an email productivity tool. We all use emails, yet we all hate them. So, this must be fixed. Everyone uses emails, in fact everyone HAS TO use emails. So, I just needed to build a tool and wait for people to come. This was all, really. After all, the problem space is huge, there is enough room for another product, everyone uses emails, no need for any further validation, right? ❌ WRONG ONCE AGAIN! We all hear from the greatest in the startup landscape that we must validate our ideas with real people, yet at least some of us (guilty here 🥸) think that our product will be hugely successful and prove them to be an exception. Few might, but most are not. I certainly wasn't. 👉 Lesson learned: Always validate your ideas with real people. Ask them how much they’d pay for such a tool (not if they would). Much better if they are willing to pay upfront for a discount, etc. But even this comes later, keep reading. I think the difference between “How much” and “If” is huge for two reasons: (1) By asking them for “How much”, you force them to think in a more realistic setting. (2) You will have a more realistic idea on your profit margins. Based on my competitive analysis, I already had a solution in my mind to improve our email usage standards and email productivity (huge mistake), but I did my best to learn about their problems regarding those without pushing the idea too hard. The idea is this: Generate concise email summaries with suggested actions, combine them into one email, and send it at their preferred times. Save as much as time the AI you end up with allows. After all, everyone loves to save time. So, what kind of validation did I seek for? Talked with only a few people around me about this crazy, internet-breaking idea. The responses I got were, now I see, mediocre; no one got excited about it, just said things along the lines of “Cool idea, OK”. So, any reasonable person in this situation would think “Okay, not might not be working”, right? Well, I did not. I assumed that they were the wrong audience for this product, and there was this magical land of user segments waiting eagerly for my product, yet unknowingly. To this day, I still have not reached this magical place. Perhaps, it didn’t exist in the first place. If I cannot find it, whether it exists or not doesn’t matter. I am certainly searching for it. 👉 What I should have done: Once I decide on a problem space (time management, email productivity, etc.), I should decide on my potential user segments, people who I plan to sell my product to. Then I should go talk to those people, ask them about their pains, then get to the problem-solving/ideation phase only later. ❗️ VALIDATION COMES FROM THE REALITY OUTSIDE. What validation looks like might change from product to product; but what invalidation looks like is more or less the same for every product. Nico Jeannen told me yesterday “validation = money in the account” on Twitter. This is the ultimate form of validation your product could get. If your product doesn’t make any money, then something is invalidated by reality: Your product, you, your idea, who knows? So, at this point, I knew a little bit of Python from spending some time in tutorial hell a few years ago, some HTML/CSS/JS, barely enough React to build a working app. React could work for this project, but I needed easy-to-implement server interactivity. Luckily, around this time, I got to know about this new gen of indie hackers, and learned (but didn’t truly understand) about their approach to indie hacking, and this library called Nextjs. How good Next.js still blows my mind. So, I was back to tutorial hell once again. But, this time, with a promise to myself: This is the last time I would visit tutorial hell. Time to start building this "ground-breaking idea" Learning the fundamentals of Next.js was easier than learning of React unsurprisingly. Yet, the first time I managed to run server actions on Next.js was one of the rarest moments that completely blew my mind. To this day, I reject the idea that it is something else than pure magic under its hood. Did I absolutely need Nextjs for this project though? I do not think so. Did it save me lots of time? Absolutely. Furthermore, learning Nextjs will certainly be quite helpful for other projects that I will be tackling in the future. Already got a few ideas that might be worth pursuing in the head in case I decide to abandon Summ in the future. Fast-forward few weeks again: So, at this stage, I had a barely working MVP-like product. Since the very beginning, I spent every free hour (and more) on this project as speed is essential. But, I am not so sure it was worth it to overwork in retrospect. Yet, I know I couldn’t help myself. Everything is going kinda smooth, so what’s the worst thing that could ever happen? Well, both Apple and Google announced their AIs (Apple Intelligence and Google Gemini, respectively) will have email summarization features for their products. Summarizing singular emails is no big deal, after all there were already so many similar products in the market. I still think that what truly matters is a frictionless user experience, and this is why I built this product in a certain way: You spend less than a few minutes setting up your account, and you get to enjoy your email summaries, without ever visiting its website again. This is still a very cool concept I really like a lot. So, at this point: I had no other idea that could be pursued, already spent too much time on this project. Do I quit or not? This was the question. Of course not. I just have to launch this product as quickly as possible. So, I did something right, a quite rare occurrence I might say: Re-planned my product, dropped everything secondary to the core feature immediately (save time on reading emails), tried launching it asap. 👉 Insight: Sell only one core feature at one time. Drop anything secondary to this core feature. Well, my primary occupation is product design. So one would expect that a product I build must have stellar design. I considered any considerable time spent on design at this stage would be simply wasted. I still think this is both true and wrong: True, because if your product’s core benefits suck, no one will care about your design. False, because if your design looks amateurish, no one will trust you and your product. So, I always targeted an average level design with it and the way this tool works made it quite easy as I had to design only 2 primary pages: Landing page and user portal (which has only settings and analytics pages). However, even though I knew spending time on design was not worth much of my time, I got a bit “greedy”: In fact, I redesigned those pages three times, and still ended up with a so-so design that I am not proud of. 👉 What I would do differently: Unless absolutely necessary, only one iteration per stage as long as it works. This, in my mind, applies to everything. If your product’s A feature works, then no need to rewrite it from scratch for any reason, or even refactor it. When your product becomes a success, and you absolutely need that part of your codebase to be written, do so, but only then. Ready to launch, now is th etime for some marketing, right? By July 26, I already had a “launchable” product that barely works (I marked this date on a Notion docs, this is how I know). Yet, I had spent almost no time on marketing, sales, whatever. After all, “You build and they will come”. Did I know that I needed marketing? Of course I did, but knowingly didn’t. Why, you might ask. Well, from my perspective, it had to be a dev-heavy product; meaning that you spend most of your time on developing it, mostly coding skills. But, this is simply wrong. As a rule of thumb, as noted by one of the greatests, Marc Louvion, you should spend at least twice of the building time on marketing. ❗️ Time spent on building \* 2 people don’t know your product > they don’t use your product > you don’t get users > you don’t make money Easy as that. Following the same reasoning, a slightly different approach to planning a project is possible. Determine an approximate time to complete the project with a high level project plan. Let’s say 6 months. By the reasoning above, 2 months should go into building, and 4 into marketing. If you need 4 months for building instead of 2, then you need 8 months of marketing, which makes the time to complete the project 12 months. If you don’t have that much time, then quit the project. When does a project count as completed? Well, in reality, never. But, I think we have to define success conditions even before we start for indie projects and startups; so we know when to quit when they are not met. A success condition could look like “Make $6000 in 12 months” or “Have 3000 users in 6 months”. It all depends on the project. But, once you set it, it should be set in stone: You don’t change it unless absolutely necessary. I suspect there are few principles that make a solopreneur successful; and knowing when to quit and when to continue is definitely one of them. Marc Louvion is famously known for his success, but he got there after failing so many projects. To my knowledge, the same applies to Nico Jeannen, Pieter Levels, or almost everyone as well. ❗️ Determining when to continue even before you start will definitely help in the long run. A half-aed launch Time-leap again. Around mid August, I “soft launched” my product. By soft launch, I mean lazy marketing. Just tweeting about it, posting it on free directories. Did I get any traffic? Surely I did. Did I get any users? Nope. Only after this time, it hit me: “Either something is wrong with me, or with this product” Marketing might be a much bigger factor for a project’s success after all. Even though I get some traffic, not convincing enough for people to sign up even for a free trial. The product was still perfect in my eyes at the time (well, still is ^(\_),) so the right people are not finding my product, I thought. Then, a question that I should have been asking at the very first place, one that could prevent all these, comes to my mind: “How do even people search for such tools?” If we are to consider this whole journey of me and my so-far-failed product to be an already destined failure, one metric suffices to show why. Search volume: 30. Even if people have such a pain point, they are not looking for email summaries. So, almost no organic traffic coming from Google. But, as a person who did zero marketing on this or any product, who has zero marketing knowledge, who doesn’t have an audience on social media, there is not much I could do. Finally, it was time to give up. Or not… In my eyes, the most important element that makes a founder (solo or not) successful (this, I am not by any means) is to solve problems. ❗️ So, the problem was this: “People are not finding my product by organic search” How do I make sure I get some organic traffic and gets more visibility? Learn digital marketing and SEO as much as I can within very limited time. Thankfully, without spending much time, I came across Neil Patel's YT channel, and as I said many times, it is an absolute gold mine. I learned a lot, especially about the fundamentals, and surely it will be fruitful; but there is no magic trick that could make people visit your website. SEO certainly helps, but only when people are looking for your keywords. However, it is truly a magical solution to get in touch with REAL people that are in your user segments: 👉 Understand your pains, understand their problems, help them to solve them via building products. I did not do this so far, have to admit. But, in case you would like to have a chat about your email usage, and email productivity, just get in touch; I’d be delighted to hear about them. Getting ready for a ProductHunt launch The date was Sept 1. And I unlocked an impossible achievement: Running out of Supabase’s free plan’s Egres limit while having zero users. I was already considering moving out of their Cloud server and managing a Supabase CLI service on my Hetzner VPS for some time; but never ever suspected that I would have to do this quickly. The cheapest plan Supabase offers is $25/month; yet, at that point, I am in between jobs for such a long time, basically broke, and could barely afford that price. One or two months could be okay, but why pay for it if I will eventually move out of their Cloud service? So, instead of paying $25, I spent two days migrating out of Supabase Cloud. Worth my time? Definitely not. But, when you are broke, you gotta do stupid things. This was the first time that I felt lucky to have zero users: I have no idea how I would manage this migration if I had any. I think this is one of the core tenets of an indie hacker: Controlling their own environment. I can’t remember whose quote this is, but I suspect it was Naval: Entrepreneurs have an almost pathological need to control their own fate. They will take any suffering if they can be in charge of their destiny, and not have it in somebody else’s hands. What’s truly scary is, at least in my case, we make people around us suffer at the expense of our attempting to control our own fates. I know this period has been quite hard on my wife as well, as I neglected her quite a bit, but sadly, I know that this will happen again. It is something that I can barely help with. Still, so sorry. After working the last two weeks on a ProductHunt Launch, I finally launched it this Tuesday. Zero ranking, zero new users, but 36 kind people upvoted my product, and many commented and provided invaluable feedback. I couldn't be more grateful for each one of them 🙏. Considering all these, what lies in the future of Summ though? I have no idea, to be honest. On one hand, I have zero users, have no job, no income. So, I need a way to make money asap. On the other hand, the whole idea of it revolves around one core premise (not an assumption) that I am not so willing to share; and I couldn’t have more trust in it. This might not be the best iteration of it, however I certainly believe that email usage is one of the best problem spaces one could work on. 👉 But, one thing is for certain: I need to get in touch with people, and talk with them about this product I built so far. In fact, this is the only item on my agenda. Nothing else will save my brainchild <3. Below are some other insights and notes that I got during my journey; as they do not 100% fit into this story, I think it is more suitable to list them here. I hope you enjoyed reading this. Give Summ a try, it comes with a generous free trial, no credit card required. Some additional notes and insights: Project planning is one of the most underestimated skills for solopreneurs. It saves you enormous time, and helps you to keep your focus up. Building B2C products beats building B2B products. Businesses are very willing to pay big bucks if your product helps them. On the other hand, spending a few hours per user who would pay $5/m probably is not worth your time. It doesn’t matter how brilliant your product is if no one uses it. If you cannot sell a product in a certain category/niche (or do not know how to sell it), it might be a good idea not to start a project in it. Going after new ideas and ventures is quite risky, especially if you don’t know how to market it. On the other hand, an already established category means that there is already demand. Whether this demand is sufficient or not is another issue. As long as there is enough demand for your product to fit in, any category/niche is good. Some might be better, some might be worse. Unless you are going hardcore B2B, you will need people to find your product by means of organic search. Always conduct thorough keyword research as soon as possible.

What Does “Building a Community” Actually Mean for a Startup?

I’ve talked to a lot of founders, and almost everyone gives the same advice: “Build your product and do sales at the same time. Also, build a community alongside it.” I get the first part. Shipping and selling together makes sense. But the “community building” part? That’s where things get blurry for me. Does community building mean posting regular updates on Twitter or LinkedIn? Does it mean making Instagram reels about the product? Or is it more about actually talking to potential customers one-on-one? When people say “build a community,” do they mean creating a place where users can interact with each other or just a way to keep them engaged with the product? The reason I’m asking is that I see different approaches everywhere. Some founders document their startup journey on social media, and that seems to attract an audience. Others focus on getting early users into a private group (Discord, Slack, or WhatsApp) and nurturing relationships there. And then there are those who take a totally different approach—like building in public, sharing code, or offering free tools to bring people in. For my startup, I’m trying to figure out what community building should look like in 2025. The startup landscape has changed drastically in the past year, especially with AI and automation becoming more mainstream. Founders no longer have time to manually interact with every user. So what’s the new way of doing this? What’s working for early-stage startups today? I’d love to hear thoughts from fellow founders. What does “community” actually mean in today’s world, and what’s the best way to build one?

Stable Video 3D creates orbiting videos of objects

The introduction of Stable Video 3D (SV3D) by Stability AI could significantly change how we interact with digital content in several straightforward ways: \- Online Shopping: Products can be viewed in 360-degree videos, making shopping online more like seeing the item in person. This could help shoppers make better decisions and feel more confident about their purchases. \- Design and Gaming: Designers and game developers can quickly turn images into 3D models, speeding up their work and improving the quality of their designs and games. \- Augmented and Virtual Reality: Creating content for AR and VR could become easier and more accessible, leading to more immersive and engaging experiences in these platforms. \- Accessibility for Creators: With SV3D available for non-commercial use, more people can experiment with 3D content creation, potentially leading to innovative applications and uses in various fields. This literally just happened if you want AI news as it drops it launches here first. The whole article has been extrapolated here as well for convenience.

My app has gone viral and I grew from 1k users (take 5months) to 100k user in 5 days

I've always dreamt of building an online side business where I can build once and sell to millions. I love that business model but have never dreamt that I can achieve that, given that I am not a programmer in my career. I have been following side hustle school and some other business podcast for the past years as a drive and motivation to create my own business.  Over the years, I've delve a little on to web development using WordPress and in the hope of earning some money from that. I learnt in the hard way but is a good learning story and journey. I realised that what you put all your efforts building and excited for doesn't mean anything for anyone else and also learnt the importance of UI UX.  Fast forward to 5 months ago (July 2024), I've came across several low code app builder. With the help of the low code tools in combination with chatgpt, I've finally launched my first mobile app - Rolly: AI Money Tracker. But the business challenges doesn't end here, but it's just the beginning. I got no experience and skills on marketing but I've got my drive and passion that keep propelling me forward. By keep listening on people sharing their journey, looking at different apps to brainstorm etc, I've managed to now grow my user base from 1k (in 5 months) to 100k (in 5days). What's happening was my app somehow got viral in Vietnam when people are getting interest funny comments from my AI during entering the transaction and it has been sharing around in the social media and even featured on the news. What a crazy journey as the inflow of users has been too sudden, my server has been down for a few times until I progressively upgrade it until it got stable these couple of days. As for my advice to people dreaming the to be entreprenuer - Don't overthinking about all the problems you will face before starting. You will encounter hundreds of problems along the way and you just need to solve them one by one. You will never start if you think about what's not working and there will never be an answer for everything - even I don't have an answer for everything now.

thinking about starting a small business for creating personalised podcasts - what do you think?

I have an idea for a consumer app and I'd love to get peoples thoughts... Your favorite podcasters have all the answers you need - but they're buried in hundreds of episodes, scattered across different shows. Let me paint you a picture that every founder and creator knows too well… You're looking for specific advice, like growth tactics for your social sports app. You find a great episode from Greg Isenberg on growth hacking, but while he talks about internet directories, you need strategies for converting online matches into real-world meetups. While it’s interesting, it’s not really what you need. So you close the tab and keep searching... But what if it didn't have to be this way? With PodCraft, AI crafts personalized podcast content just for you. Simply ask for exactly what you need, and get a podcast in seconds in your favorite creator's voice and style, perfectly tailored to your specific needs. No more: Hours wasted searching for the right content Listening to multiple podcasts and articles to get one answer Generic advice that doesn't fit your context Instead move to: Instant access to exactly the content you need One personalized podcast instead of many Content that truly understands you and your business What do you think? Would you use a personalised podcast app like this?

Your offer is the biggest problem in outreach

Cold outreach isn’t failing because you don’t have the right tools. The real question isn’t whether you’re reaching the right people. It’s whether they actually need what you’re selling. AI Tools can automate the process, but they won’t sell product nobody wants. So once again the question isn’t how you reach people – it’s why they should care. Do they actually need what you’re selling? Is your offer different enough? In old markets, where everyone sells the same thing, the only way to win is through discounts and price wars. In new markets, the challenge is even bigger. You have to educate people before they even realize they have a problem. Finding the right people? Mostly solved. Messaging and delivery? Already optimized. What’s left? Market fit. If outreach isn’t working, your reply rate will tell you why. It’s the best indicator of whether you’re in the right market and if there’s a real chance to build a profitable business. Cold outreach isn’t just about selling today – it’s about planting seeds for tomorrow. The tools will only work if the strategy is right.  Here am I, CEO of tool for cold outreach. Ask your questions. Ready to answer and help.

Virtual Assistants -- Service vs. Freelance

Hi all! I run a small marketing agency (by small, I mean tiny, we only have three full-time employees). We do a lot of strategic SEO work and really embed with our client teams to help them build holistic content/search/AI-optimization strategies. Anyway, I've been working with a virtual assistant I found through a reference, and she was absolutely fantastic, but she's moving on to a full-time role. She was managing our calendars, updating templated audit presentations, and handling a lot of our CRM processes. I need to hire someone to replace her part-time. I'm not sure how to proceed, so I thought I'd ask here. I need to decide if I should hire someone contract or it might be be better to hire a managed VA service. My concerns are: Having to retrain a VA whenever they leave Confidentiality/security concerns Continuity of support I've been looking at services like Prialto and Belay and the managed element is compelling, but I know a contractor is cheaper. People who've tried both or either, what did you prefer?

How do you make your client presentations stand out?

Hey folks! I’ve been working on improving how I pitch to clients, and I feel like my presentations are always missing that extra “wow” factor. I try to keep things professional and clean, but it still feels like something’s missing—whether it’s storytelling, design, or just better ways to structure ideas. Do you have any strategies or tips for creating client presentations that leave a strong impression? Would love to hear what’s worked for you or any resources you’d recommend! Update: some of the good advice I got: use story to attract people, use Fiverr to get help form designers, use ChatGPT or ChatSlide to help with the content, use DeathToStock to help with images.

In this post, share your small business experience, successes, failures, AMAS, and lessons learned. Week of March 10, 2025

This post welcomes and is dedicated to: Your business successes Small business anecdotes Lessons learned Unfortunate events Unofficial AMAs Links to outstanding educational materials (with explanations and/or an extract of the content) In this post, share your small business experience, successes, failures, AMAs, and lessons learned. Week of December 9, 2019 /r/smallbusiness is one of a very few subs where people can ask questions about operating their small business. To let that happen the main sub is dedicated to answering questions about subscriber's own small businesses. Many people also want to talk about things which are not specific questions about their own business. We don't want to disappoint those subscribers and provide this post as a place to share that content without overwhelming specific and often less popular simple questions. This isn't a license to spam the thread. Business promotion and free giveaways are welcome only in the Promote Your Business thread. Thinly-veiled website or video promoting posts will be removed as blogspam. Discussion of this policy and the purpose of the sub is welcome at https://www.reddit.com/r/smallbusiness/comments/ana6hg/psawelcometorsmallbusinesswearededicated_to/

Restarting My Agency / Compared To Full Time Corporate

I’m currently thinking about going back to consulting / agency work compared to my current tech job I have. Over a year ago I signed this tech client and they wanted more and more from me which ended up becoming a full time role. At the time, the challenge excited me as it was working on a very large project on a global scale, competing with some of the biggest brands in the world. I was making good money before working in my agency and consulting with lots of different brands on their paid media, websites and e-commerce. I have a healthy package where I’m at at the moment but want more. Working with different clients always created curiosity, no day was the same and that what I loved about it. So now I’m considering going to back to starting the business and working with clients again. My question is: What do businesses ACTUALLY want? Everyone wants great roas and an amazing site but what are core things people are looking for in a growth partner / agency? I’m thinking of relaunching with three pillars in mind: Digital (Paid Media, Lead Gen, Web Dev) AI implementation as a lot of businesses don’t know how to leverage AI completely for cost saving and efficiencies. Content (Video, SEO, Content Writing) for modern day ranking I’m currently rebuilding my pitch deck and thought I would ask the question here before I go back to my network and start opening up conversations again. Would love to hear people’s thoughts in addition to anyone that’s done the same?

I spent 6 months on building a web product, and got zero users. Here is my story.

Edit Thank you all so much for your time reading my story. Your support, feedback, criticism, and skepticism; all helped me a lot, and I couldn't appreciate it enough \^\_\^ I have stuff to post on Reddit very rarely, but I share how my project is going on, random stuff, and memes on X. Just in case few might want to keep in touch 👀 TL;DR I spent 6 months on a tool that currently has 0 users. Below is what I learned during my journey, sharing because I believe most mistakes are easily avoidable. Do not overestimate your product and assume it will be an exception to fundamental principles. Principles are there for a reason. Always look for validation before you start. Avoid building products with a low money-to-effort ratio/in very competitive fields. Unless you have the means, you probably won't make it. Pick a problem space, pick your target audience, and talk to them before thinking about a solution. Identify and match their pain points. Only then should you think of a solution. If people are not overly excited or willing to pay in advance for a discounted price, it might be a sign to rethink. Sell one and only one feature at a time. Avoid everything else. If people don't pay for that one core feature, no secondary feature will change their mind. Always spend twice as much time marketing as you do building. You will not get users if they don't know it exists. Define success metrics ("1000 users in 3 months" or "$6000 in the account at the end of 6 months") before you start. If you don't meet them, strongly consider quitting the project. If you can't get enough users to keep going, nothing else matters. VALIDATION, VALIDATION, VALIDATION. Success is not random, but most of our first products will not make a success story. Know when to admit failure, and move on. Even if a product of yours doesn't succeed, what you learned during its journey will turn out to be invaluable for your future. My story So, this is the story of a product that I’ve been working on for the last 6 months. As it's the first product I’ve ever built, after watching you all from the sidelines, I have learned a lot, made many mistakes, and did only a few things right. Just sharing what I’ve learned and some insights from my journey so far. I hope that this post will help you avoid the mistakes I made — most of which I consider easily avoidable — while you enjoy reading it, and get to know me a little bit more 🤓. A slow start after many years Summ isn’t the first product I really wanted to build. Lacking enough dev skills to even get started was a huge blocker for so many years. In fact, the first product I would’ve LOVED to build was a smart personal shopping assistant. I had this idea 4 years ago; but with no GPT, no coding skills, no technical co-founder, I didn’t have the means to make it happen. I still do not know if such a tool exists and is good enough. All I wanted was a tool that could make data-based predictions about when to buy stuff (“buy a new toothpaste every three months”) and suggest physical products that I might need or be strongly interested in. AFAIK, Amazon famously still struggles with the second one. Fast-forward a few years, I learned the very basics of HTML, CSS, and Vanilla JS. Still was not there to build a product; but good enough to code my design portfolio from scratch. Yet, I couldn’t imagine myself building a product using Vanilla JS. I really hated it, I really sucked at it. So, back to tutorial hell, and to learn about this framework I just heard about: React.React introduced so many new concepts to me. “Thinking in React” is a phrase we heard a lot, and with quite good reasons. After some time, I was able to build very basic tutorial apps, both in React, and React Native; but I have to say that I really hated coding for mobile. At this point, I was already a fan of productivity apps, and had a concept for a time management assistant app in my design portfolio. So, why not build one? Surely, it must be easy, since every coding tutorial starts with a todo app. ❌ WRONG! Building a basic todo app is easy enough, but building one good enough for a place in the market was a challenge I took and failed. I wasted one month on that until I abandoned the project for good. Even if I continued working on it, as the productivity landscape is overly competitive, I wouldn’t be able to make enough money to cover costs, assuming I make any. Since I was (and still am) in between jobs, I decided to abandon the project. 👉 What I learned: Do not start projects with a low ratio of money to effort and time. Example: Even if I get 500 monthly users, 200 of which are paid users (unrealistically high number), assuming an average subscription fee of $5/m (such apps are quite cheap, mostly due to the high competition), it would make me around $1000 minus any occurring costs. Any founder with a product that has 500 active users should make more. Even if it was relatively successful, due to the high competition, I wouldn’t make any meaningful money. PS: I use Todoist today. Due to local pricing, I pay less than $2/m. There is no way I could beat this competitive pricing, let alone the app itself. But, somehow, with a project that wasn’t even functional — let alone being an MVP — I made my first Wi-Fi money: Someone decided that the domain I preemptively purchased is worth something. By this point, I had already abandoned the project, certainly wasn’t going to renew the domain, was looking for a FT job, and a new project that I could work on. And out of nowhere, someone hands me some free money — who am I not to take it? Of course, I took it. The domain is still unused, no idea why 🤔. Ngl, I still hate the fact that my first Wi-Fi money came from this. A new idea worth pursuing? Fast-forward some weeks now. Around March, I got this crazy idea of building an email productivity tool. We all use emails, yet we all hate them. So, this must be fixed. Everyone uses emails, in fact everyone HAS TO use emails. So, I just needed to build a tool and wait for people to come. This was all, really. After all, the problem space is huge, there is enough room for another product, everyone uses emails, no need for any further validation, right? ❌ WRONG ONCE AGAIN! We all hear from the greatest in the startup landscape that we must validate our ideas with real people, yet at least some of us (guilty here 🥸) think that our product will be hugely successful and prove them to be an exception. Few might, but most are not. I certainly wasn't. 👉 Lesson learned: Always validate your ideas with real people. Ask them how much they’d pay for such a tool (not if they would). Much better if they are willing to pay upfront for a discount, etc. But even this comes later, keep reading. I think the difference between “How much” and “If” is huge for two reasons: (1) By asking them for “How much”, you force them to think in a more realistic setting. (2) You will have a more realistic idea on your profit margins. Based on my competitive analysis, I already had a solution in my mind to improve our email usage standards and email productivity (huge mistake), but I did my best to learn about their problems regarding those without pushing the idea too hard. The idea is this: Generate concise email summaries with suggested actions, combine them into one email, and send it at their preferred times. Save as much as time the AI you end up with allows. After all, everyone loves to save time. So, what kind of validation did I seek for? Talked with only a few people around me about this crazy, internet-breaking idea. The responses I got were, now I see, mediocre; no one got excited about it, just said things along the lines of “Cool idea, OK”. So, any reasonable person in this situation would think “Okay, not might not be working”, right? Well, I did not. I assumed that they were the wrong audience for this product, and there was this magical land of user segments waiting eagerly for my product, yet unknowingly. To this day, I still have not reached this magical place. Perhaps, it didn’t exist in the first place. If I cannot find it, whether it exists or not doesn’t matter. I am certainly searching for it. 👉 What I should have done: Once I decide on a problem space (time management, email productivity, etc.), I should decide on my potential user segments, people who I plan to sell my product to. Then I should go talk to those people, ask them about their pains, then get to the problem-solving/ideation phase only later. ❗️ VALIDATION COMES FROM THE REALITY OUTSIDE. What validation looks like might change from product to product; but what invalidation looks like is more or less the same for every product. Nico Jeannen told me yesterday “validation = money in the account” on Twitter. This is the ultimate form of validation your product could get. If your product doesn’t make any money, then something is invalidated by reality: Your product, you, your idea, who knows? So, at this point, I knew a little bit of Python from spending some time in tutorial hell a few years ago, some HTML/CSS/JS, barely enough React to build a working app. React could work for this project, but I needed easy-to-implement server interactivity. Luckily, around this time, I got to know about this new gen of indie hackers, and learned (but didn’t truly understand) about their approach to indie hacking, and this library called Nextjs. How good Next.js still blows my mind. So, I was back to tutorial hell once again. But, this time, with a promise to myself: This is the last time I would visit tutorial hell. Time to start building this "ground-breaking idea" Learning the fundamentals of Next.js was easier than learning of React unsurprisingly. Yet, the first time I managed to run server actions on Next.js was one of the rarest moments that completely blew my mind. To this day, I reject the idea that it is something else than pure magic under its hood. Did I absolutely need Nextjs for this project though? I do not think so. Did it save me lots of time? Absolutely. Furthermore, learning Nextjs will certainly be quite helpful for other projects that I will be tackling in the future. Already got a few ideas that might be worth pursuing in the head in case I decide to abandon Summ in the future. Fast-forward few weeks again: So, at this stage, I had a barely working MVP-like product. Since the very beginning, I spent every free hour (and more) on this project as speed is essential. But, I am not so sure it was worth it to overwork in retrospect. Yet, I know I couldn’t help myself. Everything is going kinda smooth, so what’s the worst thing that could ever happen? Well, both Apple and Google announced their AIs (Apple Intelligence and Google Gemini, respectively) will have email summarization features for their products. Summarizing singular emails is no big deal, after all there were already so many similar products in the market. I still think that what truly matters is a frictionless user experience, and this is why I built this product in a certain way: You spend less than a few minutes setting up your account, and you get to enjoy your email summaries, without ever visiting its website again. This is still a very cool concept I really like a lot. So, at this point: I had no other idea that could be pursued, already spent too much time on this project. Do I quit or not? This was the question. Of course not. I just have to launch this product as quickly as possible. So, I did something right, a quite rare occurrence I might say: Re-planned my product, dropped everything secondary to the core feature immediately (save time on reading emails), tried launching it asap. 👉 Insight: Sell only one core feature at one time. Drop anything secondary to this core feature. Well, my primary occupation is product design. So one would expect that a product I build must have stellar design. I considered any considerable time spent on design at this stage would be simply wasted. I still think this is both true and wrong: True, because if your product’s core benefits suck, no one will care about your design. False, because if your design looks amateurish, no one will trust you and your product. So, I always targeted an average level design with it and the way this tool works made it quite easy as I had to design only 2 primary pages: Landing page and user portal (which has only settings and analytics pages). However, even though I knew spending time on design was not worth much of my time, I got a bit “greedy”: In fact, I redesigned those pages three times, and still ended up with a so-so design that I am not proud of. 👉 What I would do differently: Unless absolutely necessary, only one iteration per stage as long as it works. This, in my mind, applies to everything. If your product’s A feature works, then no need to rewrite it from scratch for any reason, or even refactor it. When your product becomes a success, and you absolutely need that part of your codebase to be written, do so, but only then. Ready to launch, now is th etime for some marketing, right? By July 26, I already had a “launchable” product that barely works (I marked this date on a Notion docs, this is how I know). Yet, I had spent almost no time on marketing, sales, whatever. After all, “You build and they will come”. Did I know that I needed marketing? Of course I did, but knowingly didn’t. Why, you might ask. Well, from my perspective, it had to be a dev-heavy product; meaning that you spend most of your time on developing it, mostly coding skills. But, this is simply wrong. As a rule of thumb, as noted by one of the greatests, Marc Louvion, you should spend at least twice of the building time on marketing. ❗️ Time spent on building \* 2 people don’t know your product > they don’t use your product > you don’t get users > you don’t make money Easy as that. Following the same reasoning, a slightly different approach to planning a project is possible. Determine an approximate time to complete the project with a high level project plan. Let’s say 6 months. By the reasoning above, 2 months should go into building, and 4 into marketing. If you need 4 months for building instead of 2, then you need 8 months of marketing, which makes the time to complete the project 12 months. If you don’t have that much time, then quit the project. When does a project count as completed? Well, in reality, never. But, I think we have to define success conditions even before we start for indie projects and startups; so we know when to quit when they are not met. A success condition could look like “Make $6000 in 12 months” or “Have 3000 users in 6 months”. It all depends on the project. But, once you set it, it should be set in stone: You don’t change it unless absolutely necessary. I suspect there are few principles that make a solopreneur successful; and knowing when to quit and when to continue is definitely one of them. Marc Louvion is famously known for his success, but he got there after failing so many projects. To my knowledge, the same applies to Nico Jeannen, Pieter Levels, or almost everyone as well. ❗️ Determining when to continue even before you start will definitely help in the long run. A half-aed launch Time-leap again. Around mid August, I “soft launched” my product. By soft launch, I mean lazy marketing. Just tweeting about it, posting it on free directories. Did I get any traffic? Surely I did. Did I get any users? Nope. Only after this time, it hit me: “Either something is wrong with me, or with this product” Marketing might be a much bigger factor for a project’s success after all. Even though I get some traffic, not convincing enough for people to sign up even for a free trial. The product was still perfect in my eyes at the time (well, still is ^(\_),) so the right people are not finding my product, I thought. Then, a question that I should have been asking at the very first place, one that could prevent all these, comes to my mind: “How do even people search for such tools?” If we are to consider this whole journey of me and my so-far-failed product to be an already destined failure, one metric suffices to show why. Search volume: 30. Even if people have such a pain point, they are not looking for email summaries. So, almost no organic traffic coming from Google. But, as a person who did zero marketing on this or any product, who has zero marketing knowledge, who doesn’t have an audience on social media, there is not much I could do. Finally, it was time to give up. Or not… In my eyes, the most important element that makes a founder (solo or not) successful (this, I am not by any means) is to solve problems. ❗️ So, the problem was this: “People are not finding my product by organic search” How do I make sure I get some organic traffic and gets more visibility? Learn digital marketing and SEO as much as I can within very limited time. Thankfully, without spending much time, I came across Neil Patel's YT channel, and as I said many times, it is an absolute gold mine. I learned a lot, especially about the fundamentals, and surely it will be fruitful; but there is no magic trick that could make people visit your website. SEO certainly helps, but only when people are looking for your keywords. However, it is truly a magical solution to get in touch with REAL people that are in your user segments: 👉 Understand your pains, understand their problems, help them to solve them via building products. I did not do this so far, have to admit. But, in case you would like to have a chat about your email usage, and email productivity, just get in touch; I’d be delighted to hear about them. Getting ready for a ProductHunt launch The date was Sept 1. And I unlocked an impossible achievement: Running out of Supabase’s free plan’s Egres limit while having zero users. I was already considering moving out of their Cloud server and managing a Supabase CLI service on my Hetzner VPS for some time; but never ever suspected that I would have to do this quickly. The cheapest plan Supabase offers is $25/month; yet, at that point, I am in between jobs for such a long time, basically broke, and could barely afford that price. One or two months could be okay, but why pay for it if I will eventually move out of their Cloud service? So, instead of paying $25, I spent two days migrating out of Supabase Cloud. Worth my time? Definitely not. But, when you are broke, you gotta do stupid things. This was the first time that I felt lucky to have zero users: I have no idea how I would manage this migration if I had any. I think this is one of the core tenets of an indie hacker: Controlling their own environment. I can’t remember whose quote this is, but I suspect it was Naval: Entrepreneurs have an almost pathological need to control their own fate. They will take any suffering if they can be in charge of their destiny, and not have it in somebody else’s hands. What’s truly scary is, at least in my case, we make people around us suffer at the expense of our attempting to control our own fates. I know this period has been quite hard on my wife as well, as I neglected her quite a bit, but sadly, I know that this will happen again. It is something that I can barely help with. Still, so sorry. After working the last two weeks on a ProductHunt Launch, I finally launched it this Tuesday. Zero ranking, zero new users, but 36 kind people upvoted my product, and many commented and provided invaluable feedback. I couldn't be more grateful for each one of them 🙏. Considering all these, what lies in the future of Summ though? I have no idea, to be honest. On one hand, I have zero users, have no job, no income. So, I need a way to make money asap. On the other hand, the whole idea of it revolves around one core premise (not an assumption) that I am not so willing to share; and I couldn’t have more trust in it. This might not be the best iteration of it, however I certainly believe that email usage is one of the best problem spaces one could work on. 👉 But, one thing is for certain: I need to get in touch with people, and talk with them about this product I built so far. In fact, this is the only item on my agenda. Nothing else will save my brainchild <3. Below are some other insights and notes that I got during my journey; as they do not 100% fit into this story, I think it is more suitable to list them here. I hope you enjoyed reading this. Give Summ a try, it comes with a generous free trial, no credit card required. Some additional notes and insights: Project planning is one of the most underestimated skills for solopreneurs. It saves you enormous time, and helps you to keep your focus up. Building B2C products beats building B2B products. Businesses are very willing to pay big bucks if your product helps them. On the other hand, spending a few hours per user who would pay $5/m probably is not worth your time. It doesn’t matter how brilliant your product is if no one uses it. If you cannot sell a product in a certain category/niche (or do not know how to sell it), it might be a good idea not to start a project in it. Going after new ideas and ventures is quite risky, especially if you don’t know how to market it. On the other hand, an already established category means that there is already demand. Whether this demand is sufficient or not is another issue. As long as there is enough demand for your product to fit in, any category/niche is good. Some might be better, some might be worse. Unless you are going hardcore B2B, you will need people to find your product by means of organic search. Always conduct thorough keyword research as soon as possible.

AI Implementation

Hey guys. I am an entrepreneur. I started a service-based business in the Telecom construction industry. I have had my ups and downs. There are a lot of factors in that kind of business and I wanted to venture out to an industry that is more in demand now. The tech industry has been booming for the last two decades and the new AI revolution will help it keep the momentum. I am researching ideas about how and where AI could be useful and how to make it more accessible to those people who need them. In my service field, AI has helped me manage my projects and cut down on work time by half. A lot of organizational tasks and tracking can be done much faster with the help of AI. I'm looking for ideas on where else can someone use AI's help and what would make you want to use it. Also, what would be something that might attract your attention towards that? Looking for any and all opinions.

Anyone actually using ai in their business?

Feels like every day there’s another AI ad, another person trying to sell some tool. But are other small business owners actually using AI in a way that makes a real difference? Or is it just something people talk about but never really implement? I’ve been messing around with it and have seen it work in some cases, curious if anyone here has actually made it part of their business or tried and gave up on it. If you’ve got thoughts, I’d love to hear them. Feel free to DM me too if you just wanna talk shop.

Nuts and bolts AI implementation for small business

How can small businesses use AI to increase sales or decrease expenses without massive disruption? One way for us is using AI to process our email history to identify patterns and write personalized messages based on past correspondence. According to legal advice in which I have confidence, email that is personalized for each recipient (and meets other standards) does not need to be opt in. If you disagree - understood - but spam morality is not the topic here. Bottom line - obviously a game changer. Knowing phrases people have used before becoming clients - and all of the possible permutations of those phrases, and detecting where those phrases show up will make our sales and marketing many times more effective for a fraction of the cost. There's a reason big corps. record calls, and now small business can leverage the same technology. We are setting up a process that yields accurate, up to date, comprehensive data for our own business operations. Our clients - who are they and how has their demographic changed over time? To answer this question and for email personalization, we also need access to external data sources e.g. like accurate up to date company demographics. IMO - the leader in company data in the US? THEY SUCK. We found there is no magic fairy who is going to make good data appear for our AI. The process of applying our own proprietary knowledge to code and categorize the data is just as important, and obviously highly sensitive. How do we leverage the AI technologies of companies like Google and Microsoft (or anyone else) without being their bitch? Below is a list of some of the sources of my business's data: Data sources: PST/OST/Other Email data files Microsoft data from Windows/O365 Windows/Linux/Android/IOS application logs and other data Web server logs for the company website. SEO/Analytics Data Google data export Google voice/VOIP logs OneDrive/G drive Other Phone system/cell service logs Other SAAS and in-house application data. Facebook/social media data for company pages. QuickBooks/other accounting systems/business bank account logs POS/Credit card processing systems/PayPal, etc. OSINT to fill in the blanks

What are your struggles with AI implementation?

Hey! I am working on a project (won't advertise it so won't even give a name & I don't have it anywhere in my profile) to help people with AI implementation in their businesses. We have already covered areas of how to spot AI opportunities and various tools, etc, but I wanted to know a bit more what others are struggling with. What are your challenges in AI implementation in your business? What kind of material (guide, checklist, roadmap, whatever) help entrepreneurs and business executives to finally get on the AI train and grow their businesses? Any suggestions and pain points are welcome. The more you share, the better guides we will create to help businesses with AI adoption. Cheers

Seeking co-founder to build LinkedIn’s biggest rival(curated version)

How do you connect with likeminded people? You see the polished wins everywhere, but what about the messy drafts , the awkward pitches and the moments you’re not sure you’ve got it right? Problem: The whole idea of founding and starting a business can be super intimidating for some people, specially those who don’t know any founders personally, those who don’t have a large network, those who don’t have rich parents with large networks, those not inserted in an entrepreneurial culture like in the US for example (which is my case). Sometimes all you need is the right support network, and too see others do what you want, to know that it’s possible! Everyone has an “ultimate guide” to make 7 figures or build a business on YouTube but NO ONE shoes you the HOW, just the results… I’ve tried joining founder communities, LinkedIn ,Reddit … you name it. Most of these founder communities are inaccessible for regular people and often ask for you to have an already existing business with a min ARR… or their simply geography based and if you’re not in a certain area you can’t really participate… As of LinkedIn… full of empty AI generated posts about how some random dude raised $10m in 7 days. Okay Jonathan, but what about the HOW?? How did you write your first pitch? How many rejection calls did you get? What is an MVP? There simply isn’t a platform out there to document your founding journey and find inspiration within a community of people who are doing the same as you. What better way to feel motivated then to see someone actually document their process? Solution: I’m working on building a social media platform for aspiring/founders to connect through the RAW, UNFILTERED process of turning ideas into reality in REAL time. It’s all gonna be around the “building in public “ concept and content creation. Picture an instagram/tiktok profile where instead of seeing someone’s dog you see them documenting their founding process—from the moment they had the idea, to the moment they launched, you’re going to see the successes, the fails, the rejected calls, all documented through actual content and not some AI generated LinkedIn post. Imagine if you wanted to learn about how Steve Jobs started Apple , you could simply go through his profile on this app—exactly. To make sure all interactions are meaningful people would have to apply. It’s a truly curated community, with REAL people, building REAL things in REAL time, and not just tell us the story of how they did it… Audience: I’m targeting people who have a burning desire of building a business and early stage founders starting their founder journeys, that don’t have a support network and simply don’t know where to start. People who are tired of watching 30 min “ultimate guides “ on how to make it on YouTube from “business gurus” selling courses. People who haven’t reached the min ARR required to join an “exclusive “ founder a community. People who can’t simply just move to the US to get into the “exclusive” YC combinator. People who want to connect with real people building real things and not anonymous people on Reddit, or LinkedIn influencers again trying to promote their services. I believe in the idea because I’m also part of my audience. Have always wanted to start my own thing just never knew how to and where to find a community of likeminded people . I don’t know any founders myself, I come from a non-entrepreneurial society and I’d pay good money to access a community of REAL passionate founders building REAL things, in REAL time. This would be my first ever business, and I want to share my journey building it and hopefully inspire others to just start so I’ve created a mailing list to keep anyone interested in the project updated on my fails , learnings and successes. I’m not worried about “making it” but just “starting” and hopefully reach the right audience and inspire anyone to start whatever they have marinating in their thoughts. If you’re a founder struggling with staying consistent or an aspiring founder with an insane desire of starting and don’t know how to start, I’d love to get your feedback on what’s stopping you, your challenges starting out and what you’d find useful in such platform. And finally would this be something that interests you?? PS: casually looking for a technical co-founder

Small business teaching and implementing ai

Purely a question as a "poll" and will not accept business if interested on this platform. My name is anonymous. Question: I want to teach people, seniors, and small businesses to use chatgpt/other ai tools. Ideally it would be a small profit venture by charging per support ticket and prompt engineering sessions. Is this a bad idea? I know people who know and do not know chatgpt, those who do use it but only at a basic level. I feel even if I charge a few dollars but empower people I could reach several thousand and make a living?

Aspiring AI Consultant seeking advice & connections in Healthcare to get started

I’m an aspiring entrepreneur with a background in software engineering with 3 years of experience consulting for a medical device OEM. I’ve recently decided to venture out and start my own AI consultancy/integration services business, with an initial focus on non-clinical use cases in healthcare (e.g., workflow automation, predictive analytics, etc.). So far, I’ve done my research and have identified a few good potential use-cases, but I’m currently stuck because: I don’t have any direct connections with people who work in a healthcare setting. I’m unsure about the best next steps to validate my ideas and move forward. I’m reaching out here to seek guidance on how to proceed. Specifically: Are there any healthcare professionals here who could share insights into day-to-day challenges and workflows in non-clinical settings? What are the biggest operational pain points you face that could potentially benefit from automation or AI solutions? (Forget about the AI part—just think about tools or capabilities that could make your life easier.) If you’ve been in a similar position starting a business, how did you connect with potential clients or validate your ideas? I’d also love to hear from anyone who has tried offering AI consultancy or similar services, especially in healthcare. This is a genuine attempt to learn and grow, and I’m open to any advice, feedback, or even collaborations. If you’re in healthcare or know someone who might be able to help, I’d be incredibly grateful if you could point me in the right direction.

Seeking Feedback & Support: Launching a Nut Mix Startup to Improve Gut Health

This txt is AI summarized but I read it, he just restructured my thoughts accurately. Hey all, I’m Ilia, a Seattle-based entrepreneur working on a product that’s all about making healthy eating easier. I’m creating a premium nut mix with 16+ different nuts (70% organic) aimed at helping people improve their microbiome and overall health. The concept is simple: diverse ingredients lead to better gut health, reduced inflammation, and more energy. No more juggling 20 bags of different foods—my nut mix is a convenient, delicious solution. I’m in the early stages and raising about $7,000 to cover things like regulatory compliance, a commercial kitchen rental, quality ingredients, packaging, and a basic brand presence. I’ve poured my own savings into this and am now turning to the community for support, advice, and maybe even early funding. I made a short (12-min) video walking through the concept, the budget breakdown, and my long-term vision (expanding to seeds, fruit mixes, and maybe even a billion-dollar brand one day!). I’d love your honest feedback, connections, or suggestions. If you’re interested in supporting, even by sharing this post, I really appreciate it. Feel free to ask me anything—transparency is key for me, and I want to build something that genuinely helps people live healthier. https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-my-goal-to-make-healthy-eating-easy-and-convenient

I spent 6 months on building a web product, and got zero users. Here is my story.

Edit Thank you all so much for your time reading my story. Your support, feedback, criticism, and skepticism; all helped me a lot, and I couldn't appreciate it enough \^\_\^ I have stuff to post on Reddit very rarely, but I share how my project is going on, random stuff, and memes on X. Just in case few might want to keep in touch 👀 TL;DR I spent 6 months on a tool that currently has 0 users. Below is what I learned during my journey, sharing because I believe most mistakes are easily avoidable. Do not overestimate your product and assume it will be an exception to fundamental principles. Principles are there for a reason. Always look for validation before you start. Avoid building products with a low money-to-effort ratio/in very competitive fields. Unless you have the means, you probably won't make it. Pick a problem space, pick your target audience, and talk to them before thinking about a solution. Identify and match their pain points. Only then should you think of a solution. If people are not overly excited or willing to pay in advance for a discounted price, it might be a sign to rethink. Sell one and only one feature at a time. Avoid everything else. If people don't pay for that one core feature, no secondary feature will change their mind. Always spend twice as much time marketing as you do building. You will not get users if they don't know it exists. Define success metrics ("1000 users in 3 months" or "$6000 in the account at the end of 6 months") before you start. If you don't meet them, strongly consider quitting the project. If you can't get enough users to keep going, nothing else matters. VALIDATION, VALIDATION, VALIDATION. Success is not random, but most of our first products will not make a success story. Know when to admit failure, and move on. Even if a product of yours doesn't succeed, what you learned during its journey will turn out to be invaluable for your future. My story So, this is the story of a product that I’ve been working on for the last 6 months. As it's the first product I’ve ever built, after watching you all from the sidelines, I have learned a lot, made many mistakes, and did only a few things right. Just sharing what I’ve learned and some insights from my journey so far. I hope that this post will help you avoid the mistakes I made — most of which I consider easily avoidable — while you enjoy reading it, and get to know me a little bit more 🤓. A slow start after many years Summ isn’t the first product I really wanted to build. Lacking enough dev skills to even get started was a huge blocker for so many years. In fact, the first product I would’ve LOVED to build was a smart personal shopping assistant. I had this idea 4 years ago; but with no GPT, no coding skills, no technical co-founder, I didn’t have the means to make it happen. I still do not know if such a tool exists and is good enough. All I wanted was a tool that could make data-based predictions about when to buy stuff (“buy a new toothpaste every three months”) and suggest physical products that I might need or be strongly interested in. AFAIK, Amazon famously still struggles with the second one. Fast-forward a few years, I learned the very basics of HTML, CSS, and Vanilla JS. Still was not there to build a product; but good enough to code my design portfolio from scratch. Yet, I couldn’t imagine myself building a product using Vanilla JS. I really hated it, I really sucked at it. So, back to tutorial hell, and to learn about this framework I just heard about: React.React introduced so many new concepts to me. “Thinking in React” is a phrase we heard a lot, and with quite good reasons. After some time, I was able to build very basic tutorial apps, both in React, and React Native; but I have to say that I really hated coding for mobile. At this point, I was already a fan of productivity apps, and had a concept for a time management assistant app in my design portfolio. So, why not build one? Surely, it must be easy, since every coding tutorial starts with a todo app. ❌ WRONG! Building a basic todo app is easy enough, but building one good enough for a place in the market was a challenge I took and failed. I wasted one month on that until I abandoned the project for good. Even if I continued working on it, as the productivity landscape is overly competitive, I wouldn’t be able to make enough money to cover costs, assuming I make any. Since I was (and still am) in between jobs, I decided to abandon the project. 👉 What I learned: Do not start projects with a low ratio of money to effort and time. Example: Even if I get 500 monthly users, 200 of which are paid users (unrealistically high number), assuming an average subscription fee of $5/m (such apps are quite cheap, mostly due to the high competition), it would make me around $1000 minus any occurring costs. Any founder with a product that has 500 active users should make more. Even if it was relatively successful, due to the high competition, I wouldn’t make any meaningful money. PS: I use Todoist today. Due to local pricing, I pay less than $2/m. There is no way I could beat this competitive pricing, let alone the app itself. But, somehow, with a project that wasn’t even functional — let alone being an MVP — I made my first Wi-Fi money: Someone decided that the domain I preemptively purchased is worth something. By this point, I had already abandoned the project, certainly wasn’t going to renew the domain, was looking for a FT job, and a new project that I could work on. And out of nowhere, someone hands me some free money — who am I not to take it? Of course, I took it. The domain is still unused, no idea why 🤔. Ngl, I still hate the fact that my first Wi-Fi money came from this. A new idea worth pursuing? Fast-forward some weeks now. Around March, I got this crazy idea of building an email productivity tool. We all use emails, yet we all hate them. So, this must be fixed. Everyone uses emails, in fact everyone HAS TO use emails. So, I just needed to build a tool and wait for people to come. This was all, really. After all, the problem space is huge, there is enough room for another product, everyone uses emails, no need for any further validation, right? ❌ WRONG ONCE AGAIN! We all hear from the greatest in the startup landscape that we must validate our ideas with real people, yet at least some of us (guilty here 🥸) think that our product will be hugely successful and prove them to be an exception. Few might, but most are not. I certainly wasn't. 👉 Lesson learned: Always validate your ideas with real people. Ask them how much they’d pay for such a tool (not if they would). Much better if they are willing to pay upfront for a discount, etc. But even this comes later, keep reading. I think the difference between “How much” and “If” is huge for two reasons: (1) By asking them for “How much”, you force them to think in a more realistic setting. (2) You will have a more realistic idea on your profit margins. Based on my competitive analysis, I already had a solution in my mind to improve our email usage standards and email productivity (huge mistake), but I did my best to learn about their problems regarding those without pushing the idea too hard. The idea is this: Generate concise email summaries with suggested actions, combine them into one email, and send it at their preferred times. Save as much as time the AI you end up with allows. After all, everyone loves to save time. So, what kind of validation did I seek for? Talked with only a few people around me about this crazy, internet-breaking idea. The responses I got were, now I see, mediocre; no one got excited about it, just said things along the lines of “Cool idea, OK”. So, any reasonable person in this situation would think “Okay, not might not be working”, right? Well, I did not. I assumed that they were the wrong audience for this product, and there was this magical land of user segments waiting eagerly for my product, yet unknowingly. To this day, I still have not reached this magical place. Perhaps, it didn’t exist in the first place. If I cannot find it, whether it exists or not doesn’t matter. I am certainly searching for it. 👉 What I should have done: Once I decide on a problem space (time management, email productivity, etc.), I should decide on my potential user segments, people who I plan to sell my product to. Then I should go talk to those people, ask them about their pains, then get to the problem-solving/ideation phase only later. ❗️ VALIDATION COMES FROM THE REALITY OUTSIDE. What validation looks like might change from product to product; but what invalidation looks like is more or less the same for every product. Nico Jeannen told me yesterday “validation = money in the account” on Twitter. This is the ultimate form of validation your product could get. If your product doesn’t make any money, then something is invalidated by reality: Your product, you, your idea, who knows? So, at this point, I knew a little bit of Python from spending some time in tutorial hell a few years ago, some HTML/CSS/JS, barely enough React to build a working app. React could work for this project, but I needed easy-to-implement server interactivity. Luckily, around this time, I got to know about this new gen of indie hackers, and learned (but didn’t truly understand) about their approach to indie hacking, and this library called Nextjs. How good Next.js still blows my mind. So, I was back to tutorial hell once again. But, this time, with a promise to myself: This is the last time I would visit tutorial hell. Time to start building this "ground-breaking idea" Learning the fundamentals of Next.js was easier than learning of React unsurprisingly. Yet, the first time I managed to run server actions on Next.js was one of the rarest moments that completely blew my mind. To this day, I reject the idea that it is something else than pure magic under its hood. Did I absolutely need Nextjs for this project though? I do not think so. Did it save me lots of time? Absolutely. Furthermore, learning Nextjs will certainly be quite helpful for other projects that I will be tackling in the future. Already got a few ideas that might be worth pursuing in the head in case I decide to abandon Summ in the future. Fast-forward few weeks again: So, at this stage, I had a barely working MVP-like product. Since the very beginning, I spent every free hour (and more) on this project as speed is essential. But, I am not so sure it was worth it to overwork in retrospect. Yet, I know I couldn’t help myself. Everything is going kinda smooth, so what’s the worst thing that could ever happen? Well, both Apple and Google announced their AIs (Apple Intelligence and Google Gemini, respectively) will have email summarization features for their products. Summarizing singular emails is no big deal, after all there were already so many similar products in the market. I still think that what truly matters is a frictionless user experience, and this is why I built this product in a certain way: You spend less than a few minutes setting up your account, and you get to enjoy your email summaries, without ever visiting its website again. This is still a very cool concept I really like a lot. So, at this point: I had no other idea that could be pursued, already spent too much time on this project. Do I quit or not? This was the question. Of course not. I just have to launch this product as quickly as possible. So, I did something right, a quite rare occurrence I might say: Re-planned my product, dropped everything secondary to the core feature immediately (save time on reading emails), tried launching it asap. 👉 Insight: Sell only one core feature at one time. Drop anything secondary to this core feature. Well, my primary occupation is product design. So one would expect that a product I build must have stellar design. I considered any considerable time spent on design at this stage would be simply wasted. I still think this is both true and wrong: True, because if your product’s core benefits suck, no one will care about your design. False, because if your design looks amateurish, no one will trust you and your product. So, I always targeted an average level design with it and the way this tool works made it quite easy as I had to design only 2 primary pages: Landing page and user portal (which has only settings and analytics pages). However, even though I knew spending time on design was not worth much of my time, I got a bit “greedy”: In fact, I redesigned those pages three times, and still ended up with a so-so design that I am not proud of. 👉 What I would do differently: Unless absolutely necessary, only one iteration per stage as long as it works. This, in my mind, applies to everything. If your product’s A feature works, then no need to rewrite it from scratch for any reason, or even refactor it. When your product becomes a success, and you absolutely need that part of your codebase to be written, do so, but only then. Ready to launch, now is th etime for some marketing, right? By July 26, I already had a “launchable” product that barely works (I marked this date on a Notion docs, this is how I know). Yet, I had spent almost no time on marketing, sales, whatever. After all, “You build and they will come”. Did I know that I needed marketing? Of course I did, but knowingly didn’t. Why, you might ask. Well, from my perspective, it had to be a dev-heavy product; meaning that you spend most of your time on developing it, mostly coding skills. But, this is simply wrong. As a rule of thumb, as noted by one of the greatests, Marc Louvion, you should spend at least twice of the building time on marketing. ❗️ Time spent on building \* 2 people don’t know your product > they don’t use your product > you don’t get users > you don’t make money Easy as that. Following the same reasoning, a slightly different approach to planning a project is possible. Determine an approximate time to complete the project with a high level project plan. Let’s say 6 months. By the reasoning above, 2 months should go into building, and 4 into marketing. If you need 4 months for building instead of 2, then you need 8 months of marketing, which makes the time to complete the project 12 months. If you don’t have that much time, then quit the project. When does a project count as completed? Well, in reality, never. But, I think we have to define success conditions even before we start for indie projects and startups; so we know when to quit when they are not met. A success condition could look like “Make $6000 in 12 months” or “Have 3000 users in 6 months”. It all depends on the project. But, once you set it, it should be set in stone: You don’t change it unless absolutely necessary. I suspect there are few principles that make a solopreneur successful; and knowing when to quit and when to continue is definitely one of them. Marc Louvion is famously known for his success, but he got there after failing so many projects. To my knowledge, the same applies to Nico Jeannen, Pieter Levels, or almost everyone as well. ❗️ Determining when to continue even before you start will definitely help in the long run. A half-aed launch Time-leap again. Around mid August, I “soft launched” my product. By soft launch, I mean lazy marketing. Just tweeting about it, posting it on free directories. Did I get any traffic? Surely I did. Did I get any users? Nope. Only after this time, it hit me: “Either something is wrong with me, or with this product” Marketing might be a much bigger factor for a project’s success after all. Even though I get some traffic, not convincing enough for people to sign up even for a free trial. The product was still perfect in my eyes at the time (well, still is ^(\_),) so the right people are not finding my product, I thought. Then, a question that I should have been asking at the very first place, one that could prevent all these, comes to my mind: “How do even people search for such tools?” If we are to consider this whole journey of me and my so-far-failed product to be an already destined failure, one metric suffices to show why. Search volume: 30. Even if people have such a pain point, they are not looking for email summaries. So, almost no organic traffic coming from Google. But, as a person who did zero marketing on this or any product, who has zero marketing knowledge, who doesn’t have an audience on social media, there is not much I could do. Finally, it was time to give up. Or not… In my eyes, the most important element that makes a founder (solo or not) successful (this, I am not by any means) is to solve problems. ❗️ So, the problem was this: “People are not finding my product by organic search” How do I make sure I get some organic traffic and gets more visibility? Learn digital marketing and SEO as much as I can within very limited time. Thankfully, without spending much time, I came across Neil Patel's YT channel, and as I said many times, it is an absolute gold mine. I learned a lot, especially about the fundamentals, and surely it will be fruitful; but there is no magic trick that could make people visit your website. SEO certainly helps, but only when people are looking for your keywords. However, it is truly a magical solution to get in touch with REAL people that are in your user segments: 👉 Understand your pains, understand their problems, help them to solve them via building products. I did not do this so far, have to admit. But, in case you would like to have a chat about your email usage, and email productivity, just get in touch; I’d be delighted to hear about them. Getting ready for a ProductHunt launch The date was Sept 1. And I unlocked an impossible achievement: Running out of Supabase’s free plan’s Egres limit while having zero users. I was already considering moving out of their Cloud server and managing a Supabase CLI service on my Hetzner VPS for some time; but never ever suspected that I would have to do this quickly. The cheapest plan Supabase offers is $25/month; yet, at that point, I am in between jobs for such a long time, basically broke, and could barely afford that price. One or two months could be okay, but why pay for it if I will eventually move out of their Cloud service? So, instead of paying $25, I spent two days migrating out of Supabase Cloud. Worth my time? Definitely not. But, when you are broke, you gotta do stupid things. This was the first time that I felt lucky to have zero users: I have no idea how I would manage this migration if I had any. I think this is one of the core tenets of an indie hacker: Controlling their own environment. I can’t remember whose quote this is, but I suspect it was Naval: Entrepreneurs have an almost pathological need to control their own fate. They will take any suffering if they can be in charge of their destiny, and not have it in somebody else’s hands. What’s truly scary is, at least in my case, we make people around us suffer at the expense of our attempting to control our own fates. I know this period has been quite hard on my wife as well, as I neglected her quite a bit, but sadly, I know that this will happen again. It is something that I can barely help with. Still, so sorry. After working the last two weeks on a ProductHunt Launch, I finally launched it this Tuesday. Zero ranking, zero new users, but 36 kind people upvoted my product, and many commented and provided invaluable feedback. I couldn't be more grateful for each one of them 🙏. Considering all these, what lies in the future of Summ though? I have no idea, to be honest. On one hand, I have zero users, have no job, no income. So, I need a way to make money asap. On the other hand, the whole idea of it revolves around one core premise (not an assumption) that I am not so willing to share; and I couldn’t have more trust in it. This might not be the best iteration of it, however I certainly believe that email usage is one of the best problem spaces one could work on. 👉 But, one thing is for certain: I need to get in touch with people, and talk with them about this product I built so far. In fact, this is the only item on my agenda. Nothing else will save my brainchild <3. Below are some other insights and notes that I got during my journey; as they do not 100% fit into this story, I think it is more suitable to list them here. I hope you enjoyed reading this. Give Summ a try, it comes with a generous free trial, no credit card required. Some additional notes and insights: Project planning is one of the most underestimated skills for solopreneurs. It saves you enormous time, and helps you to keep your focus up. Building B2C products beats building B2B products. Businesses are very willing to pay big bucks if your product helps them. On the other hand, spending a few hours per user who would pay $5/m probably is not worth your time. It doesn’t matter how brilliant your product is if no one uses it. If you cannot sell a product in a certain category/niche (or do not know how to sell it), it might be a good idea not to start a project in it. Going after new ideas and ventures is quite risky, especially if you don’t know how to market it. On the other hand, an already established category means that there is already demand. Whether this demand is sufficient or not is another issue. As long as there is enough demand for your product to fit in, any category/niche is good. Some might be better, some might be worse. Unless you are going hardcore B2B, you will need people to find your product by means of organic search. Always conduct thorough keyword research as soon as possible.

Here’s How Chatbots Can Boost Your Small Business

Chatbots are the next big thing in the tech world that are meant for business use. Almost every business can benefit from chatbots in one way or the other. They are now everywhere – the fastest rising star are basically computer-operated machines that can play a variety of roles such as customer service representative, social media manager, personal assistant and much more. Virtually every industry is seemingly investing in it. Chatbots became the flavor of the season because of their task management and problem solving skills. This is why companies are aggressively deploying chatbots to their business strategy to make it work right. What are Chatbots – How They Can Benefit Your Small Business? In essence, chatbots are simply a computer program tailor-made to mimic conversations with the help of artificial intelligence (AI). These computer-based programs are capable enough to respond to natural language text and voice inputs in a human way. Chatbots can take over a lot of time consuming tasks, allowing project managers to focus on other important matters and take high level decisions. Chatbots are not just the next big thing for digital and tech brands, small businesses can also get the most out from them. Small businesses should get into chatbots to streamline their routine project management practices and support other business operations – thereby saving budget, time, energy, while improving ROI. If you are not completely getting into it, here are some ways that help you deploy this rising technology in order to boost your small business strategy. Instant Customer Support One of the effective ways small businesses can implement a chatbot is an immediate customer support. If you belong to an industry that offers products and services, chances are you get so many phone calls and emails to educate people. Prior to allowing customers to clog up your inbox with unlimited queries, try using a chatbot that will save your valuable time. You can simply create an immediate customer support presence for customers who engage with your chatbot. Craft answers for all the popular queries so that your project management team can focus on other complex and important issues while chatbots addressing the most commonly asked questions. Moreover, it will add a consistency to your brand voice. You can control the tone and ensure that the chatbot will deliver your crafted messages. Boost Sales Leads Generation Chatbots are not just about sharing or collecting information. They can actually boost sales. But, how? Though they can’t replace your sales and marketing team, they can smartly assist them by being an immediate point of contact. Create an automated conversation for a new visitor and it can directly influence sales. Though chatbots are rising, they will ultimately carry on artificial intelligence that is capable for gathering the data required to curate a specific set of products for customers. For instance, if a user asks the chatbot for blue shirt in cotton, the chatbot can pull items with the particular details for the user. This process is cumulative and when next time the user communicates with the chatbot, it will consider their preferences. Increase Your Business Efficiency Though chatbots can’t perform every business operation, what they can do is eliminate few of the menial but important operations. Consider all the important tasks that your employees need to perform, such as answering customer queries, compiling data for a user, filling out form etc. Most of these tasks are monotonous in nature that allows you to train your chatbot to manage all these repetitive tasks with a low risk and high return of your valuable time. Reducing Cost and Resource Consumption Like any online task management system , chatbots are great to reduce manpower. From performing as a personal assistant to a customer sales representative, you can easily cut down the total number of resources that deal with customer complaints and feedback. You can utilize a chatbot, as it can do this work easily a human would usually do. Read Full article here

Is Digital Marketing Dying?

Is Digital Marketing Dying? &#x200B; I have read articles and seen youtube videos saying, DIGITAL MARKETING IS DYING, AI will replace everything. Facebook is dying! SEO will be Automated You have AI Tools in marketing replacing many jobs roles such as, Copy. AI, Quillbot, Paraphraser, Design. AI, MadgicX, Etc &#x200B; Having been in Digital Marketing for two years, all my seniors are having 2nd thoughts about it. I don,t want to change my domain. I believe marketing will always be there, but the methods, technologies, and tools will change. &#x200B; What do you people have to say?

80+ Social Media Updates Related to Business Marketing That Occurred in last 5 months

Tiktok expanded its caption limits from 100 to 500 Characters. Reddit Updates Search tools, Now you can search User Comments. “Comment search is here”. Pinterest Announces New Partnership with WooCommerce to Expand Product Listings. Google’s launched ‘multisearch’ feature that lets you search using text and image at the same time. Etsy sellers went on strike after platform increases transaction fees. Reddit launched $1 million fund to support various projects going on platform. Instagram is updating its ranking algorithm to put more focus on Original Content LinkedIn Added New tools In creator mode: improved content analytics and Updates profile video Options. Tiktok launched its own gif library “Effect House”. Instagram Updates Reels editing tools adding reordering clips feature. Google Search got a new label to direct people to original news sources YouTube launches new Profile Rings for Stories and Live. Snapchat launched YouTube Link stickers to make video sharing easier! Messenger adds new shortcuts, including a slack like @everyone feature. Pinterest Expands it’s Creator funds program to help more Underrepresented creators. Reddit brings back r/place after 5 years. Google Adds New Seller Performance Badges, New Pricing Insights for eCommerce Brands. Meta and Google agrees to New Data Transfer agreement to keep Instagram and Facebook running in EU. Twitter tests New Interactive Ad types to boost its promotional Appeal. Instagram removed In-stream Ads from its Advertising Options. Tiktok launched new program “CAP” to help creative agencies reach its audience. Twitch shuts down its desktop app. Meta launched the ability to add “share to Reels” feature to third Party Apps. TikTok Adds New ‘Background Player’ Option for Live-Streams. Twitter rolls out ALT badge and improved image description. Fast, A Checkout Startup with $15 billion valuation shuts down after spending all the funds raised in 2021. Wordpress announced new pricing with more traffic and storage limits after receiving backlash from the community. Sales force upgrades marketing field services and sales tools with AI. Dropbox shop launches in open beta to allow creators to sell digital content. Tiktok is the most downloaded app in Quarter 1 of 2022. WhatsApp announced launch of ‘Communities’ - more structured group chats with admin controls. Tiktok expands testing a private dislike button for comments. Twitter acquired “Openback” A notification app to improve timeline and relevance of push notifications YouTube and Tiktok added New options for Automated Captions, Improving Accessibility. A new social media App “Be Real” is trending across the internet grabbing Gen-Zs attention to try the app. WhatsApp got permission to expand payment services to its Indian user base of 100 Million. YouTube Shorts now allows creators to splice in long-form videos. You can use long form video audios and clips for YT shorts. New Snapchat feature ‘Dynamic Stories’ uses a publisher’s RSS feed to automatically create Stories posts. Zoom launches AI-powered features aimed at sales teams. Tiktok started testing who viewed your profile feature. Ogilvy Announced they will no longer work with who edit their bodies and faces for ads. If you don’t know “Oglivy” is the most successful advertising agency of the decade. YouTube Launches New ‘Search Insights’ for all creators. Snapchat Added 13 million new users in Q1 2022 more than both Twitter and Facebook. Google is Introduced new options to reject tracking cookies in Europe after receiving fines from violating EU data laws. Sony & Microsoft are planning to integrate Ads into their gaming platforms Xbox and PlayStation. YouTube Adds new Shorts Shelf to Trending Tab to show Top Shorts in an alternative section. Instagram started testing a reels template feature which enables creators to copy formats from other reels. Google Tests “What People Are Saying” Search Results. Twitter Launches New Test of Promotions for Third Party Tools Within the App. Instagram is changing how hashtags work by experimenting removing Recents tab from hashtags section. Google Adds New Publisher Verification Badges to Extension Listings in the Google Web Store Amazon AWS launches $30M accelerator program aimed at minority founders. Meta launched more fundraising options for Instagram Reels in 30 countries. Brave Search and DuckDuckGo will no longer support Google AMP due to privacy issues. Instagram is working on a pinned post feature and will officially launch in next few months. Meta: You can now add Music to your Facebook comments Twitter tests new closed caption button to switch on captions in Video Clip Elon Musk Bought Twitter $44 Billion and Company is set to go private. Google now lets you request the removal of personal contact information from search results YouTube reveals that Ads between YT Shorts are being tested with selective brands. LinkedInis rolling out a new website link feature. Google Reduces Visibility Of Business Edits With Color Changes To Profile Updates. Instagram expands testing of 90 second Reels. Microsoft Advertising now offers incentive features like cash-back and adding stock images from your website. Facebook & Pinterest are growing again despite all the hype around slow growth of both platform in last quarter. Google Added 9 new Ad policies to prevent misleading ads taking place. Tiktok Introduces Third-party cookies to its Pixel. (like Facebook Pixel) Twitter reportedly overcounted number of daily active users for last 3 years. Google launched Media CDN to compete on content delivery. YouTube expands Thank You Monetisation tool to all eligible creators. Twitch is looking to expand their cut from streamers earnings from 30 to 50% and also thinks of boosting Ads. Snapchat launches a $230 flying drone camera and new e-commerce integrations in Snap Summit 2022. YouTube Expands its ‘Pre-Publish Checks’ Tool to the Mobile App Google Search Console’s URL parameter tool is officially removed for a time period. Twitter creators can now get paid through Cryptocurrency on Twitter with Stripe. Jellysmack- One of the Influencer marketing agency acquires YouTube analytics tool Google & Microsoft Ads brought more revenue in last quarter- 22% Gains! WhatsApp is working on a paid subscription for multi-phone and tablet chatting. Instagram users now spend 20% of their time in the reels section. Google tests new Color for clicked search results by you. Now Clicked results are in Purple. Twitter: Elon plans to remove employees and focus more on influencers for twitter’s growth + new monetisation ideas were shared. YouTube revenue falls as more users spend time on shorts tab than consuming long form content. Drop 👋 to receive June Updates!

Seeking advice from every type of business owner - if you have a moment & an opinion please chime in.

Hello everyone. I haven't started selling yet and wanted to get some insight from the community I'm trying to serve (that makes the most sense to me). So over the past couple months I've gotten into AI & Automation. I got a HighLevel account and went to town learning new things. I learned how to make automations and workflows that make running a business easier (my dad has been letting me use his concrete business as a guinea pig). I also learned how to build and train AI Chat Assistants. I want to start a service based business that uses AI & workflows to automate some of the customer service tasks & lead generation for business. What I'm seeking advice about are as follows: NICHE SELECTION: Part of me thinks I shouldn't niche down in the beginning and just take whoever comes and niche down once I find an industry I'm comfortable with. Another side thinks I should choose one. What is your opinion on niche selection in the beginning? PRICING: I know that pricing largely depends on the value I bring to the client, but I've seen people doing the same or similar things as I want to do and charging vastly different prices. From $300- $2,000. While I think these solutions could absolutely help companies get and retain new business and reduce some of the workload of their staff -- I'm not comfortable charging a high price until I've got enough experience and data to justify that. &#x200B; THESE ARE THE SERVICES I'M THINKING OF OFFERING: Customer Service Chat Assistant. This will be on the website as a "Live Chat". It also connects to Facebook Messenger & Google Business Chat. I'd train the chat assistant on everything related to the company; pertinent info (NAP, company mission, industry background), contact info, services / products / pricing, FAQs, current specials &/or discount codes (this can be changed monthly), how to handle upset clients, etc. It can also connect to a calendar like Google or Calendly so customers can make an appointment or schedule a call directly from the conversation. Missed Call Follow Up. If you're familiar with the platform HighLevel it's commonly called "Missed Call Text Back". The idea is that when a call is missed a text message is automatically fired to the prospect's phone saying something along the lines of "Hey this is \\\\\\ from \\\\\\\_. How can I help you?" and the business owner is alerted to the missed call via text notification. People have said they see a lot of success for their clients with this alone due to the instant follow up. I see a lot of people charging $300 /m. for this. My issues with this are: 1). The text fires automatically when the call is missed, but if the business owner isn't available to actually follow up and keep texting after the customer texts back, they will look inconsistent and bothersome. 2). Without context a prospect may wonder why you didn't answer when they called, but texted them instead. So my answer to these problems are #3. SMS Answering Service. It is essentially taking 2 + 1 and combining them. The missed call text goes out to the prospect, but with context on why they're being texted (because no one is available to take the call at the moment) and IF the prospect responds, a Customer Service Chat Assistant will take over the conversation with the goal of answering their questions and either getting them on the phone with the company via a call back OR helping them schedule an appointment. This offers a more consistent solution than just a text to the business owner / team & the prospect is contacted and helped (hopefully) before they have a chance to start calling a competitor. Lead Nurture / Lead Qualifying Sales Funnel. This one is more than just AI & automation. It's a full funnel. It can be for either Facebook or Google. The process is AD -> Landing Page -> AI Text Message Convo -> Booking/Schedule Call/ Appointment. Typically the ad will offer a lead magnet which they will claim on the LP by giving their information. After the form is submitted, they get a text message and begin a conversation with the AI. It can be trained to just walk them through a booking process, nurture a sale by answering questions and handling objections or to qualify leads. Lead qualification via text works well if you want to weed out who is serious versus who is curious. To be clear; I'd be making the ad, landing page & training the AI -- all parts of the funnel. For whichever service a few things are universal: \- All conversations; no matter what platform they're had on, all go to one inbox which is pretty helpful to see them all in one place. \- When scheduling / booking these can also collect payment. \- Tags can be added to keep track of how they came into the business and where they are in a sales pipeline. There are a lot of fun things I can do with these automations and I'm excited about learning more everyday. I'd really like to know what you think these services could be worth to a business. If you do reply please tell me what type of business you're in so I have an idea of what industries I should be looking towards. Thank you for any response I get as I know this was a long read! SN: I currently do digital marketing & web design as a freelancer.

ChatGPT for business automation (incredible new AI)

Hey fellow small business owners! I'm curious to know how you would use ChatGPT or other AI automation tools to improve your business. For those who are not aware, recently a new chat AI was made available to the public by OpenAI, called ChatGPT. (same company that did Dall-E) In a tweet Elon Musk wrote that "ChatGPT is scary good. We are not far from dangerously strong AI." It allows anyone (regardless of tech skill) to simply type commands and it will spit out answers. It can also create actual working code. For example most tasks you do in a browser can be automated with a Python script, but it takes time and coding knowledge to create. With ChatGPT you can just tell it what you want and it will create the code! The impact for businesses is insane: 1) Your entire customer service can be easily replaced by chat bots and probably soon by AI that can speak over the phone (google showcased this in 2018, it already exists). 2) you can have the AI automate your sales process, creating a 1-on-1 conversations, at scale. It can probably also improve and optimize it's closing rate over time as it learns more about your customers. 3) It can be used to train your staff. It's really good for 1on1 instruction and teaching because it will go a the students pace and answer questions (compare that to the usual PowerPoint presentation people use) 4) Since it can create code to automate most tasks a human can do in a browser, you can create for example bots that take customer orders and automatically import them to whatever shipping system you use, send customers tracking info etc. (a lot of this stuff is done with software and APIs, but now anyone can create their own, custom solutions) I feel like we hit an inflection point in 2022 with AI and now we are beginning to see some really useful stuff coming out. Am I crazy or are we about to see a massive shift in how we do things?

Is anyone using and getting reliable results from AI for social media, and automating some tasks in the business?

Hi, We are currently paying £600/month for a social media company to do a pretty meh job at promoting us, by just doing some posts on our socials I am just wondering if anyone has used AI to help with this and if so what do you use. I've looked at Blaze but I'm put off by their marketing and then Sintra looks interesting but hoping for some feedback from people that have used it, or any others!

Is anyone using and getting reliable results from AI for social media, and automating some tasks in the business?

Hi, We are currently paying £600/month for a social media company to do a pretty meh job at promoting us, by just doing some posts on our socials I am just wondering if anyone has used AI to help with this and if so what do you use. I've looked at Blaze but I'm put off by their marketing and then Sintra looks interesting but hoping for some feedback from people that have used it, or any others!

What I learn from my $200 MRR App I built 4 months ago?

4 month ago, I am just a 10-years experienced product manager without any software development experience. I have an $3K/month job, but I am so tired, I don’t like my life, don’t like my boss, don’t like my daily work, that make me feeling I already died however I am still living. I yearn for freedom and want to live each day the way I want to. So I quit my job, and become a Indie developer to build my own business, my own app, even my own life. I am so grateful for this time and experience, now my app reach $200 MRR, still very little compared to my previous salary, but I never regret. I have learned lots of things from this time and experience, more than I had in last 10 years. Here is the time-line of my App: \- Sep 2023: Launch first version to iOS App store \- Oct 2023: Release in-app-purchase features and have first subscriber, the revenue in October is $154 \- Nov 2023: Change from subscription to pay per use, and I did lots of marketing jobs in November, however, the revenue reduced to only $40. \- Dec 2023: Change back to subscription, and stop some invalid marketing jobs, only keep the ones that actually work. I almost did nothing in December, and the revenue come to $243. During this process, I have learned lots of things, there are some of them that I think could help you as well. Web or App My App is an iOS app that only can running on Apple’s device such like iPhone/iPad or Mac with Apple silicon. Many people ask me why my product is an iOS app not a website, because they don’t have any Apple device. It's true that promoting an app is much harder than promoting a website. However I am now very glad I made an App and not a website! If I make a website, I don't think it's possible to make $100 in the first month. My App is about keyword research, to help people find some ideas from search keyword, because every keyword people searched in Google are representing a real need of them, also can be used in SEO field. However there are a lot of website tools about keyword research, some of them are famous like Ahrefs, SEMrush… I have no intention of competing with them. Actually I don’t have any chance. While in app store, there are little apps about keyword research, each of them have terrible data and user experience, that means if my app has better data and experience that could be my chance. In fact, the App store brings me 20 organic installs a day that Google would never have been able to bring me if I had a website, at least for the first few months. Furthermore, Apple nearly did everything for developer, I don’t need to care about user login, payment and so on, Apple did everything, I just need to call their API, that save lots of time, if I build a website, I need to implement login and payment by myself, that would add some extra work. Not to mention I'd need to buy servers and domains, that would cost me a lot of money. Although Apple will take 30% of the revenue, I can live with that in the early stages because the most important thing for me is to get the product to market as soon as possible. Actually thought Apple’s SMB program, the take rate is 15% now. So Web or App is not important in the early stage, time is important, if people need my product, it's easy to make a website one. More Users or More Valuable Users In November, I notice some users would like use my app, and they were meet paywall, but they never subscribe. I provided 7 day free trail, but it seem that they don’t like it. So I decide to change subscription to pay per use. Because as a user, I don’t like subscription as well, pay per use seem like more friendly. So I change from subscription to pay per use. People can afford $9.99 to subscribe monthly for unlimited use or pay $1.99 for each data they want(First purchase is $0.99 then $1.99). I was expecting more user to pay, but it was the complete opposite! Some users who would have paid a higher subscription fee are switching to a lower priced single payment. Users are encountering paywalls more often, and each time they need to make a decision about whether or not to pay, which increases the probability that they will abandon payment. This resulted in a 75% decrease in revenue in November. In fact, the mostly of my revenue comes from a handful of long-cycle subscribers, such as annual subscription. \\Few bring in most of the revenue,\\ that is the most important thing I learned. You don't need a lot of customers, you just need more valuable ones. That's why it's only right to design a mechanism to filter out high-value customers and focus on them, all the things you want do is just let more people into the filter, and from that point of view, subscription with free trial period is the best way, even if most people don't like it. The rule of 20/80 will always be there. The most important thing is always focus on the 20 percent things and people. Effort does not always guarantee rewards. Unless one engages in deep thinking, or most efforts are invalid. I have been working very hard to promote my product for a period of time. It’s about in November. I did a lot of job, such as write script to send message to my potential clients on Fiverr, post and write comments on others post on Reddit, find related questions and answer them on Quora, post and comments on Twitte, etc. During that period, I was exhausted every day, but the outcome did not meet my expectations. There is only little growth on App installation, even less revenue than before. That make me frustrated. I finally realized that If I need to put in a tremendous amount of effort just to make a little progress, there is must something wrong. So I stop 80% of promote work I have ever did, only keep app store search ad, which will bring a installation with less than $0.5 cost. Then I dive into long time and deeply thinking, I spent more time on reading books, investigate other product with great MRR, watch interviews with people who are already living the kind of life I aspire to live, for example, u/levelsio. These things have given me great inspiration, and my life has become easier. It seems that the life I anticipated when I resigned is getting closer. I also have a clearer understanding of my app. Meanwhile, MRR has been growing. This experience let me learn that effort does not always guarantee results. Many times, our efforts are just wishful thinking, they are invalid, do the right thing after deeply thinking is more important. What Next? My goal is reach $3K MRR, as same as my job payment, I will never stop to building things, and I will keep my currently lifestyle. I still don't know how to get more people to use my app, but levelsio's interviews give me some inspiration that I can verified something by manually instead of build a software. I plan to launch a trend analysis product based on the keyword data provided by my current app. I have always wanted to combine AI to build such a product, but I didn't know how to do it. Now I intend to manually complete it first and start software development once there are paying users. If you are interested to my App, you could try it.

Feedback request: Virtual Receptionist - Phone Answering Service

Hi everyone! We develop an AI solution for the Enterprise segment, aimed at managing and automating interactions with Customers (e.g. self-service customer support via telephone) I do not refer in any way to company names, products, etc... to avoid any ambiguity or distraction. ➡️ My post is aimed at exploring the point of view of an SMB regarding the problem of managing interactions with customers, for example in managing telephone calls. ⭐In particular, what do you think of traditional virtual receptionist and phone answering services? The underlying issue is valuing every call, or interaction in general. ⭐A missed or poorly managed call can be a lost opportunity (a sale, a service) or even worse, a lost customer. But often outsourcing the service also means relying on people in a call center who manage your business in parallel with many others, and you cannot be an expert in everything. Therefore, the outsourced agents will be competent on 10, 15 points. This often results in little use for the caller, which does not resolve the issue for which he called. AI is making giant strides, as is speech synthesis and speech recognition. 🚀 What do you think if you were to use AI as a virtual receptionist, or in general for call management for your business? ⭐ Points in favor? What is the most critical aspect? Typical cases: Provide information Customer service Appointment made Order management ...other? The purpose of this post is to provide food for constructive reflection, combining different visions.

Small Business Owners: How's AI Working (or Not) for You?

I'm interested in doing some "user research" to hear from the community on how AI fits into the small business landscape. Some SMB owners I talked to felt like "AI is a cool novelty, but it's not transformative". Curious how people here feel about AI, thanks. How are you using (or have used) AI in your business? Seen any ROI boosts? Hit any roadblocks or adoption challenges? What do you wish AI could do for your biz that it doesn't currently? (besides run everything lol)

40% Of SMBs Still Can't Pay Their Rent, Extending High Delinquency From September Into October

https://www.alignable.com/forum/q4s-off-to-a-rough-start-40-of-smbs-still-cant-pay-their-rent October 31, 2023: While the federal government reported a surge in economic growth for the U.S. last week, that news doesn't hold true for many small business owners. In fact, in October polling by Alignable, only 12% said their companies are experiencing significant growth this month. Beyond that, Alignable’s October Rent Report, released today, shows that a whopping 40% of SMBs couldn't even pay their October rent in full and on time. This marks the second consecutive month of a 40% rent delinquency rate -- extending 2023's record high from September through October. These findings are based on responses from 4,246 randomly selected small business owners surveyed from 10/1/23 to 10/30/23, as well as input from 44,000+ other respondents over the past year. As the chart below shows, October's SMB rent delinquency rate is 10 percentage points higher than it was in January, reflecting cumulative economic struggles: increased rents, high interest rates, still-stifling inflation, rising labor costs, and revenues that have declined since this time last year. Rent delinquency rates among small businesses during 2023 based on Alignable surveys So, Why's Rent Delinquency At 40% For A 2nd Month? Here’s the current list of problems contributing to two months' worth of the highest delinquency rate 2023 has seen so far: Consumer Spending Declines On Main Street: Quarterly, we ask about customer spending habits at retailers. This month, 45% of independent Mom and Pop Shops said spending has been down over the last 30 days. Some said it was due to more people spending money online with big retailers like Amazon. This figure is quite high, especially considering that back in July, only 24% reported a drop in consumer spending -- 21 percentage points less severe than it is now. Revenue Troubles: 42% are making half or less of the income they generated monthly prior to COVID. For businesses that are less than three years old, this situation is even worse: 53% of this group reports making half or less of what they generated this time last year. High Interest Rates: Over half of all SMB owners polled said the past 19 months of high interest rates have hurt their margins, reduced revenues, and put their expansion plans on hold, as they don't want to apply for loans. Increased Rent Prices: 50% say they’re being charged more for rent now than they were six months ago, with 15% saying rent has increased by 20% or more. At present, only 37% of pre-COVID businesses have recovered financially from the pandemic era, leaving 63% still striving to make up for time they lost due to COVID, inflationary pressures, and high interest rates. There's a slight silver lining here, though, as the 37% figure is three percentage points higher than it was in September. But, with that said, a recovery rate of 37% after more than three and a half years is still very low and speaks volumes about the ongoing list of troubles small business owners face looking into the rest of 2023. Tech, Manufacturing, Gyms, Beauty & Retail Struggle Examining the rent delinquency landscape in terms of sectors, there's quite a negative shift occurring among some industries in October. Let's look at the charts below to see what's really happening. Sectors most affected by rent delinquency include tech and retail Details on sectors affected by rent delinquency in October This is alarming for a few reasons: The countless technology layoffs at larger companies over the past year appear to be affecting the small companies now, too, who are often dependent on the larger ones as clients. Right now, 54% of science/technology small companies couldn't pay their October rent, up 10 percentage points from September and 16 percentage points since August. There are also some comments in the surveys of technology roles being reduced or replaced by ChatGPT and other AI, which can write software programs. Gyms have been struggling now for a while and now 50% of them can't afford the rent, up 8 percentage points from September. The biggest shift between October and September occurred among manufacturers, partially due to ongoing fluctuation in the price of gas and other inflationary issues. For quite some time, manufacturers were improving a lot in terms of their rent delinquency rates, but in October, they jumped 25 percentage points, doubling their rate, which is now 50%. This is also a record high for manufacturers in 2023. We hope this is just a blip, but we'll see in November. Also due, in part, to fluctuating gas prices and costs of vehicles, 45% of transportation companies couldn't pay October rent in full and on time. That's up 6 percentage points from last month. Sadly, 47% of salon owners couldn't cover October rent, after showing a lot of stability over the past few months. But that stability ended this month, as salons' rent delinquency rates jumped nine percentage points. Though rates have dropped three percentage points in October, a high percentage of retailers are still having trouble paying the rent. Last month, it was 47%. This month, it's better, but is still over 40%, landing at 44%. This is worrisome, especially since Q4 is a "make it or break it" time for many Main Street merchants. Looking more closely at the industries, there was some good news, in that a few others experienced lower delinquency rates in October, including restaurants, which dipped to 40% from 44% in September. Travel/lodging dropped seven percentage points to 38% (from 45% last month), as did education, which is also at 38%, down from 43%. When looking at rent delinquency from the vantage point of the states that are most affected, many surges can be seen between October and September, while a few states saw some dramatic, encouraging declines, too. Rent Troubles Increase For IL, VA, TX, MA, FL, & CO Looking at the states' charts, you can see how tumultuous the rent story has become this fall. Let's first talk about those with significant jumps in their delinquency rates. Here's the rundown: Illinois leads the list once again. After having a better month in September, its delinquency rate has soared, once more, landing at 54% for October (up from 46% last month). In fact, the 54% figure is the highest rate IL-based SMBs have seen in 2023. Virginia was in great shape last month, with a delinquency rate of just 19%. But Virginia-based small business owners have had a very rough month, at least in terms of rent. Now, 50% of them who took our poll say they couldn't cover rent (an increase of 31 percentage points). Texas is third on the list, with an 11-percentage-point lift from 38% in September to 49% in October. MA is next up at 48%, which marks the largest jump on the chart -- 32 percentage points from a low of just 16% in September. Small businesses in Florida have also experienced two challenging months in terms of rent delinquency. Right now, 45% of SMBs there couldn't afford to pay, up nine percentage points from September and 15 percentage points from August. Colorado's businesses regressed in October, hitting a new record high of 40%. That rent delinquency rate jumped 13 percentage points from September to October. While we just covered states with some very high delinquency rates, there were also several more positive swings that have occurred in October. Though encouraging, we'll have to see how long those delinquency rates continue. Here are the most remarkable: New York -- After reaching a record rate of 55% last month, New York's small business owners now report a more stable number: just 29%. That's down 26 percentage points. New Jersey -- New York's neighbor has an even more impressive story in October: only 20% of New Jersey's SMBs couldn't pay rent this month, a record low over at least the past 14 months, down 34 percentage points from a record high of 54%. Michigan -- Similarly, Michigan's small business owners boast a rate of just 20%, down from 45% in September.

ChatGPT for business automation (incredible new AI)

Hey fellow small business owners! I'm curious to know how you would use ChatGPT or other AI automation tools to improve your business. For those who are not aware, recently a new chat AI was made available to the public by OpenAI, called ChatGPT. (same company that did Dall-E) In a tweet Elon Musk wrote that "ChatGPT is scary good. We are not far from dangerously strong AI." It allows anyone (regardless of tech skill) to simply type commands and it will spit out answers. It can also create actual working code. For example most tasks you do in a browser can be automated with a Python script, but it takes time and coding knowledge to create. With ChatGPT you can just tell it what you want and it will create the code! The impact for businesses is insane: 1) Your entire customer service can be easily replaced by chat bots and probably soon by AI that can speak over the phone (google showcased this in 2018, it already exists). 2) you can have the AI automate your sales process, creating a 1-on-1 conversations, at scale. It can probably also improve and optimize it's closing rate over time as it learns more about your customers. 3) It can be used to train your staff. It's really good for 1on1 instruction and teaching because it will go a the students pace and answer questions (compare that to the usual PowerPoint presentation people use) 4) Since it can create code to automate most tasks a human can do in a browser, you can create for example bots that take customer orders and automatically import them to whatever shipping system you use, send customers tracking info etc. (a lot of this stuff is done with software and APIs, but now anyone can create their own, custom solutions) I feel like we hit an inflection point in 2022 with AI and now we are beginning to see some really useful stuff coming out. Am I crazy or are we about to see a massive shift in how we do things?

Do you use automation for lead communication? Thoughts on using AI?

Hey all! wanted to hear if people are automating some of their lead communication- things like automated SMS campaigns, using tools to automate Yelp responses, etc! If you are using automation, or would like to- what sort of customer communications would you most want to automate? Would it be inbound lead conversations, outbound to potential leads, reminder texts to old customers? (full transparency I'm working on a tool to both automate lead communications/FAQs and meeting bookings for my own leads, and for other businesses- so I'm looking to get some insights from other businesses🙏)

No-code AI platform?

Hey there, A group of like-minded people and I are working on a no-code AI platform. Our goal is to make machine learning technologies accessible to people without any specific knowledge. The workflow would look like the following: Select a task and data types. Upload data (with annotation or annotate it in our platform). Wait for a model to be trained automatically (up to 30-40 minutes). Use the created model (through API, through integration with other no-/low-code platforms, or as a docker image). What do you think about our idea? Would anybody use it? I'd really appreciate it if you could share your thoughts.

What do you think about no-code AI development

A team of like-minded people and I are working on a no-code AI development platform. Our goal is to make deep learning technologies accessible for everyone, not just for machine learning engineers and big companies. We've decided to start with computer vision tasks. The workflow would look like the following: Select task (image classification, object detection, image tagging). Upload data (with annotation or annotate it in our platform). Wait for a model to be trained automatically (about 10 minutes). Integrate the created model into your product (through API, docker image, or through integration with other no-/low-code platforms). What do you think is there any future for no-code AI development platforms? I'd really appreciate it if you could share your thoughts.

Understand and train your own GPT – No prior AI or coding knowledge required

Hi all I wrote this "blog" Google colab notebook for friends and family who have little technical know-how or do not yet have an understanding of language models. It's based on nanoGPT (a minimal GPT implementation from Andrej Karpathy, ex-OpenAI). However, I rewrote the code from scratch, made it more explicit, and have lots of textual information such that everyone should be able to follow what is happening when, and train their own little GPT :) Hope it helps some people and let me know if you have any questions/feedback. Find it here: https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1J9qJ-JArJSORVfOcppoD4cMC3u2I7aGZ?usp=sharing Tl;dr: Blog about how LLMs work & train a mini model without prior knowledge.

MIT Introduction to Data-Centric AI

Announcing the first-ever course on Data-Centric AI. Learn how to train better ML models by improving the data. Course homepage | Lecture videos on YouTube | Lab Assignments The course covers: Data-Centric AI vs. Model-Centric AI Label Errors Dataset Creation and Curation Data-centric Evaluation of ML Models Class Imbalance, Outliers, and Distribution Shift Growing or Compressing Datasets Interpretability in Data-Centric ML Encoding Human Priors: Data Augmentation and Prompt Engineering Data Privacy and Security MIT, like most universities, has many courses on machine learning (6.036, 6.867, and many others). Those classes teach techniques to produce effective models for a given dataset, and the classes focus heavily on the mathematical details of models rather than practical applications. However, in real-world applications of ML, the dataset is not fixed, and focusing on improving the data often gives better results than improving the model. We’ve personally seen this time and time again in our applied ML work as well as our research. Data-Centric AI (DCAI) is an emerging science that studies techniques to improve datasets in a systematic/algorithmic way — given that this topic wasn’t covered in the standard curriculum, we (a group of PhD candidates and grads) thought that we should put together a new class! We taught this intensive 2-week course in January over MIT’s IAP term, and we’ve just published all the course material, including lecture videos, lecture notes, hands-on lab assignments, and lab solutions, in hopes that people outside the MIT community would find these resources useful. We’d be happy to answer any questions related to the class or DCAI in general, and we’d love to hear any feedback on how we can improve the course material. Introduction to Data-Centric AI is open-source opencourseware, so feel free to make improvements directly: https://github.com/dcai-course/dcai-course.

[Help Needed] Developing an AI to Play Mini Metro – Struggling with Data Extraction & Strategy method

Hello everyone ! First of all, please excuse my English if i do mistakes, as it is not my native language and I am not necessarily comfortable with it :) Regarding this project, I will explain my initial intention. I know very little about coding, but I enjoy it and have had some Python lessons, along with a few small personal projects for fun, mostly using YouTube tutorials. Nothing too advanced... However, now I want to take it to the next level. Since I have some familiarity with coding, I’ve wanted to work on artificial intelligence for a while. I have never coded AI myself, but I enjoy downloading existing projects (for chess, checkers, cat-and-mouse games, etc.), testing their limits, and understanding how they work. One of my favorite strategy game genres is management games, especially Mini Metro. Given its relatively simple mechanics, I assumed there would already be AI projects for it. But to my surprise, I could only find mods that add maps ! I admit that I am neither the best nor the most patient researcher, so I haven’t spent hours searching, but the apparent lack of projects for this game struck me. Maybe the community is just small ? I haven't looked deeply into it. So, I got it into my head to create my own AI. After all, everything is on the internet, and perseverance is key ! However, perseverance alone is not enough when you are not particularly experienced, so I am turning to the community to find knowledgeable people who can help me. The First Obstacle: Getting Game Data I quickly realized that the biggest challenge is that Mini Metro does not have an accessible API (at least, not one I could find). This means I cannot easily extract game data. My initial idea was to have an AI analyze the game, think about the best move, and then write out the actions to be performed, instead of coding a bot that directly manipulates the game. But first, I needed a way to retrieve and store game data. Attempt #1: Image Recognition (Failed) Since there was no API, I tried using image recognition to gather game data. Unfortunately, it was a disaster. I used mss for screenshots ,Tesseract for OCR, andNumPy to manipulate images in the HSV color space but it produced unreliable results : It detected many false positives (labeling empty spaces as stations) It failed to consistently detect numbers (scores or resources like trains and lines) Dotted bridge indicators over rivers were misinterpreted as stations While I could detect stations, lines, and moving trains, the data was chaotic and unreliable Attempt #2: Manual Data Entry (Partially Successful but Impractical) Since image recognition was unreliable, I decided to manually update the game data in real-time. I created a script that : Displays an overlay when I press Shift+R. Allows me to manually input stations, lines, and other game elements. Saves the current state when I press Shift+R again, so I can resume playing. Implements a simple resource management system (trains, lines, etc.). This works better than image recognition because I control the input, but I’m running into serious limitations : Some game mechanics are hard to implement manually (adding a station in the middle of a line, extending the correct line when two lines overlap at a station) Keeping track of station demands (the shapes passengers want to travel to) becomes overwhelming as the game progresses Updating the score in real-time is practically impossible manually, and the score is essential for training an AI (for my reward systems) My Dilemma At this point, I am unsure of how to proceed. My questions for the community : Am I going in the right direction? Should I continue improving my manual tracking system or is it a dead end? Should I have persevered with image recognition instead? Is there a better way to extract game data that I haven’t thought of? I would appreciate any guidance or ideas. Thanks in advance ! if you need more info, i have posted my codes here : https://github.com/Dmsday/mini\metro\data\analyzer (for the image detection version I'm not sure that it's the latest version aka the most "functional" version that I could do because I think I deleted it out of boredom...)

How to build a simple Neural Network from scratch without frameworks. Just Math and Python. (With lots of animations and code)

Hi ML community! I've made a video (at least to the best of my abilities lol) for beginners about the origins of neural networks and how to build the simplest network from scratch. Without frameworks or libraries, just using math and python, with the objective to get people involved with this fascinating topic! I tried to use as many animations and manim as possible in the making of the video to help visualizing concepts :) The video can be seen here Building the Simplest AI Neural Network From Scratch with just Math and Python - Origins of AI Ep.1 (youtube.com) It covers: The origins of neural networks The theory behind the Perceptron Weights, bias, what's all that? How to implement the Perceptron How to make a simple Linear Regression Using the simplest cost function - The Mean Absolute Error (MAE) Differential calculus (calculating derivatives) Minimizing the Cost Making a simple linear regression I tried to go at a very slow pace because as I mentioned, the video was done with beginners in mind! This is the first out of a series of videos I am intending to make. (Depending of course if people like them!) I hope this can bring value to someone! Thanks!

Sophomore computer science student, looking at ISLP vs ESL vs mlcourse.ai

For background, I am currently a computer science sophomore, with intermediate skills in Python and C++. I have taken university courses on data structure and algorithms, calc 1-3, linear algebra, and an introductory stat course (which covered confidence interval, Z and T sample test, and hypothesis testing). I also have read up to Chapter 5 of the MML book and am currently self-studying probability theory (through STAT 110 video and textbook by Joe Blitzstein). I have done a few beginner ML projects with Tensorflow and scikit-learn, but most of the work is in EDA and feature engineering, while the ML model is just a black box that I plug and chug. So now, I want to learn how to implement ML models from scratch. I've been skimming over ISLP, which many people online recommended, but it seems that while it talks about mathematical equations used, I don't really get to implement it; as the labs are a lot of importing an already implemented model then plug and chug. So now, I am looking at ESL, which I believe is the more detailed and mathematically rigorous version of ISL. However, there aren't any labs or code along to ease beginners in (which I somewhat understand given the intended audience of the book). Another option I am looking at is mlcourse.ai, which seems to cover mathematics and has some lab/code along for it. But it doesn't seem to span as many subjects as ESL does. Given these options, I am unsure of which one to pick, should I first finish my self-study on probability theory and then Chapters 6-8 of MML? Then should I do ISLP first or just get into ESL? Or maybe I should do mlcourse.ai first then into ESL? Or should I just do the ML course/book along with the maths? In addition, there is also the data science + feature engineering stuff which I wonder if I should study more about. Sorry if this seems like a mess, there are just so many things to ML that I am kinda overwhelmed.

NeRFs (2025)

Hey everyone! I'm currently working on my final year project, and it's focused on NeRFs and the representation of large-scale outdoor objects using drones. I'm looking for advice and some model recommendations to make comparisons. My goal is to build a private-access web app where I can upload my dataset, train a model remotely via SSH (no GUI), and then view the results interactively — something like what Luma AI offers. I’ll be running the training on a remote server with 4x A6000 GPUs, but the whole interaction will be through CLI over SSH. Here are my main questions: Which NeRF models would you recommend for my use case? I’ve seen some models that support JS/WebGL rendering, but I’m not sure what the best approach is for combining training + rendering + web access. How can I render and visualize the results interactively, ideally within my web app, similar to Luma AI? I've seen things like sMPLerNeRF, SNeRFs, and Instant-NGP, but I’m curious if there are more beginner-friendly or better-documented alternatives that can integrate well with a custom web interface. Any guidance on how to stream or render the output inside a browser? I’ve seen people use WebGL/Three.js, but I’m still not clear on the pipeline. I’m still new to NeRFs, but my goal is to implement the best model I can, and allow interactive mapping through my web application using data captured by drones. Any help or insights are much appreciated!

Advice Needed

Hey everyone, I’ve been diving into Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and Deep Learning recently, but I find myself a little confused about how to approach the learning process effectively. My goal isn’t just to secure a job but to actually build cool AI products or startups—something innovative and impactful, like what companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, or ElevenLabs are doing. I often see founders or engineers building incredible AI-driven startups, and I can’t help but wonder: • What kind of learning path did these people follow? • Surely they didn’t just stick to basic Udemy or YouTube courses that most people use for job prep. • What resources or approaches do serious AI practitioners use? I’ve heard that implementing research papers is a great way to gain a deep, intuitive understanding of AI concepts. But as someone who is still a beginner, I’m unsure how to start implementing papers without feeling overwhelmed. Here’s what I’m hoping to get clarity on: Where should I begin as a complete beginner? What resources, projects, or habits would you recommend to build solid fundamentals in AI/ML? How do I progress from beginner to a level where I can implement research papers? Are there intermediate steps I need to take before diving into papers? What would the ideal roadmap look like for someone who wants to build startups in AI? If you’re an AI practitioner, researcher, or startup founder, I’d love to hear about your experiences and learning pathways. What worked for you? What didn’t? Any advice or resources would be immensely appreciated. I’m ready to put in the hard work, I just want to make sure I’m moving in the right direction. Thanks in advance! Looking forward to learning from this community.

Neural Networks you can try to implement from scratch (for beginners)

I was reading a tweet talking about how useful it is to implement neural networks from scratch. How it allowed for a greater understanding of the topic. The author said he found it more useful than other people explaining the concept to him. While I disagree with the author’s opinion that it stops the need for explanations. It certainly does help the understanding of one’s model. I recommend giving it a go. In the blog post, I will suggest which models you should try to implement from scratch using NumPy or your favourite library. Also, I will link to some accompanying resources. Simple Feedforward Network This is the most famous example because it’s so simple. But allows you to learn so much. I heard about this idea from Andrew Trask. It also helped me think about implementing networks from scratch in general. In the Feedforward network, you will be using NumPy. As you won't need Pytorch or TensorFlow. To do the heavy-lifting for complex calculations. You can simply create a Numpy Array for training and testing data. You can also create a nonlinear function using Numpy. Then work out the error rate between the layer’s guess and real data. Resource for this task: https://iamtrask.github.io/2015/07/12/basic-python-network/ Follow this tutorial. It does a much better job of explaining how to do this in NumPy. With code examples to follow. Feedforward Network with Gradient Descent This is an extension of the network above. In this network, we allow the model to optimise its weights. This can also be done in NumPy. Resource for this task: https://iamtrask.github.io/2015/07/27/python-network-part2/ A follow-on from the previous article. Pytorch version of Perceptrons and Multi-layered Perceptrons. Here will go up a level by using a library. Examples I'm using will be done in Pytorch. But you can use whatever library you prefer. When implementing these networks, you learn how much a library does the work for you. Recourses for the task: https://medium.com/@tomgrek/building-your-first-neural-net-from-scratch-with-pytorch-56b0e9c84d54 https://becominghuman.ai/pytorch-from-first-principles-part-ii-d37529c57a62 K Means Clustering Yes, this does not count as a neural network. But a traditional machine learning algorithm is still very useful. As this is non deep learning algorithm it should be easier to understand. This can be done just using NumPy or Pandas depending on the implementation. Recourse for this task: https://www.machinelearningplus.com/predictive-modeling/k-means-clustering/ http://madhugnadig.com/articles/machine-learning/2017/03/04/implementing-k-means-clustering-from-scratch-in-python.html https://gdcoder.com/implementation-of-k-means-from-scratch-in-python-9-lines/ There are quite a few choices to choose from. So pick whatever implementation helps you understand the concepts better. These networks or models should be simple enough that you won't get lost trying to implement them. But still, help learn a few stuff along the way. \- If you found this post useful, then check out my mailing list where I write more stuff like this.

Learning Resources + Side Project Ideas

I made a post last night about my journey to landing an AI internship and have received a lot of responses asking about side projects and learning resources, so I am making another thread here consolidating this information for all those that are curious! Learning Process Step 1) Learn the basic fundamentals of the Math USE YOUTUBE!!! Literally just type in 'Machine Learning Math" and you will get tons of playlists covering nearly every topic. Personally I would focus on Linear Algebra and Calculus - specifically matrices/vector operations, dot products, eigenvectors/eigenvalues, derivatives and gradients. It might take a few tries until you find someone that meshes well with your learning style, but 3Blue1Brown is my top recommendation. I also read the book "Why Machines Learn" and found that extremely insightful. Work on implementing the math both with pen and paper then in Python. Step 2) Once you have a grip on the math fundamentals, I would pick up Hands-on Machine Learning with Sci-kit Learn, Keras and TensorFlow. This book was a game changer for me. It goes more in depth on the math and covers every topic from Linear Regression to the Transformers architecture. It also introduces you to Kaggle and some beginner level side projects. Step 3) After that book I would begin on side projects and also checking out other similar books, specifically Hands on Large Language Models and Hands on Generative AI. Step 4) If you have read all three of these books, and fully comprehend everything, then I would start looking up papers. I would just ask ChatGPT to feed you papers that are most relevant to your interests. Beginner Side Project Ideas 1) Build a Neural Network from scratch, using just Numpy. It can be super basic - have one input layer with 2 nodes, 1 hidden layer with 2 nodes, and output layer with one node. Learn about the forward feed process and play around with different activation functions and loss functions. Learn how these activation functions and loss functions impact backpropagation (hint: the derivatives of the activation functions and loss functions are all different). Get really good at this and understand the difference between regression models and classification models and which activation/loss functions go with which type of model. If you are really feeling crazy and are more focused on a SWE type of role, try doing it in a language other than python and try building a frontend for it so there is an interface where a user can input data and select their model architecture. 2) Build a CNN Image Classifier for the MNIST - Get familiar with the intricacies of CNN's, image manipulation, and basic computer vision concepts. 3) Build on top of open source LLM's. Go to Hugging Face's models page and start playing around with some. 4) KAGGLE COMPETITIONS - I will not explain further, do Kaggle Competitions. Other Resources I've mentioned YouTube, several books and Hugging Face. I also recommend: DataLemur.com \- Python practice, SQL practices, ML questions - his book Ace the Data Science Interview is also very good. X.com \- follow people that are prominent in the space. I joined an AI and Math Group that is constantly posting resources in there deep-ml.com If you have found any of this helpful - feel free to give me a follow on X and stay in touch @ x.com/hark0nnen\

How is ML/AI implemented in your company?

Hi, I am currently working as a full time SWE. I generally get to work with data/build solutions using data but I don't have any official ML/Data science title or background. Ideally, I'd like to be able to start making more intelligent decisions using that data and that's why I am interested on machine learning. Ideally, I'd like to write production systems that leverage models that I can build and understand end to end but after some research, I am not sure if such jobs exist today or if teams are usually split between modelling team (people that only train and analyze models) and SWE teams (people that take such models and focus on deploying them on production). My current company is using that model of development, so I might need to leave to be able to do what I want. I imagine startups work that way, but I am looking for some stability. Thanks!

Month of August in AI

🔍 Inside this Issue: 🤖 Latest Breakthroughs: This month it’s all about Agents, LangChain RAG, and LLMs evaluation challenges.* 🌐 AI Monthly News: Discover how these stories are revolutionizing industries and impacting everyday life: EU AI Act, California’s Controversial SB1047 AI regulation act, Drama at OpenAI, and possible funding at OpenAI by Nvidia and Apple.* 📚 Editor’s Special: This covers the interesting talks, lectures, and articles we came across recently. Follow me on Twitter and LinkedIn at RealAIGuys and AIGuysEditor to get insight on new AI developments. Please don't forget to subscribe to our Newsletter: https://medium.com/aiguys/newsletter Latest Breakthroughs Are Agents just simple rules? Are Agents just enhanced reasoning? The answer is yes and no. Yes, in the sense that agents have simple rules and can sometimes enhance reasoning capabilities compared to a single prompt. But No in the sense that agents can have a much more diverse functionality like using specific tools, summarizing, or even following a particular style. In this blog, we look into how to set up these agents in a hierarchal manner just like running a small team of Authors, researchers, and supervisors. How To Build Hierarchical Multi-Agent Systems? TextGrad. It is a powerful framework performing automatic “differentiation” via text. It backpropagates textual feedback provided by LLMs to improve individual components of a compound AI system. In this framework, LLMs provide rich, general, natural language suggestions to optimize variables in computation graphs, ranging from code snippets to molecular structures. TextGrad showed effectiveness and generality across various applications, from question-answering and molecule optimization to radiotherapy treatment planning. TextGrad: Improving Prompting Using AutoGrad The addition of RAG to LLMs was an excellent idea. It helped the LLMs to become more specific and individualized. Adding new components to any system leads to more interactions and its own sets of problems. Adding RAG to LLMs leads to several problems such as how to retrieve the best content, what type of prompt to write, and many more. In this blog, we are going to combine the LangChain RAG with DSPy. We deep dive into how to evaluate the RAG pipeline quantitatively using RAGAs and how to create a system where instead of manually tweaking prompts, we let the system figure out the best prompt. How To Build LangChain RAG With DSPy? As the field of natural language processing (NLP) advances, the evaluation of large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4 becomes increasingly important and complex. Traditional metrics such as accuracy are often inadequate for assessing these models’ performance because they fail to capture the nuances of human language. In this article, we will explore why evaluating LLMs is challenging and discuss effective methods like BLEU and ROUGE for a more comprehensive evaluation. The Challenges of Evaluating Large Language Models AI Monthly News AI Act enters into force On 1 August 2024, the European Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) enters into force. The Act aims to foster responsible artificial intelligence development and deployment in the EU. The AI Act introduces a uniform framework across all EU countries, based on a forward-looking definition of AI and a risk-based approach: Minimal risk: most AI systems such as spam filters and AI-enabled video games face no obligation under the AI Act, but companies can voluntarily adopt additional codes of conduct. Specific transparency risk: systems like chatbots must clearly inform users that they are interacting with a machine, while certain AI-generated content must be labelled as such. High risk: high-risk AI systems such as AI-based medical software or AI systems used for recruitment must comply with strict requirements, including risk-mitigation systems, high-quality of data sets, clear user information, human oversight, etc. Unacceptable risk: for example, AI systems that allow “social scoring” by governments or companies are considered a clear threat to people’s fundamental rights and are therefore banned. EU announcement: Click here https://preview.redd.it/nwyzfzgm4cmd1.png?width=828&format=png&auto=webp&s=c873db37ca0dadd5b510bea70ac9f633b96aaea4 California AI bill SB-1047 sparks fierce debate, Senator likens it to ‘Jets vs. Sharks’ feud Key Aspects of SB-1047: Regulation Scope: Targets “frontier” AI models, defined by their immense computational training requirements (over 10²⁶ operations) or significant financial investment (>$100 million). Compliance Requirements: Developers must implement safety protocols, including the ability to immediately shut down, cybersecurity measures, and risk assessments, before model deployment. Whistleblower Protections: Encourages reporting of non-compliance or risks by offering protection against retaliation. Safety Incident Reporting: Mandates reporting AI safety incidents within 72 hours to a newly established Frontier Model Division. Certification: Developers need to certify compliance, potentially under penalty of perjury in earlier drafts, though amendments might have altered this. Pros: Safety First: Prioritizes the prevention of catastrophic harms by enforcing rigorous safety standards, potentially safeguarding against AI misuse or malfunction. Incentivizes Responsible Development: By setting high standards for AI model training, the company encourages developers to think critically about the implications of their creations. Public Trust: Enhances public confidence in AI by ensuring transparency and accountability in the development process. Cons: Innovation Stagnation: Critics argue it might stifle innovation, especially in open-source AI, due to the high costs and regulatory burdens of compliance. Ambiguity: Some definitions and requirements might be too specific or broad, leading to legal challenges or unintended consequences. Global Competitiveness: There’s concern that such regulations could push AI development outside California or the U.S., benefiting other nations without similar restrictions. Implementation Challenges: The practicalities of enforcing such regulations, especially the “positive safety determination,” could be complex and contentious. News Article: Click here Open Letter: Click here https://preview.redd.it/ib96d7nk4cmd1.png?width=828&format=png&auto=webp&s=0ed5913b5dae72e203c8592393e469d9130ed689 MORE OpenAI drama OpenAI co-founder John Schulman has left the company to join rival AI startup Anthropic, while OpenAI president and co-founder Greg Brockman is taking an extended leave until the end of the year. Schulman, who played a key role in creating the AI-powered chatbot platform ChatGPT and led OpenAI’s alignment science efforts, stated his move was driven by a desire to focus more on AI alignment and hands-on technical work. Peter Deng, a product manager who joined OpenAI last year, has also left the company. With these departures, only three of OpenAI’s original 11 founders remain: CEO Sam Altman, Brockman, and Wojciech Zaremba, lead of language and code generation. News Article: Click here https://preview.redd.it/0vdjc18j4cmd1.png?width=828&format=png&auto=webp&s=e9de604c26aed3e47b50df3bdf114ef61f967080 Apple and Nvidia may invest in OpenAI Apple, which is planning to integrate ChatGPT into iOS, is in talks to invest. Soon after, Bloomberg also reported that Apple is in talks but added that Nvidia “has discussed” joining the funding round as well. The round is reportedly being led by Thrive Capital and would value OpenAI at more than $100 billion. News Article: Click here https://preview.redd.it/ude6jguh4cmd1.png?width=828&format=png&auto=webp&s=3603cbca0dbb1be3e6d0efcf06c3a698428bbdd6 Editor’s Special The AI Bubble: Will It Burst, and What Comes After?: Click here Eric Schmidt Full Controversial Interview on AI Revolution (Former Google CEO): Click here AI isn’t gonna keep improving Click here General Intelligence: Define it, measure it, build it: Click here

GPT Weekly - 19the June Edition - OpenAI's function calling, Meta's free LLM, EU Regulation and more.

This is a recap covering the major news from last week. 🔥Top 3 news - OpenAI’s updates, Meta’s upcoming free LLM and EU Regulation 🗞️Interesting reads include PSA about protecting your keys, The GPT ouroboros, Reddit - OpenAI’s moat, and more.. 🧑‍🎓Learning includes a Step-by-step guide from a non-technical founder who launched his MVP, Chatbot for your Gdrive and more 🔥Top 3 AI news in the past week OpenAI: New Pricing, Models, & Functions OpenAI has been on a roll. Last week we saw the release of OpenAI best practice on using GPT. This week we saw some amazing updates. Three major buckets were: First, the price decreases for both embeddings and GPT-3.5 tokens. Second, new models for gpt-4 and gpt-3.5. A new longer context model for gpt-3.5. Third, a new function calling capability. Why is it important? Previously, the output from OpenAI was all text. So, calling an external API from GPT was quite difficult. You had to parse the text data and things were often incorrect. Langchain created the Agents and Tools feature to tackle this problem. It was still unreliable and prone to issues. Now you get native support to generate a fixed format output. You can use the output to generate functional calls and also pass functions which need to be called. For example, if your app has multiple API endpoints then you can use GPT to generate the API calls with parameters. You can also pass the endpoints as function calls to ensure the correct function is executed. This functionality can further be used to generate structured data (JSON) out of GPT. So, you can generate data from GPT and load it into your backend. What’s next? This functionality allows turning natural language responses into structured data. This can be used to create “intelligent” backends using LLMs. We might see implementations in no-code tools to allow more robust and natural-language tools for non-technical folks. The structured data process goes both ways. You can also feed structured data into GPT for better responses. This feature also has its share of issues. Function calling suffers from the same prompt injection issues. Malicious actors can pass malicious code in function or the responses. For example, creation of queries using functions might contain malicious code to delete data. Without proper user validation this code will be executed automatically and delete data. So, using LLM as the back-end layer needs proper security implementation. Meta's LLM: Commercial Use Ahead Llama has been a boon for the open source community. Many of the open source models rely on Llama. The issue is that Llama is research-only and cannot be used commercially. So, no one can use it to build any product. Meta is now working on the next version of the model. This model will be available for commercial use. This is in stark contrast to both OpenAI and Google. Both safe-guarde their models and make it available through API. Why is it important? Certain industries cannot use LLM APIs because of strict restrictions on data privacy. These companies would want to run their own instance of a foundational model. A commercially available foundational model is also going to help people who want to keep their “API call” costs next to 0. A commercially available free-for-all model will also help push the open source community further. Just like Llama. What’s next? Sam Altman has said OpenAI didn’t release GPT-3 as open-source because they didn’t think people would be able to run it. Now OpenAI is working on an open-source model. This is going to be weaker than GPT-4. Let the battle of LLMs begin. EU's Proposed Legislation and Its Impact on AI Usage The EU parliament voted to move ahead with the E.U. AI Act. This act aims to ensure consumer protection against the dangers of AI. Why is it important? OpenAI and Sam Altman want regulations for models. They have proposed a IAEA-type of agency to stop the proliferation of LLM models. As per OpenAI, all models should be regulated and monitored. The suggestion of a license based regulation has led to significant backlash. Many people have called it “regulatory capture” - with the aim of shutting down competing LLMs. Licensing based regulations might not really be effective. The EU is approaching regulation from a different angle. It doesn’t focus on how models are developed. Rather focuses on how AI will/can be used. They have broken down use cases into 4 categories - unacceptable (prohibited), high, medium and low risk. For example, Building a Pre-Crime software,on%20crimes%20not%20yet%20committed.) to predict crimes? Building a Social credit system? Unacceptable. Using tools to influence elections or recommendation algorithms? High (Highly regulated). Using generative AI tools to create text or images on news sites? Medium (Add label that the content is AI generated) AI providers also need to disclose their training source. To me this sounds like good legislation. What do you guys think? But, OpenAI has warned that EU regulations might force them to pull out completely. What’s next? The disclosure requirements might help various publishing companies. AI and media companies are in talks to pay for training data. Google has been leading the charge. Additionally, OpenAI and Deepmind will open their models for safety and research purposes to the UK government. 🗞️10 AI news highlights and interesting reads PSA: If you are using Repl to write code, you might want to check your OpenAI API keys. If you have left them embedded then people can pirate and steal the keys. LLMs rely on human annotation or human feedback to learn. And one way to generate human annotation is crowdsourcing. But what if the crowdsource human annotators use LLMs? Research shows 33-46% workers used LLMs. So, basically we go from Human -> AI -> Human -> AI. The AI ouroboros. Researchers also say generated data to train models might cause serious issue. All the talks about moats \- Reddit might be OpenAI’s \future\ moat. Given the amount of complaints about how Google search experience has deteriorated during the blackout, this might be true? Doctors are using ChatGPT but not to diagnose.Rather to be more empathetic. We discussed this just a month ago. And guess where the data for this study came from? Reddit AskDocs. Moat FTW?! Beatles to make a comeback…using Generative AI. SnapFusion - Text to Image diffusion on mobile phones. Large context lengths are important for better GPT experience. The secret sauce for 100k context length. There is a lot of bad AI research out there. Some border on snake oil. Most AI “research” should be double checked and challenged. A new research on huggingface said that GPT-4 can ace MIT curriculum. Now someone is replicating the results and say that GPT-4 can’t beat MIT. Are we seeing peak AI? Especially when people from Deepmind and Meta are involved? Mistral AI raised $113 million in seed round with no product. Some might say this funding is for the team and the team is really solid. The issue though is whether the valuation is justified when OpenAI and Google already have a head start. The AI Hype Wall of Shame. \- Collection of articles which mislead people about AI in various aspects. 🧑‍🎓3 Learning Resources Building and Launching a company using GPT-4 with prompts. (The author didn’t know how to code but created and launched the MVP in a month). Chatbot for your Gdrive - https://www.haihai.ai/gpt-gdrive/ Building ChatGPT plugin using Supabase - https://supabase.com/blog/building-chatgpt-plugins-template That’s it folks. Thank you for reading and have a great week ahead. If you are interested in a focused weekly recap delivered to your inbox on Mondays you can subscribe here. It is FREE!

Funny story about a misinformed startup founder...

So I do artificial intelligence/ML for clients on a by-project basis. I was contacted by an entrepreneur yesterday, and the pitch was too good not to share: The person was founding a software startup. Neither he nor the other cofounder are "tech people," and so they know nothing about software. He wanted me to come onboard as the "technical" founder, because I can do AI and they want to put AI into their software product. He did not know anything about AI, so he wanted me to tell him what it is and what it could do for their software. I got the vibe that he had just heard about this magical thing called AI on the news, and without any understanding of it, thought "that would be cool to have." They had no funding. I offered a suggestion that could make their product idea successful, and they rejected it because it would be too hard. I politely declined, and told them to contact me when they would like to hire me to build something for them.

How I Built a Simple 1-Person Startup With 100% AI

AI Made It Possible For All Of Us To Be An Entrepreneur Or Say Solopreneur Full Article https://i.redd.it/i4kzcaqvr18d1.gif AI Made It Possible For All Of Us To Be An Entrepreneur Or Say Solopreneur ● What's This Article About? • Creating a one-person startup called "Aniket Mart Shipping Solutions" using AI • Using AI to simplify product shipping • AI decides shipping methods based on product description purchased by customer • No humans needed in the shipping process ● Why Read This Article? • Learn how AI can help run a business with few people • See how AI can make business tasks easier • Get ideas for using AI in your own projects ● Let's Design: • The website uses Streamlit for easy shopping • A Flask server works with AI to sort products for shipping • The code is organized to make updates easy ● Project Structure: • UI Component: Main website code controls how the app runs Special code makes the website look nice Code to show products and let people buy them • Server Component: Sets up the main server Manages important information like API keys Stores product data Uses AI to decide shipping methods Handles requests from the website ● Closing Thoughts: • AI is changing how we can run businesses • In the future, AI will do even more in business • This project shows that one person with AI can do big things in business

Study Plan for Learning Data Science Over the Next 12 Months [D]

In this thread, I address a study plan for 2021. In case you're interested, I wrote a whole article about this topic: Study Plan for Learning Data Science Over the Next 12 Months Let me know your thoughts on this. &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/emg20nzhet661.png?width=1170&format=png&auto=webp&s=cf09e4dc5e82ba2fd7b57c706ba2873be57fe8de We are ending 2020 and it is time to make plans for next year, and one of the most important plans and questions we must ask is what do we want to study?, what do we want to enhance?, what changes do we want to make?, and what is the direction we are going to take (or continue) in our professional careers?. Many of you will be starting on the road to becoming a data scientist, in fact you may be evaluating it, since you have heard a lot about it, but you have some doubts, for example about the amount of job offers that may exist in this area, doubts about the technology itself, and about the path you should follow, considering the wide range of options to learn. I’m a believer that we should learn from various sources, from various mentors, and from various formats. By sources I mean the various virtual platforms and face-to-face options that exist to study. By mentors I mean that it is always a good idea to learn from different points of view and learning from different teachers/mentors, and by formats I mean the choices between books, videos, classes, and other formats where the information is contained. When we extract information from all these sources we reinforce the knowledge learned, but we always need a guide, and this post aims to give you some practical insights and strategies in this regard. To decide on sources, mentors and formats it is up to you to choose. It depends on your preferences and ease of learning: for example, some people are better at learning from books, while others prefer to learn from videos. Some prefer to study on platforms that are practical (following online code), and others prefer traditional platforms: like those at universities (Master’s Degree, PHDs or MOOCs). Others prefer to pay for quality content, while others prefer to look only for free material. That’s why I won’t give a specific recommendation in this post, but I’ll give you the whole picture: a study plan. To start you should consider the time you’ll spend studying and the depth of learning you want to achieve, because if you find yourself without a job you could be available full time to study, which is a huge advantage. On the other hand, if you are working, you’ll have less time and you’ll have to discipline yourself to be able to have the time available in the evenings, mornings or weekends. Ultimately, the important thing is to meet the goal of learning and perhaps dedicating your career to this exciting area! We will divide the year into quarters as follows First Quarter: Learning the Basics Second Quarter: Upgrading the Level: Intermediate Knowledge Third Quarter: A Real World Project — A Full-stack Project Fourth Quarter: Seeking Opportunities While Maintaining Practice First Quarter: Learning the Basics &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/u7t9bthket661.png?width=998&format=png&auto=webp&s=4ad29cb43618e7acf793259243aa5a60a8535f0a If you want to be more rigorous you can have start and end dates for this period of study of the bases. It could be something like: From January 1 to March 30, 2021 as deadline. During this period you will study the following: A programming language that you can apply to data science: Python or R. We recommend Python due to the simple fact that approximately 80% of data science job offers ask for knowledge in Python. That same percentage is maintained with respect to the real projects you will find implemented in production. And we add the fact that Python is multipurpose, so you won’t “waste” your time if at some point you decide to focus on web development, for example, or desktop development. This would be the first topic to study in the first months of the year. Familiarize yourself with statistics and mathematics. There is a big debate in the data science community about whether we need this foundation or not. I will write a post later on about this, but the reality is that you DO need it, but ONLY the basics (at least in the beginning). And I want to clarify this point before continuing. We could say that data science is divided in two big fields: Research on one side and putting Machine Learning algorithms into production on the other side. If you later decide to focus on Research then you are going to need mathematics and statistics in depth (very in depth). If you are going to go for the practical part, the libraries will help you deal with most of it, under the hood. It should be noted that most job offers are in the practical part. For both cases, and in this first stage you will only need the basics of: Statistics (with Python and NumPy) Descriptive statistics Inferential Statistics Hypothesis testing Probability Mathematics (with Python and NumPy) Linear Algebra (For example: SVD) Multivariate Calculus Calculus (For example: gradient descent) Note: We recommend that you study Python first before seeing statistics and mathematics, because the challenge is to implement these statistical and mathematical bases with Python. Don’t look for theoretical tutorials that show only slides or statistical and/or mathematical examples in Excel/Matlab/Octave/SAS and other different to Python or R, it gets very boring and impractical! You should choose a course, program or book that teaches these concepts in a practical way and using Python. Remember that Python is what we finally use, so you need to choose well. This advice is key so you don’t give up on this part, as it will be the most dense and difficult. If you have these basics in the first three months, you will be ready to make a leap in your learning for the next three months. Second Quarter: Upgrading the Level: Intermediate Knowledge &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/y1y55vynet661.png?width=669&format=png&auto=webp&s=bd3e12bb112943025c39a8975faf4d64514df275 If you want to be more rigorous you can have start and end dates for this period of study at the intermediate level. It could be something like: From April 1 to June 30, 2021 as deadline. Now that you have a good foundation in programming, statistics and mathematics, it is time to move forward and learn about the great advantages that Python has for applying data analysis. For this stage you will be focused on: Data science Python stack Python has the following libraries that you should study, know and practice at this stage Pandas: for working with tabular data and make in-depth analysis Matplotlib and Seaborn: for data visualization Pandas is the in-facto library for data analysis, it is one of the most important (if not the most important) and powerful tools you should know and master during your career as a data scientist. Pandas will make it much easier for you to manipulate, cleanse and organize your data. Feature Engineering Many times people don’t go deep into Feature Engineering, but if you want to have Machine Learning models that make good predictions and improve your scores, spending some time on this subject is invaluable! Feature engineering is the process of using domain knowledge to extract features from raw data using data mining techniques. These features can be used to improve the performance of machine learning algorithms. Feature engineering can be considered as applied machine learning itself. To achieve the goal of good feature engineering you must know the different techniques that exist, so it is a good idea to at least study the main ones. Basic Models of Machine Learning At the end of this stage you will start with the study of Machine Learning. This is perhaps the most awaited moment! This is where you start to learn about the different algorithms you can use, which particular problems you can solve and how you can apply them in real life. The Python library we recommend you to start experimenting with ML is: scikit-learn. However it is a good idea that you can find tutorials where they explain the implementation of the algorithms (at least the simplest ones) from scratch with Python, since the library could be a “Black Box” and you might not understand what is happening under the hood. If you learn how to implement them with Python, you can have a more solid foundation. If you implement the algorithms with Python (without a library), you will put into practice everything seen in the statistics, mathematics and Pandas part. These are some recommendations of the algorithms that you should at least know in this initial stage Supervised learning Simple Linear Regression Multiple Linear Regression K-nearest neighbors (KNN) Logistic Regression Decision Trees Random Forest Unsupervised Learning K-Means PCA Bonus: if you have the time and you are within the time ranges, you can study these others Gradient Boosting Algorithms GBM XGBoost LightGBM CatBoost Note: do not spend more than the 3 months stipulated for this stage. Because you will be falling behind and not complying with the study plan. We all have shortcomings at this stage, it is normal, go ahead and then you can resume some concepts that did not understand in detail. The important thing is to have the basic knowledge and move forward! If at least you succeed to study the mentioned algorithms of supervised and unsupervised learning, you will have a very clear idea of what you will be able to do in the future. So don’t worry about covering everything, remember that it is a process, and ideally you should have some clearly established times so that you don’t get frustrated and feel you are advancing. So far, here comes your “theoretical” study of the basics of data science. Now we’ll continue with the practical part! Third Quarter: A Real World Project — A Full-stack Project &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/vrn783vqet661.png?width=678&format=png&auto=webp&s=664061b3d33b34979b74b10b9f8a3d0f7b8b99ee If you want to be more rigorous you can have start and end dates for this period of study at the intermediate level. It could be something like: From July 1 to September 30, 2021 as deadline. Now that you have a good foundation in programming, statistics, mathematics, data analysis and machine learning algorithms, it is time to move forward and put into practice all this knowledge. Many of these suggestions may sound out of the box, but believe me they will make a big difference in your career as a data scientist. The first thing is to create your web presence: Create a Github (or GitLab) account, and learn Git*. Being able to manage different versions of your code is important, you should have version control over them, not to mention that having an active Github account is very valuable in demonstrating your true skills. On Github, you can also set up your Jupyter Notebooks and make them public, so you can show off your skills as well. This is mine for example: https://github.com/danielmoralesp Learn the basics of web programming*. The advantage is that you already have Python as a skill, so you can learn Flask to create a simple web page. Or you can use a template engine like Github Pages, Ghost or Wordpress itself and create your online portfolio. Buy a domain with your name*. Something like myname.com, myname.co, myname.dev, etc. This is invaluable so you can have your CV online and update it with your projects. There you can make a big difference, showing your projects, your Jupyter Notebooks and showing that you have the practical skills to execute projects in this area. There are many front-end templates for you to purchase for free or for payment, and give it a more personalized and pleasant look. Don’t use free sub-domains of Wordpress, Github or Wix, it looks very unprofessional, make your own. Here is mine for example: https://www.danielmorales.dev/ Choose a project you are passionate about and create a Machine Learning model around it. The final goal of this third quarter is to create ONE project, that you are passionate about, and that is UNIQUE among others. It turns out that there are many typical projects in the community, such as predicting the Titanic Survivors, or predicting the price of Houses in Boston. Those kinds of projects are good for learning, but not for showing off as your UNIQUE projects. If you are passionate about sports, try predicting the soccer results of your local league. If you are passionate about finance, try predicting your country’s stock market prices. If you are passionate about marketing, try to find someone who has an e-commerce and implement a product recommendation algorithm and upload it to production. If you are passionate about business: make a predictor of the best business ideas for 2021 :) As you can see, you are limited by your passions and your imagination. In fact, those are the two keys for you to do this project: Passion and Imagination. However don’t expect to make money from it, you are in a learning stage, you need that algorithm to be deployed in production, make an API in Flask with it, and explain in your website how you did it and how people can access it. This is the moment to shine, and at the same time it’s the moment of the greatest learning. You will most likely face obstacles, if your algorithm gives 60% of Accuracy after a huge optimization effort, it doesn’t matter, finish the whole process, deploy it to production, try to get a friend or family member to use it, and that will be the goal achieved for this stage: Make a Full-stack Machine Learning project. By full-stack I mean that you did all the following steps: You got the data from somewhere (scrapping, open data or API) You did a data analysis You cleaned and transformed the data You created Machine Learning Models You deployed the best model to production for other people to use. This does not mean that this whole process is what you will always do in your daily job, but it does mean that you will know every part of the pipeline that is needed for a data science project for a company. You will have a unique perspective! Fourth Quarter: Seeking Opportunities While Maintaining Practice &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/qd0osystet661.png?width=1056&format=png&auto=webp&s=2da456b15985b2793041256f5e45bca99a23b51a If you want to be more rigorous you can have start and end dates for this period of study at the final level. It could be something like: From October 1 to December 31, 2021 as deadline. Now you have theoretical and practical knowledge. You have implemented a model in production. The next step depends on you and your personality. Let’s say you are an entrepreneur, and you have the vision to create something new from something you discovered or saw an opportunity to do business with this discipline, so it’s time to start planning how to do it. If that’s the case, obviously this post won’t cover that process, but you should know what the steps might be (or start figuring them out). But if you are one of those who want to get a job as a data scientist, here is my advice. Getting a job as a data scientist “You’re not going to get a job as fast as you think, if you keep thinking the same way”.Author It turns out that all people who start out as data scientists imagine themselves working for the big companies in their country or region. Or even remote. It turns out that if you aspire to work for a large company like data scientist you will be frustrated by the years of experience they ask for (3 or more years) and the skills they request. Large companies don’t hire Juniors (or very few do), precisely because they are already large companies. They have the financial muscle to demand experience and skills and can pay a commensurate salary (although this is not always the case). The point is that if you focus there you’re going to get frustrated! Here we must return to the following advise: “You need creativity to get a job in data science”. Like everything else in life we have to start at different steps, in this case, from the beginning. Here are the scenarios If you are working in a company and in a non-engineering role you must demonstrate your new skills to the company you are working for*. If you are working in the customer service area, you should apply it to your work, and do for example, detailed analysis of your calls, conversion rates, store data and make predictions about it! If you can have data from your colleagues, you could try to predict their sales! This may sound funny, but it’s about how creatively you can apply data science to your current work and how to show your bosses how valuable it is and EVANGELIZE them about the benefits of implementation. You’ll be noticed and they could certainly create a new data related department or job. And you already have the knowledge and experience. The key word here is Evangelize. Many companies and entrepreneurs are just beginning to see the power of this discipline, and it is your task to nurture that reality. If you are working in an area related to engineering, but that is not data science*. Here the same applies as the previous example, but you have some advantages, and that is that you could access the company’s data, and you could use it for the benefit of the company, making analyses and/or predictions about it, and again EVANGELIZING your bosses your new skills and the benefits of data science. If you are unemployed (or do not want, or do not feel comfortable following the two examples above)*, you can start looking outside, and what I recommend is that you look for technology companies and / or startups where they are just forming the first teams and are paying some salary, or even have options shares of the company. Obviously here the salaries will not be exorbitant, and the working hours could be longer, but remember that you are in the learning and practice stage (just in the first step), so you can not demand too much, you must land your expectations and fit that reality, and stop pretending to be paid $ 10,000 a month at this stage. But, depending of your country $1.000 USD could be something very interesting to start this new career. Remember, you are a Junior at this stage. The conclusion is: don’t waste your time looking at and/or applying to offers from big companies, because you will get frustrated. Be creative, and look for opportunities in smaller or newly created companies. Learning never stops While you are in that process of looking for a job or an opportunity, which could take half of your time (50% looking for opportunities, 50% staying in practice), you have to keep learning, you should advance to concepts such as Deep Learning, Data Engineer or other topics that you feel were left loose from the past stages or focus on the topics that you are passionate about within this group of disciplines in data science. At the same time you can choose a second project, and spend some time running it from end-to-end, and thus increase your portfolio and your experience. If this is the case, try to find a completely different project: if the first one was done with Machine Learning, let this second one be done with Deep learning. If the first one was deployed to a web page, that this second one is deployed to a mobile platform. Remember, creativity is the key! Conclusion We are at an ideal time to plan for 2021, and if this is the path you want to take, start looking for the platforms and media you want to study on. Get to work and don’t miss this opportunity to become a data scientist in 2021! Note: we are building a private community in Slack of data scientist, if you want to join us write to the email: support@datasource.ai I hope you enjoyed this reading! you can follow me on twitter or linkedin Thank you for reading!

AI for Entrepreneurs Podcast- Adrian Rosebrock

We have a new episode of our podcast series AI for Entrepreneurs! Today, we will talk to Adrian Rosebrock, a successful entrepreneur and the author of a popular computer vision and machine learning blog PyImageSearch.  Adrian shares his thoughts on how to build an audience, how to come up with product ideas, and how to manage time for maximum productivity. In addition, he gives advice to people who want to get started in AI. His story is one of tremendous grit, extreme discipline, and relentless execution and you can watch it at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5KWHMOb1H8.

Here is an interesting article on the potential future risks of AI to humanity.

"There is a tremendous amount of enthusiasm in the media surrounding the topic of AI, and for good reason.  This exciting new technology has the potential to automate almost every boring, repetitive task in our lives.  It also offers exciting new opportunities to tap into new businesses, solve difficult problems with ease, and even offer new outlets for creative expression. What often does not get equal play in these discussions are the potential dangers of AI to humanity associated with this new technology.  Every new technology comes with risks that must be addressed, and it often takes a meltdown before safety concerns are taken seriously.  Often, those raising concerns are labeled as “chicken little” or a Johnny Raincloud spreading fud and dismissed or ignored.  This is common when the potential of the opportunities is so exciting. As I always say, emotion clouds the mind, and when optimism and enthusiasm run high, if we are honest, we often find a way to bring ourselves to believe what we want to believe.  All errors have consequences, for example, the risks associated with falling for a get-rich-quick scam may have consequences for an individual. However, consequences increase with the number of people that a mistake affects. With more powerful technology comes more power for good, but also a greater potential for great harm. In this article, I will attempt to balance out some of the enthusiasm and excitement with a healthy amount of caution.  I hope that the public will not just be swept away by the excitement of another new technology.  Rather, I hope that the public will demand responsibility, accountability, and regulation of this technology, before any AI version of Chornobyl, or worse, consigning the planet to a hellish dystopian hellscape reminiscent of post-apocalyptic sci-fi movies." https://ai-solutions.pro/dangers-and-risks-of-ai-to-humanity/

AI Noob where to start?

Hello, TL;DR: Where do I get started with AI from an ICT engineer POV? I find the subject complex and vague, and I have no idea where to start. A little bit about myself, I am a telecoms engineer with 7 years of experience in networking, servers (virtualisation and containers), Audio-visual and industrial/home automations and CAD, but I am more specialised in the first 4 layers of the OSI model with a little experience in Python, YAML and Ansible (nowhere near a software engineer, but decent enough to make simple automations work if needed). I am starting to have clients that ask questions about AI and its use for their business, and I am not confident in answering them. Where should I start? My only knowledge about AI was gathered from a course I have done “AI Infrastructure and Operations Fundamentals” from Nvidia and the fact that Lamma is an open-source model from Meta (which I absolutely adore the idea of local open-source AI). I am do not think I want to be an AI developer and pivot, but more like how AI can enhance my current skill set. I want to understand what the technical requirements are, technical terminology, how the different models can be used for different purposes (text, images, etc.). From a HW perspective, I am long overdue for a workstation upgrade (currently i7 9^(th) Gen, RTX 2060 Super 8Gb VRAM, 16Gb DDR4 RAM) I use my workstation as a homelab and for CAD and gaming. My hope is that by the time intel 15^(th) gen and Nvidia 5000 will be released, I will have some kind of idea of what I want to do with it from an AI perspective. I have seen a lot of knowledgeable people in this subreddit and wanted to know what it was their journey and how did they get started? What do you recommend (courses, books, HW/SW, etc.)?

Seeking Guidance to Transition from SRE to Quant Developer/HFT

Hey Reddit! Let me introduce myself: I’m a 2024 B.Tech (IT) graduate from a state-level college in India. Currently, I’m working as an SRE (Site Reliability Engineer) at one of the world’s largest custodian banks (not naming the company). I’ve been with the organization for about a year now, combining my internship and full-time role. During this time, I’ve developed a strong foundation in AI/ML and have primarily been working on projects to automate BAU (Business-As-Usual) activities using these technologies. Outside of work, I have a deep interest in trading and stock markets—something that runs in the family, as my father has been trading for over 40 years. My ultimate goal is to transition into the field of quantitative development or high-frequency trading (HFT) and work for top-tier firms like HRT, Optiver, or Tower Research. To make this dream a reality, I’ve started preparing in the following ways: Learning the basics of stock markets and financial instruments. Studying statistics and experimenting with different algorithms to analyze stocks (mainly on a fundamental level for now). Getting back to practicing DSA (Data Structures and Algorithms). I’ll admit I’m rusty here since I haven’t been consistent with it for a while. I’m aware that transitioning from SRE to Quant Developer/HFT is ambitious and might seem like a pipe dream, but it’s a challenge I’m willing to take on. I’d love to hear from people in the quant field or those who’ve made similar career transitions. What should I focus on? Any recommended resources, books, or courses? Are there any specific skill sets or certifications that could make me stand out? Any guidance, advice, or encouragement would mean a lot. Thank you!

I'm Building an "AiExecutiveSuperAgent_Systems_Interface" between humanity and the Ai world, as well as each other... Let's Talk?

Ok... So look... This one is pretty crazy... I'm building an Ai Interface that knows me better than I know myself - Check, lots of people have this, either in reality with employees and family members, or with ai intelligence. But it doesn't just know Me... It knows how to talk with Me. It understands my language, because I've trained it to. I've also trained it to translate that to all my clients and HumanAgents, soon to become RobotAgents... The RESULT: I can literally just spend 1-18 hours talking to it, and things get DONE. Most of that time, I just say EXECUTE, or ENGAGE, or DRAFT, or DISPATCH. I feel like a secret agent communicating in codes with his agency 😂 Not great for the paranoiac in me, but it's easy to get that part under control, ya'll. It's like having a team of 10,000 people, all available 24/7, all perfectly synchronised to each other's communication styles, preferences and ultimately: WHAT DO YOU NEED ME TO DO. At the end of the it all, having run my single COMMAND through a thousand of those people, a Document is prepared that outlines the next 3 stages of the plan, along with instructions to the whole team for how to ENACT it. Sounds rather grand and wonderful... Even when I simply use it to help me come up with a filing system for my creative work... \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Here's my current VISION, why I'm doing this AND why I'm doing it publicly despite it being top secret. VISION To create an army of User-Owned and Operated "AiSuperAgencies" which gather intelligence on the user, securely file and analyse it, and then construct a sub-army of agents and tools that work together to produce the desired output, for any Function in the Personal and Professional Lives of EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE, in 3-5 Years. To start, I'm building it for me and the 5-10 cleaners who've made it to Level 1 in my access system. They were sick of toxic employers, tyrannical agencies and greedy customers. They gathered around us (many came in, many went out, few stayed, took about a year for our core team of 3 Level 2 Cleaners. My goal has always been to never employ anyone. Just me, my Partner and the Cleaners. All Shared Owners in the system for delivering the right cleaner to the right house in our town, at the right time and without any dramas or arguments... I have a personal talent for resolving disputes, which has made working for and buying from my business a mostly enjoyable and upbeat experience, with a touch of mystery and a feeling that you're part of something big! It is a business that ran on Me. I put in my time, every day, building automated tool after automated tool. Hiring a contractor to do a job, scratching my head when it didn't add enough value to pay for itself, then just doing it myself again. I wanted to solve that problem. I'm trusting that the few who hear about it who actually see the potential, will just come join us, no dramas, just cool people partnering up! And those that don't, won't. No one could steal it, because it's Mine, and I'll just change the keys anyway loser! Enjoy digging through my past, you lunatic! I'm out here living Now. Anyways... It's lonely around here. I have a cleaning business that I run from my laptop, which means I can live anywhere, but I still had this big problem of time... NOT ENOUGH Oh Wait. It's Here.

How I landed an internship in AI

For motivational purposes only! I see a lot of posts on here from people without “traditional” machine learning, data science, etc.. backgrounds asking how they can break into the field, so I wanted to share my experience. EDIT Learning Resources and Side Project Ideas * My background: I graduated from a decent undergraduate school with a degree in Political Science several years ago. Following school I worked in both a client services role at a market research company and an account management role at a pretty notable fintech start-up. Both of these roles exposed me to ML, AI and more sophisticated software concepts in general, and I didn’t really care for the sales side of things, so I decided to make an attempt at switching careers into something more technical. While working full time I began taking night classes at a local community college, starting with pre calculus all the way up to Calc 2 and eventually more advanced classes like linear algebra and applied probability. I also took some programming courses including DSA. I took these classes for about two years while working, and on the side had been working through various ML books and videos on YouTube. What worked the best for me was Hands-on Machine Learning with Scikit Learn, Keara’s and Tensorflow. I eventually had enough credits where I was able to begin applying to MS in Data Science programs and was fortunate enough to get accepted into one and also get a position in their Robotics Lab doing Computer Vision work. When it came time to apply for internships, it was a BLOODBATH. I must have applied to over 100 roles with my only responses being video interviews and OA’s. Finally I got an interview for an AI Model Validation internship with a large insurance company and after completing the interviews was told I performed well but they were still interviewing several candidates. I ended up getting the offer and accepting the role where I’ll be working on a Computer Vision model and some LLM related tasks this summer and could not be more fortunate / excited. A couple things stood out to them during the interview process. 1, the fact that I was working and taking night classes with the intent to break into the field. It showed a genuine passion as opposed to someone who watched a YouTube video and claims they are now an expert. 2, side projects. I not only had several projects, but I had some that were relevant to the work I’d be doing this summer from the computer vision standpoint. 3, business sense. I emphasized during my interviews how working in a business role prior to beginning my masters would give me a leg up as intern because I would be able to apply the work of a data scientist to solving actual business challenges. For those of you trying to break into the field, keep pushing, keep building, and focus on what makes you unique and able to help a company! Please feel free to contact me if you would like any tips I can share, examples of projects, or anything that would be helpful to your journey.

I'm Building an "AiExecutiveSuperAgent_Systems_Interface" between humanity and the Ai world, as well as each other... Let's Talk?

Ok... So look... This one is pretty crazy... I'm building an Ai Interface that knows me better than I know myself - Check, lots of people have this, either in reality with employees and family members, or with ai intelligence. But it doesn't just know Me... It knows how to talk with Me. It understands my language, because I've trained it to. I've also trained it to translate that to all my clients and HumanAgents, soon to become RobotAgents... The RESULT: I can literally just spend 1-18 hours talking to it, and things get DONE. Most of that time, I just say EXECUTE, or ENGAGE, or DRAFT, or DISPATCH. I feel like a secret agent communicating in codes with his agency 😂 Not great for the paranoiac in me, but it's easy to get that part under control, ya'll. It's like having a team of 10,000 people, all available 24/7, all perfectly synchronised to each other's communication styles, preferences and ultimately: WHAT DO YOU NEED ME TO DO. At the end of the it all, having run my single COMMAND through a thousand of those people, a Document is prepared that outlines the next 3 stages of the plan, along with instructions to the whole team for how to ENACT it. Sounds rather grand and wonderful... Even when I simply use it to help me come up with a filing system for my creative work... \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Here's my current VISION, why I'm doing this AND why I'm doing it publicly despite it being top secret. VISION To create an army of User-Owned and Operated "AiSuperAgencies" which gather intelligence on the user, securely file and analyse it, and then construct a sub-army of agents and tools that work together to produce the desired output, for any Function in the Personal and Professional Lives of EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE, in 3-5 Years. To start, I'm building it for me and the 5-10 cleaners who've made it to Level 1 in my access system. They were sick of toxic employers, tyrannical agencies and greedy customers. They gathered around us (many came in, many went out, few stayed, took about a year for our core team of 3 Level 2 Cleaners. My goal has always been to never employ anyone. Just me, my Partner and the Cleaners. All Shared Owners in the system for delivering the right cleaner to the right house in our town, at the right time and without any dramas or arguments... I have a personal talent for resolving disputes, which has made working for and buying from my business a mostly enjoyable and upbeat experience, with a touch of mystery and a feeling that you're part of something big! It is a business that ran on Me. I put in my time, every day, building automated tool after automated tool. Hiring a contractor to do a job, scratching my head when it didn't add enough value to pay for itself, then just doing it myself again. I wanted to solve that problem. I'm trusting that the few who hear about it who actually see the potential, will just come join us, no dramas, just cool people partnering up! And those that don't, won't. No one could steal it, because it's Mine, and I'll just change the keys anyway loser! Enjoy digging through my past, you lunatic! I'm out here living Now. Anyways... It's lonely around here. I have a cleaning business that I run from my laptop, which means I can live anywhere, but I still had this big problem of time... NOT ENOUGH Oh Wait. It's Here.

Why no code tools for building ai models failed?

Business folks have tasks where neural networks could help but they don’t know Python or deep learning, right? Meanwhile ML engineers know AI models but often don’t have an actual problem to solve. So the first group hires the second. Same thing happened with websites a while ago—at first you had to code everything then came drag-and-drop editors, no-code tools, and now even this "vibe coding" stuff. It’s not the most flexible or maintainable, but it works for a lot of people who just need to get something done without spending months learning to code. So why isn’t the same thing happening with building AI models? Like if I run a business I could save a ton of money by automating manual tasks with models trained on my own data. But I have zero clue what Jupyter Notebook or Keras are, and honestly, I don’t want to know. So I have to hire an ML engineer just to get it done because there’s no viable no-code solution for this.

Building a No-Code AI Customer Service Tool While Working 9-5 | All real - No BS

I want to share my journey of building Chaterimo, my first revenue-generating side project that I've been working on for the past 1.5 years alongside my day job. What started as a solution to make AI chatbots more accessible has grown to over 300 signups, 30 paying customers, and 50,000+ customer queries handled. The Problem I Wanted to Solve: It started with my father's business struggling with customer service - hiring staff was expensive and they would eventually leave, creating a constant cycle of training new people. I decided to help by building a livechat chatbot powered by AI to handle customer queries. The first version was basic (running on ChatGPT-3 with 4k tokens), but it worked! Seeing its success at my father's business, I realized this could help many other businesses too. As I kept improving it and adding features, I expanded to focus on e-commerce stores facing similar challenges. What Makes Chaterimo Different: True no-code setup: Install and run in seconds Choice of AI Models: ChatGPT by default, with options for Claude and the latest Gemini Flexible API Integration: Bring your own API keys for cheaper, unlimited messaging Smart Context Understanding: Can search Google or scan the current webpage to provide relevant answers Lead Generation: Capture and manage potential customer information Rich Integrations: Works with Shopify, Facebook Messenger, and Make for automation Customizable Bot Personality: Edit your chatbot's role and behavior through system prompts The Journey: This is my first side project that's actually generating revenue ($500+ MRR), unlike my previous "just for fun" projects. The past 1.5 years have been a learning experience, balancing development with a full-time job. What started as a simple idea has evolved based on real user feedback and needs. Current Metrics: 300+ total signups 30 paying customers 50,000+ customer queries successfully handled by AI $500+ monthly recurring revenue All while maintaining a 9-5 job Some Things I've Learned: Focus on making things simpler, not adding more features Listen to users - they'll tell you what they really need Flexibility matters - letting users use their own API keys was a game-changer Building something you believe in makes all the difference I'm still actively improving Chaterimo based on feedback. If you're running a website or e-commerce store and want to try it out, I'd love to hear your thoughts. What's Next: I'm focused on making the onboarding even smoother and adding more customization options while keeping the core simplicity that makes Chaterimo work. Would love to hear your thoughts or answer any questions! Has anyone else built successful side projects while working full-time? What were your biggest learnings?

Why I would encourage everyone to create a side project

Many people are afraid to start working on their projects, fearing they will be unsuccessful and waste a lot of time without gaining anything in return. However, this is the biggest trap of all: you actually gain much more than just money. Even if you don't become super successful and make millions of dollars, what is it really about? When you work on your project, you immerse yourself in development across all aspects. For example, when I used to work, I focused solely on my direct responsibilities. But when you create your project, you cannot limit yourself to a narrow range of tasks; you need to handle everything. If it's a website or an app, you must manage the frontend, backend, and deployment. If it's an app, you need to upload it to stores and understand legal nuances like terms of use and privacy policies. This is just one part of it. Here, you already realize the wealth of knowledge you can gain. Additionally, you are likely to enhance your competence in the technical aspects of your work. Now, let's move to part two—part one is about creating, and part two is about selling. Selling is essentially a separate art and often more complex than development. Thus, you will probably have to immerse yourself in a completely new area and gain experience in it. On top of that, there's another nice bonus: introductions. If you develop a product publicly, you will receive feedback, and perhaps someone will appreciate your project. That person may reach out to you, leading to new connections and acquaintances—often very valuable ones. So even if you don't earn a penny from your project, you will have gained tremendous experience. Of course, if your project consists merely of jumping into AI, writing something, and publishing it immediately without thoughtful consideration, it's unlikely you'll gain any benefit. Therefore, every time I complete a project, I never focus on making millions of dollars. Instead, I first thank the universe for the opportunities I had to create this project, gain experience, and meet wonderful people. Good luck!

How I got 1000 users on day one.

This might sound like a small number, depending on who you ask, but you know it’s a start. I’ll just share my learnings so far. Introduction: The product is simple: you type what you want to build, like, let's say, a SaaS idea, and it generates the code using a framework of your choice (like NextJS). Currently, it only generates front-end code. The marketing strategy was mainly focused on social media. My social media stats are as follows: I have a whopping 14 followers on Twitter, and 10 of them are bot accounts, and on LinkedIn, it’s about 400 or so. Launching on LinkedIn: LinkedIn is unique in two different ways: The algorithm is friendly to the little guy. Your network (the people) aren’t always friendly to the little guy. Let me elaborate. This is something I learned today, actually. When I posted for the first time and asked about three of my friends to repost it, within the first hour there were about 200 views, and the click-through rate was around 40%. This was really good, given that it was in the morning. I don’t know the exact factors, but I did have a video in my post, and those three reposts probably amplified it. However, people don’t seem to like or comment on it as much as you would think. Most of my connections are CS students because I am a recent grad, so it seems like most people can relate to this product, but none of them would even put a comment or a like. At the same time, I see people liking posts from big brands like OpenAI, Microsoft, etc. I am really confused, to be honest. However, throughout the day, the view count was going up, and people were coming. Launching on Twitter: Twitter didn’t really work for me at all. I think you need a decent audience. But there are tweets like “What startup are you working on?” type questions, and from that, I find you get a couple of views on your profile. Even though Twitter didn’t really help with the views, one guy tweeted, “Keep posting on Twitter and one day this might become something like Notion.” That really made my day, to be honest. Launching on Discord: This worked really well, to be honest, especially given that I was in a lot of Discord servers where there are software devs. If you use the right language that resonates with them, it’s a home run. Not much to say, but don’t use marketing lingo; people don’t like it there. Instagram and TikTok didn’t really work. Mainly, I think my video didn’t really resonate much. Finally, Facebook Launch: The Facebook reels didn’t really do the trick. Then I posted in a bunch of groups, and still, it didn’t really do anything. But then I sent cold DMs on Facebook, and that had a pretty high open rate because I sent them to people who I saw commented on posts related to what my product was solving. Obviously, after a while, Facebook blocks the ability to send DMs. That’s all for now. Thanks I’ll post my promo video in the comment section just so that you know the video and why it might have resonated with some platforms. Also this is the first time I made a video and I’m actually proud of making that more than the product itself. To summarize, for this idea LinkedIn worked really well, because of the algorithm not the ppl commenting and liking which is what I thought should be the way. Followed by Discord groups and Facebook DMs. The video I made seemed to resonate really well with the LinkedIn audience (the engagement was around 60%) despite falling in TikTok and other video sharing platforms.

I am building a free app to fight propaganda online. Need your help

So long story short I was recently bombarded with an insane amounts of right-wing propaganda online and Russian bots so I decided I can somehow simplify the validation of the facts that are posted by people online. I have made a research of tools that are currently available for that and I've found that ChatGpt is quite biased with some topics and it lacks data about latest issues even when search mode is enabled. At least it takes some time for it to update it's memory or something Then I've checked a Google Fact Check tools which were even worse. Bad UI... I had no idea how it validates things because usually proof links that Google provides are quite random. So I decided to build a tool that simplifies the research. The idea was simple - you have a claim - you paste it in app and it goes on web collects articles on topic then processes them with ai and makes a decision based on those articles. The app is running right now. It is completely free and no ads. Also it generates a small article where it tells about how it made a conclusion. Also I need your help - How can I make this app better? Also feel free to test your claims so that I can have more real data to tune this app on. I believe that this is something that is necessary for all of us especially in those crazy times! Here is the link - truthorfake.com https://preview.redd.it/vp5fbzpyfkne1.png?width=854&format=png&auto=webp&s=84df7913382634614814866c8df743d8378d28dd

What would be your strategy to go from $0 to $10K/month in 2025?

Hello guys, I hope we can brainstorm some strategies for my case and perhaps people reading this can learn a thing or two also. So I currently have a full time job (9-6) and I'm working on two side projects, one is a weight loss tracker and analysis app, the other is an AI website builder. I know, not groundbreaking technologies (is there anything left to be invented anymore?). So my goal is not to build this huge corporation and take over the world, no. My goal for 2025 is to launch these two products and to grow them to $10K/month, which would allow me to quit my job and focus full time on my projects. I was wondering what would be your strategy and launch timeline to achieve that? What can I expect in terms of effort and resources for marketing and adoption? What key metrics are important to monitor after launch?

How me and my team made 15+ apps and not made a single sale in 2023

Hey, my name is Michael, I am in Auckland NZ. This year was the official beginning of my adult life. I graduated from university and started a full-time job. I’ve also really dug into indiehacking/bootstrapping and started 15 projects (and it will be at least 17 before the year ends). I think I’ve learned a lot but I consciously repeated mistakes. Upto (Nov) Discord Statuses + Your Location + Facebook Poke https://preview.redd.it/4nqt7tp2tf5c1.png?width=572&format=png&auto=webp&s=b0223484bc54b45b5c65e0b1afd0dc52f9c02ad1 This was the end of uni, I often messaged (and got messaged) requests of status and location to (and from my) friends. I thought, what if we make a social app that’s super basic and all it does is show you where your friends are? To differentiate from snap maps and others we wanted something with more privacy where you select the location. However, never finished the codebase or launched it. This is because I slowly started to realize that B2C (especially social networks) are way too hard to make into an actual business and the story with Fistbump would repeat itself. However, this decision not to launch it almost launched a curse on our team. From that point, we permitted ourselves to abandon projects even before launching. Lessons: Don’t do social networks if your goal is 10k MRR ASAP. If you build something to 90% competition ship it or you will think it’s okay to abandon projects Insight Bites (Nov) Youtube Summarizer Extension &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/h6drqej4tf5c1.jpg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0f211456c390ac06f4fcb54aa51f9d50b0826658 Right after Upto, we started ideating and conveniently the biggest revolution in the recent history of tech was released → GPT. We instantly began ideating. The first problem we chose to use AI for is to summarize YouTube videos. Comical. Nevertheless, I am convinced we have had the best UX because you could right-click on a video to get a slideshow of insights instead of how everyone else did it. We dropped it because there was too much competition and unit economics didn’t work out (and it was a B2C). PodPigeon (Dec) Podcast → Tweet Threads https://preview.redd.it/0ukge245tf5c1.png?width=2498&format=png&auto=webp&s=23303e1cab330578a3d25cd688fa67aa3b97fb60 Then we thought, to make unit economics work we need to make this worthwhile for podcasters. This is when I got into Twitter and started seeing people summarize podcasts. Then I thought, what if we make something that converts a podcast into tweets? This was probably one of the most important projects because it connected me with Jason and Jonaed, both of whom I regularly stay in contact with and are my go-to experts on ideas related to content creation. Jonaed was even willing to buy Podpigeon and was using it on his own time. However, the unit economics still didn’t work out (and we got excited about other things). Furthermore, we got scared of the competition because I found 1 - 2 other people who did similar things poorly. This was probably the biggest mistake we’ve made. Very similar projects made 10k MRR and more, launching later than we did. We didn’t have a coherent product vision, we didn’t understand the customer well enough, and we had a bad outlook on competition and a myriad of other things. Lessons: I already made another post about the importance of outlook on competition. Do not quit just because there are competitors or just because you can’t be 10x better. Indiehackers and Bootstrappers (or even startups) need to differentiate in the market, which can be via product (UX/UI), distribution, or both. Asking Ace Intro.co + Crowdsharing &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/0hu2tt16tf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3d397568ef2331e78198d64fafc1a701a3e75999 As I got into Twitter, I wanted to chat with some people I saw there. However, they were really expensive. I thought, what if we made some kind of crowdfunding service for other entrepreneurs to get a private lecture from their idols? It seemed to make a lot of sense on paper. It was solving a problem (validated via the fact that Intro.co is a thing and making things cheaper and accessible is a solid ground to stand on), we understood the market (or so we thought), and it could monetize relatively quickly. However, after 1-2 posts on Reddit and Indiehackers, we quickly learned three things. Firstly, no one cares. Secondly, even if they do, they think they can get the same information for free online. Thirdly, the reasons before are bad because for the first point → we barely talked to people, and for the second people → we barely talked to the wrong people. However, at least we didn’t code anything this time and tried to validate via a landing page. Lessons Don’t give up after 1 Redditor says “I don’t need this” Don’t be scared to choose successful people as your audience. Clarito Journaling with AI analyzer https://preview.redd.it/8ria2wq6tf5c1.jpg?width=1108&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=586ec28ae75003d9f71b4af2520b748d53dd2854 Clarito is a classic problem all amateur entrepreneurs have. It’s where you lie to yourself that you have a real problem and therefore is validated but when your team asks you how much you would pay you say I guess you will pay, maybe, like 5 bucks a month…? Turns out, you’d have to pay me to use our own product lol. We sent it off to a few friends and posted on some forums, but never really got anything tangible and decided to move away. Honestly, a lot of it is us in our own heads. We say the market is too saturated, it’ll be hard to monetize, it’s B2C, etc. Lessons: You use the Mom Test on other people. You have to do it yourself as well. However, recognizing that the Mom Test requires a lot of creativity in its investigation because knowing what questions to ask can determine the outcome of the validation. I asked myself “Do I journal” but I didn’t ask myself “How often do I want GPT to chyme in on my reflections”. Which was practically never. That being said I think with the right audience and distribution, this product can work. I just don’t know (let alone care) about the audience that much (and I thought I was one of them)/ Horns & Claw Scrapes financial news texts you whether you should buy/sell the stock (news sentiment analysis) &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/gvfxdgc7tf5c1.jpg?width=1287&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=63977bbc33fe74147b1f72913cefee4a9ebec9c2 This one we didn’t even bother launching. Probably something internal in the team and also seemed too good to be true (because if this works, doesn’t that just make us ultra-rich fast?). I saw a similar tool making 10k MRR so I guess I was wrong. Lessons: This one was pretty much just us getting into our heads. I declared that without an audience it would be impossible to ship this product and we needed to start a YouTube channel. Lol, and we did. And we couldn’t even film for 1 minute. I made bold statements like “We will commit to this for at least 1 year no matter what”. Learnery Make courses about any subject https://preview.redd.it/1nw6z448tf5c1.jpg?width=1112&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f2c73e8af23b0a6c3747a81e785960d4004feb48 This is probably the most “successful” project we’ve made. It grew from a couple of dozen to a couple of hundred users. It has 11 buy events for $9.99 LTD (we couldn’t be bothered connecting Stripe because we thought no one would buy it anyway). However what got us discouraged from seriously pursuing it more is, that this has very low defensibility, “Why wouldn’t someone just use chatGPT?” and it’s B2C so it’s hard to monetize. I used it myself for a month or so but then stopped. I don’t think it’s the app, I think the act of learning a concept from scratch isn’t something you do constantly in the way Learnery delivers it (ie course). I saw a bunch of similar apps that look like Ass make like 10k MRR. Lessons: Don’t do B2C, or if you do, do it properly Don’t just Mixpanel the buy button, connect your Stripe otherwise, it doesn’t feel real and you won’t get momentum. I doubt anyone (even me) will make this mistake again. I live in my GPT bubble where I make assumptions that everyone uses GPT the same way and as much as I do. In reality, the argument that this has low defensibility against GPT is invalid. Platforms that deliver a differentiated UX from ChatGPT to audiences who are not tightly integrated into the habit of using ChatGPT (which is like - everyone except for SOME tech evangelists). CuriosityFM Make podcasts about any subject https://preview.redd.it/zmosrcp8tf5c1.jpg?width=638&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d04ddffabef9050050b0d87939273cc96a8637dc This was our attempt at making Learnery more unique and more differentiated from chatGPT. We never really launched it. The unit economics didn’t work out and it was actually pretty boring to listen to, I don’t think I even fully listened to one 15-minute episode. I think this wasn’t that bad, it taught us more about ElevenLabs and voice AI. It took us maybe only 2-3 days to build so I think building to learn a new groundbreaking technology is fine. SleepyTale Make children’s bedtime stories https://preview.redd.it/14ue9nm9tf5c1.jpg?width=807&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=267e18ec6f9270e6d1d11564b38136fa524966a1 My 8-year-old sister gave me that idea. She was too scared of making tea and I was curious about how she’d react if she heard a bedtime story about that exact scenario with the moral that I wanted her to absorb (which is that you shouldn’t be scared to try new things ie stop asking me to make your tea and do it yourself, it’s not that hard. You could say I went full Goebbels on her). Zane messaged a bunch of parents on Facebook but no one really cared. We showed this to one Lady at the place we worked from at Uni and she was impressed and wanted to show it to her kids but we already turned off our ElevenLabs subscription. Lessons: However, the truth behind this is beyond just “you need to be able to distribute”. It’s that you have to care about the audience. I don’t particularly want to build products for kids and parents. I am far away from that audience because I am neither a kid anymore nor going to be a parent anytime soon, and my sister still asked me to make her tea so the story didn’t work. I think it’s important to ask yourself whether you care about the audience. The way you answer that even when you are in full bias mode is, do you engage with them? Are you interested in what’s happening in their communities? Are you friends with them? Etc. User Survey Analyzer Big User Survey → GPT → Insights Report Me and my coworker were chatting about AI when he asked me to help him analyze a massive survey for him. I thought that was some pretty decent validation. Someone in an actual company asking for help. Lessons Market research is important but moving fast is also important. Ie building momentum. Also don’t revolve around 1 user. This has been a problem in multiple projects. Finding as many users as possible in the beginning to talk to is key. Otherwise, you are just waiting for 1 person to get back to you. AutoI18N Automated Internationalization of the codebase for webapps This one I might still do. It’s hard to find a solid distribution strategy. However, the idea came from me having to do it at my day job. It seems a solid problem. I’d say it’s validated and has some good players already. The key will be differentiation via the simplicity of UX and distribution (which means a slightly different audience). In the backlog for now because I don’t care about the problem or the audience that much. Documate - Part 1 Converts complex PDFs into Excel https://preview.redd.it/8b45k9katf5c1.jpg?width=1344&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=57324b8720eb22782e28794d2db674b073193995 My mom needed to convert a catalog of furniture into an inventory which took her 3 full days of data entry. I automated it for her and thought this could have a big impact but there was no distribution because there was no ICP. We tried to find the ideal customers by talking to a bunch of different demographics but I flew to Kazakhstan for a holiday and so this kind of fizzled out. I am not writing this blog post linearity, this is my 2nd hour and I am tired and don’t want to finish this later so I don’t even know what lessons I learned. Figmatic Marketplace of high-quality Figma mockups of real apps https://preview.redd.it/h13yv45btf5c1.jpg?width=873&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=aaa2896aeac2f22e9b7d9eed98c28bb8a2d2cdf1 This was a collab between me and my friend Alex. It was the classic Clarito where we both thought we had this problem and would pay to fix it. In reality, this is a vitamin. Neither I, nor I doubt Alex have thought of this as soon as we bought the domain. We posted it on Gumroad, sent it to a bunch of forums, and called it a day. Same issue as almost all the other ones. No distribution strategy. However, apps like Mobin show us that this concept is indeed profitable but it takes time. It needs SEO. It needs a community. None of those things, me and Alex had or was interested in. However shortly after HTML → Figma came out and it’s the best plugin. Maybe that should’ve been the idea. Podcast → Course Turns Podcaster’s episodes into a course This one I got baited by Jason :P I described to him the idea of repurposing his content for a course. He told me this was epic and he would pay. Then after I sent him the demo, he never checked it out. Anyhow during the development, we realized that doesn’t actually work because A podcast doesn’t have the correct format for the course, the most you can extract are concepts and ideas, seldom explanations. Most creators want video-based courses to be hosted on Kajabi or Udemy Another lesson is that when you pitch something to a user, what you articulate is a platform or a process, they imagine an outcome. However, the end result of your platform can be a very different outcome to what they had in mind and there is even a chance that what they want is not possible. You need to understand really well what the outcome looks like before you design the process. This is a classic problem where we thought of the solution before the problem. Yes, the problem exists. Podcasters want to make courses. However, if you really understand what they want, you can see how repurposing a podcast isn’t the best way to get there. However I only really spoke to 1-2 podcasters about this so making conclusions is dangerous for this can just be another asking ace mistake with the Redditor. Documate Part 2 Same concept as before but now I want to run some ads. We’ll see what happens. https://preview.redd.it/xb3npj0ctf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3cd4884a29fd11d870d010a2677b585551c49193 In conclusion https://preview.redd.it/2zrldc9dtf5c1.jpg?width=1840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2b3105073e752ad41c23f205dbd1ea046c1da7ff It doesn’t actually matter that much whether you choose to do a B2C, or a social network or focus on growing your audience. All of these can make you successful. What’s important is that you choose. If I had to summarize my 2023 in one word it’s indecision. Most of these projects succeeded for other people, nothing was as fundamentally wrong about them as I proclaimed. In reality that itself was an excuse. New ideas seduce, and it is a form of discipline to commit to a single project for a respectful amount of time. https://preview.redd.it/zy9a2vzdtf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=901c621227bba0feb4efdb39142f66ab2ebb86fe Distribution is not just posting on Indiehackers and Reddit. It’s an actual strategy and you should think of it as soon as you think of the idea, even before the Figma designs. I like how Denis Shatalin taught me. You have to build a pipeline. That means a reliable way to get leads, launch campaigns at them, close deals, learn from them, and optimize. Whenever I get an idea now I always try to ask myself “Where can I find 1000s leads in one day?” If there is no good answer, this is not a good project to do now. &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/2boh3fpetf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1c0d5d7b000716fcbbb00cbad495e8b61e25be66 Talk to users before doing anything. Jumping on designing and coding to make your idea a reality is a satisfying activity in the short term. Especially for me, I like to create for the sake of creation. However, it is so important to understand the market, understand the audience, understand the distribution. There are a lot of things to understand before coding. https://preview.redd.it/lv8tt96ftf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6c8735aa6ad795f216ff9ddfa2341712e8277724 Get out of your own head. The real reason we dropped so many projects is that we got into our own heads. We let the negative thoughts creep in and kill all the optimism. I am really good at coming up with excuses to start a project. However, I am equally as good at coming up with reasons to kill a project. And so you have this yin and yang of starting and stopping. Building momentum and not burning out. I can say with certainty my team ran out of juice this year. We lost momentum so many times we got burnt out towards the end. Realizing that the project itself has momentum is important. User feedback and sales bring momentum. Building also creates momentum but unless it is matched with an equal force of impact, it can stomp the project down. That is why so many of our projects died quickly after we launched. The smarter approach is to do things that have a low investment of momentum (like talking to users) but result in high impact (sales or feedback). Yes, that means the project can get invalidated which makes it more short-lived than if we built it first, but it preserves team life energy. At the end of 2023 here is a single sentence I am making about how I think one becomes a successful indiehacker. One becomes a successful Indiehacker when one starts to solve pain-killer problems in the market they understand, for an audience they care about and consistently engage with for a long enough timeframe. Therefore an unsuccessful Indiehacker in a single sentence is An unsuccessful Indiehacker constantly enters new markets they don’t understand to build solutions for people whose problems they don’t care about, in a timeframe that is shorter than than the time they spent thinking about distribution. However, an important note to be made. Life is not just about indiehacking. It’s about learning and having fun. In the human world, the best journey isn’t the one that gets you the fastest to your goals but the one you enjoy the most. I enjoyed making those silly little projects and although I do not regret them, I will not repeat the same mistakes in 2024. But while it’s still 2023, I have 2 more projects I want to do :) EDIT: For Devs, frontend is always react with vite (ts) and backend is either node with express (ts) or python. For DB either Postgres or mongo (usually Prisma for ORM). For deployment all of it is on AWS (S3, EC2). In terms of libraries/APIs Whisper.cpp is best open source for transcription Obviously the gpt apis Eleven labs for voice related stuff And other random stuff here and there

How I built my SaaS and earned $273 MRR in the first month

Hi everyone! I’m Alex Varga, an indie developer. Last year, I focused on accelerating my development speed and launched 10 projects in 12 months. One of them called Bulk Image Generation started growing through SEO, so I decided to focus on it. After one month of SEO efforts, it’s generating $273 MRR. I hope my experience will be useful to others. Concept bulkimagegeneration.com website helps to generate up to 100 images in 15 seconds using AI I was using Google, started with keywords like "Bulk Image ..." a lot of them are Bulk Image Resizer, Downloader etc. But there was no Bulk Image Generator. I thought: yeah, this domain is available, let's buy. So I bought bulkimagegeneration.com and bulkimagegenerator.com So, the app concept is to help people generate images with AI at scale: let\`s say 100 images in 15 seconds. Marketing Gap https://preview.redd.it/4luzib02bbie1.png?width=1905&format=png&auto=webp&s=cbe845107aca46ae5729dfe121fefd5e9cdab9ac Most builders create a product first and figure out how to sell it later. I took a completely different approach with Bulk Image Generator. I identified a market gap and secured a domain name that matched exactly what people were searching for and launched app. https://preview.redd.it/h6vwur34bbie1.png?width=1905&format=png&auto=webp&s=9a163ff6f503be4c175c6e5e82e2003b32df1fe0 Growth Strategy SEO has become the main acquisition channel, so I’ve decided to focus even more on it with this experiment. Almost every day, I publish either a new article or a free micro-app (as a lead magnet) for Bulk Image Generator. I also tried Google Ads, spent $20, and got a $0.35 CPC. https://preview.redd.it/3rhnzvs6bbie1.png?width=1905&format=png&auto=webp&s=f9819d1e82d3e2429d6ccb7b00dcac86a7a351c2 In comparison, the Free Image to Text Prompt Converter (one of the lead magnets) has a $0.011 CPC, which is more than 30 times cheaper than Google Ads. So I decided not to focus now on paid ads. https://preview.redd.it/p333fyl9bbie1.png?width=1905&format=png&auto=webp&s=2e96532d7709b44b7459e7ccf37ef9a0fa784728 After using our free tools, some users explore our main product - a bulk image generation service. Users pay a monthly subscription to get credits, which they can spend on image generation, face swaps, and bulk background removal. Currently, this app generates around $250 in Monthly Recurring Revenue: https://preview.redd.it/9wcm0tjfbbie1.png?width=1905&format=png&auto=webp&s=41bcdd4f7594b09087c51cc5044e4b9c94c129c8 SEO Keyword Research I use Semrush or similar tools to find keywords with a search volume greater than 300 and then write articles targeting those keywords. If the topic has enough potential, I might create a free tool (e.g., a Free Image to Text Prompt Converter) to attract more users. Occasions matter. For instance, I wrote an article about creating images for Super Bowl ads, which led to one paying user who replicated the exact creatives showcased in the article https://preview.redd.it/shpax6mlbbie1.png?width=1905&format=png&auto=webp&s=d491385761df126424c2f9ba14c5da15f8cbb603 AI Tools Aggregators This can be an excellent acquisition channel. When BulkImageGeneration.com was featured in an article on Toolify.ai, I immediately gained three paying users (\~$60). I took 2 more AI Aggregators, and on average I had CPC = $0.2, which is a fair price and usually it has ROAs > 100%. However, some major aggregators are expensive ($300–400 per placement). I want to try it once I reach $500+ MRR. Next Steps bulkimagegeneration.com currently ranks #1 in search results for relevant keywords (e.g., “bulk image generation,” “bulk image generator”). I plan to keep producing content targeting niche keywords and timely occasions. buy more places in AI Aggregators I also want to reach out to YouTubers and ask them to include Bulk in their reviews for free

I got 400+ new customers in first 48 hours after launch!!!!

Yesterday I launched my new software and got 400+ customers in 48 hours. I'm gonna break down the product and my launch strategy. What is it? Remember when Elon was taking over Twitter and he emailed the CEO of Twitter Parag Agrawal saying “What did you get done this week?” Well I turned this idea into a software lol. A couple months ago, I had a realization while talking with some friends: I love asking ChatGPT for business advice, but I never remember to actually do it. Now what if there was a pro-active AI business coach that checked in on me every week? Something to keep me accountable and track my progress building my empire. It could have a database where I could see my progress every single week!!! And what if this AI business coach was a simple email that says “What did you get done this week?” So I built this: Elon Email. A weekly 1-on-1 with Elon Musk Every Sunday night for the last month, I’ve been getting a weekly email from Elon Musk saying “What did you get done this week?” I take a few minutes to write back with everything I got done that week: new revenue metrics, a list of the new features I shipped, new employees onboarded, number of workouts, exciting calls and collaboration opportunities, etc. Then an AI trained on Elon would give me tailored advice all in my email. And here's the best part. Rather than a nice friendly soft-spoken AI, I prompted the AI to be as savage and ruthless as Elon with its business advice. And it actually worked. One user said "it's like a slap in the face". I knew with 2025 New Years resolutions coming, I needed to launch it ASAP so I pushed through an all-nighter on Friday and got it launched today. Launch strategy: \> Focus on X (fka Twitter) as main source. I have 31,000 followers on X from the last few years building startups, so I posted my launch this morning there. X is Elon's social media network now so I didn't waste time on other platforms. I basically didn't look up from my phone for like 12 hours (my wife was pissed at me because we're technically on vacation but yolo) and I commented, engaged, and DMed with everyone I could. It paid off with 50,000+ views on the post and nearly 300 likes so far. \> Purposely exclude people. Yes, I know this sounds weird, but you need to purposely exclude some people to focus on the people who will actually use your product. I know a lot of people hate Elon and will hate me for making this. I don't care. I only care about the people who will actually use it aka my customers. The same thing with making it a "savage AI". I know there will be some people who prefer a nice friendly soft AI, but that's not my customer base. The internet is big enough you can find your customer base but you've gotta be willing to exclude some people to speak to the right people! \> Free tier. The weekly Elon email and AI reply is free. I also have a paid tier for a daily email and database access. I know I'm technically losing money on API fees for the free email and AI requests, but it's a loss leader, the costs are actually quite minimal since it's only 1 API request/week, and some % will convert and already have. Doing free was worth it to give people a chance to try it. I hope this helps with your next launch!!!

My Marketing App made $10,000 in 2024. Here is how I target to make $100,000 in 2025:

You totally get me, I think. It’s a bizarre feeling when you build something, and people appreciate it and are even ready to pay! Pleasant though) In early 2024 my mate and I created a marketing tool that generates ads, content and strategy blocks with a click – Aiter.io. Users can just insert a URL, hit the button and everything is ready. TBH, I built this tool because I’m too lazy to chat with ChatGPT) https://preview.redd.it/ew2kud7ceyde1.png?width=1140&format=png&auto=webp&s=f3fe5b67075858cea3d52278e8063113efa3b97e In 2024 we made $10,000, here is what worked for us: AI directories. Still is the best channel of traffic and clients for us. We listed on TAAFT and other directories scrape TAAFT, so, eventually, we became listed on all major ones. I wrote a Reddit post earlier that explained this process in detail. Email marketing. Gosh, I thought it was dead – I have never been so wrong! We set up automatic emails that share marketing insights and they have a \~25% open rate + consistently convert people. It works great. Product marketing. Having a free version really helps with word-of-mouth and leads, which can be converted via email. Also, we consistently worked on product improvement. I’d say, that our free updates give people a feeling that the devs care about their stuff that’s why they are more confident investing in it. Google Ads. TBH, we had a shitty landing page all the time because were busy with the product. So, Google Ads didn’t work well for us. But we’ve launched the 2.0 version which has a better landing page, and will try it again. Influencers. Worked well for us, but we didn’t pay a dime for this. They just found our tool on directories and created videos about Aiter, so it was a sporadic marketing channel for us. We hope to change it in 2025. We see that our product works and attracts the audience, so we want to deliver and get more in 2025. Here is the plan: Product: add ad banners and video generation. So far, we generate only text data and it’s not so valuable in the time of ChatGPT and Claude. But to generate a high-quality ad banner is still challenging, so we put this on our roadmap. Another feature – one-click market analysis to get marketing insights. Become a TOP50 tool on TAAFT. We’ve become a top tool in our category (content generation) but will need to promote our profile on the profile far more aggressively to get into TOP50 Email marketing. We are fools because we almost didn’t have product emails that explain how it works. Will fix it. Also, we are considering participating more in paid newsletters, like collaborating with Substack influencers. Youtube marketing. Search for low-tail marketing keywords on YouTube and create videos on them, placing my product in them. Blog. Our new platform is Webflow which gives a lot of flexibility in terms of blogging. So, we will repeat the YouTube strategy with blogging. Paid marketing. With an updated landing page, we hope that paid campaigns will work better. We plan to launch campaigns that target different jobs to be done and customer objections to find the right message. Product Management. For 2025, our two key product metrics are retention and product activation rate. For this, we plan to simplify onboarding and make it simpler as well as conduct a lot of in-depth interviews to understand how we can retain users better. Funding. All of this exciting stuff requires money, so we are in the process of securing funding (fingers crossed). Having an indie project is exciting and invigorating. With all these activities, I hope we will achieve the goal of $100,000 in 2025. And what are your goals and marketing steps for 2025? Or maybe you could share some exciting marketing ideas I overlooked?

I retired at 32 from my side project. Here's the path I took.

EDIT 2: Thanks for the award kind stranger! I've stopped responding to reddit comments for this post. I'm adding an FAQ to the original post based on the most common high quality questions. If you have a question that you're dying to know the answer to and that only I can help you with (vs. Google, ChatGPT, etc.), DM me. EDIT: I love how controversial this post has become (50% upvote rate), and only in this subreddit (vs. other subreddits that I posted the same content in). I trust that the open-minded half of you will find something useful in this post and my other posts and comments. I retired at 32 years old, in large part thanks to a B2C SaaS app that I developed on my own. Now, I don't have to work in order to cover my living expenses, and wouldn't have to work for quite a while. In other words, I can finally sip mai tais at the beach. I've condensed how I got there into this post. First, a super simplified timeline of events, followed by some critical details. Timeline 2013 Graduated college in the US 2013 Started first corporate job 2013 Started side project (B2C app) that would eventually lead to my retirement 2020 Started charging for use of my B2C app (was free, became freemium) 2021 Quit my last corporate job 2022 Retired: time freedom attained Details First, some summary statistics of my path to retirement: 9 years: time between graduating college and my retirement. 8 years: total length of my career where I worked at some corporate day job. 7 years: time it took my B2C app to make its first revenue dollar 2 years: time between my first dollar of SaaS revenue and my retirement. "Something something overnight success a decade in the making". I got extremely lucky on my path to retirement, both in terms of the business environment I was in and who I am as a person. I'd also like to think that some of the conscious decisions I made along the way contributed to my early retirement. Lucky Breaks Was born in the US middle class. Had a natural affinity for computer programming and entrepreneurial mindset (initiative, resourcefulness, pragmatism, courage, growth mindset). Had opportunities to develop these mindsets throughout life. Got into a good college which gave me the credentials to get high paying corporate jobs. Was early to a platform that saw large adoption (see "barnacle on whale" strategy). Business niche is shareworthy: my SaaS received free media. Business niche is relatively stable, and small enough to not be competitive. "Skillful" Decisions I decided to spend the nights and weekends of my early career working on side projects in the hopes that one would hit. I also worked a day job to support myself and build my savings. My launch funnel over roughly 7 years of working on side projects: Countless side projects prototyped. 5 side projects publically launched. 2 side projects made > $0. 1 side project ended up becoming the SaaS that would help me retire. At my corporate day jobs, I optimized for learning and work-life balance. My learning usually stalled after a year or two at one company, so I’d quit and find another job. I invested (and continute to do so) in physical and mental wellbeing via regular workouts, meditation, journaling, traveling, and good food. My fulfilling non-work-life re-energized me for my work-life, and my work-life supported my non-work-life: a virtuous cycle. I automated the most time-consuming aspects of my business (outside of product development). Nowadays, I take long vacations and work at most 20 hours a week / a three-day work week . I decided to keep my business entirely owned and operated by me. It's the best fit for my work-style (high autonomy, deep focus, fast decision-making) and need to have full creative freedom and control. I dated and married a very supportive and inspiring partner. I try not to succumb to outrageous lifestyle creep, which keeps my living expenses low and drastically extends my burn-rate. Prescription To share some aphorisms I’ve leaned with the wantrepreneurs or those who want to follow a similar path: Maximize your at bats, because you only need one hit. Bias towards action. Launch quickly. Get your ideas out into the real world for feedback. Perfect is the enemy of good. If you keep swinging and improving, you'll hit the ball eventually. Keep the big picture in mind. You don't necessarily need a home-run to be happy: a base hit will often do the job. Think about what matters most to you in life: is it a lot of money or status? Or is it something more satisfying, and often just as if not more attainable, like freedom, loving relationships, or fulfillment? Is what you’re doing now a good way to get what you want? Or is there a better way? At more of a micro-level of "keep the big picture in mind", I often see talented wantrepreneurs get stuck in the weeds of lower-level optimizations, usually around technical design choices. They forget (or maybe subconsciously avoid) the higher-level and more important questions of customer development, user experience, and distribution. For example: “Are you solving a real problem?” or “Did you launch an MVP and what did your users think?” Adopt a growth mindset. Believe that you are capable of learning whatever you need to learn in order to do what you want to do. The pain of regret is worse than the pain of failure. I’ve noticed that fear of failure is the greatest thing holding people back from taking action towards their dreams. Unless failure means death in your case, a debilitating fear of failure is a surmountable mental block. You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. When all is said and done, we often regret the things we didn't do in life than the things we did. There’s more to life than just work. Blasphemous (at least among my social circle)! But the reality is that many of the dying regret having worked too much in their lives. As Miss Frizzle from The Magic Schoolbus says: "Take chances, make mistakes, get messy!" Original post

I created a free workout plan generator

I created a GPT-powered workout training plan generator : https://train-programs.ai/. It's using your goal, preferences and physiological data to define a tailor-made training plan for workout at the gym or at home with bodyweight. I decided to make it 100% free after it reaches... 0 customer after my launch on ProductHunt (and I don't have an audience to share the tool with). I'm building the tool in public on X (https://twitter.com/GuillaumeGay\) and I just implemented the multimodal functionnality: it will create a plan based on a photo of you by analysing your body fat, strenghts, potential weaknesses and your morphology. Feel free to try it. I'm also trying to find the good marketing angle. Should it be used by people, by coaches to get faster to create personnalized plans, for gym, for fitness apps, and so on. I'm happy to read your ideas!

Just completed a new type of language learning website - read popular stories scaled to different reading levels

As a language learner and software developer, I bootstrapped my project superlang.com over the past year working on the side. There is a mobile friendly web app now, and iOS/Android apps coming in a few months. A year ago I discovered the concept of "comprehensible input" as a way to help me learn German. Even if it's not a silver bullet, it sounded pretty great. Rather than drilling vocab or looking at grammar charts, I could "just read" and acquire the language. I picked up some fairy tales in German, and stories like Alice in Wonderland. Unfortunately, I couldn't really read them. I had to stop every sentence to look up words and try and decipher sentence constructions. Then I turned to some purpose built simple stories for German beginners. But there was a different problem... these were not really stories with any real plot. I could only read so many "Hans goes to the market" type stories before losing interest. My idea was to try to get the best of both worlds somehow. What if I could take a real story, say Alice in Wonderland (or even War and Peace), and dial the difficulty down to my level without losing the plotline. That way, beginners can start right away with something basically comprehensible. Then, you could also re-read the same story at increasing difficulty levels as you gain confidence. As a cherry on top, more illustrations would help with comprehension so each page could have a picture. Is it revolutionary? Maybe, maybe not. I am building off a well established idea of "graded readers" which are simplified stories meant for learning languages. And there are somewhat similar ideas out there now that AI is good at simplifying text, but none that really take this idea where it needs to be with many preloaded stories, multiple difficulty levels, high quality human verified text, and all the bells and whistles. I spent a year building Superlang and it is ready to put out there. Some quick notes: There are 3 languages so far, intended for native English speakers: German, French, and Spanish There are 3 difficulty levels you can set on each story: beginner (roughly A1-A2), intermediate (roughly A2-B1), and advanced (the same level as the original story, but typically B2+) There is premium version as producing the content was somewhat expensive. You can still do a lot of reading on the free version. I have done no marketing yet, except for this post :) The implementation is a combination of AI, and human proofreading and reviewing. In particular, the simplification of stories is very heavily AI driven. The illustrations for each page are AI as well. For translation, as many of you may be aware new LLM models are typically better than Google translate, but still far from perfect. I am very much a proponent of keeping real people in the loop, and so I have real people proofread the translations. That's why there are only about 700 pages of content so far and not tens of thousands. Let me know what you think, and if you find it helpful! Alice in Wonderland - beginner level German Romeo and Juliet - beginner level Spanish

An Algorithm for Making Truly Stand-Out Advertising Content (+ something more | Part 1)

Hi everyone. my friend and I are software engineers and new to marketing. A few months ago we decided to leverage our software skills for a colleague in ecommerce. It started by implementing a Flux.1 model, then began using texture-based recreations with a canny mask, and then found that we could optimize on both with an added layer of inpainting...and the list goes on. This is the first of a series of posts here about it and I look forward to learning from your feedback. I realized that the most difficult parts of the marketing process when I started out (and most likely for other beginners too) are: Customer Acquisition Costs / Brand Differentiation: Competition is intensifying and it is getting more difficult to stand out in crowded markets and target ad spend more effectively. Maintaining Authenticity at Scale / Data Overload: Balancing growth with authenticity and leveraging available data to successfully engage with customers is a big ask. Creative Fatigue: Maintaining multiple marketing channels in hard, and it becomes harder when you're constantly demanding more and more creative content for campaigns. For 1) I tried using AI to help me summarize, systematize, and gain insights from the information available for a given brand or product (from a page link, prompt, input image, etc.). I know AI is everywhere now, many people are using it unnecessarily and many people are skeptical about it. However, I know from experience, that it is quite helpful in gaining insights/summarizing large amounts of data, and helping people make sense of the creative content, strategy, campaign, etc., that should be created. For 2) By leveraging reviews, forums, and other relevant brand information, AI is able to maintain the story that your brand currently tells, and enhance it based on how your customer base. For 3) Faster results means less creative fatigue- this translates to an easier time managing omnichannel marketing efforts and scaling advertising. If you're interested, please have a look at the result at madsimpleads.com You’ll need to log in to access the solution, and I'll add credits to your account to try it out! (we want to prevent from random people or bots using it because I'm paying to multiple providers for model access). DM me here or drop me a line at austin@madsimpleads.com if you need more. Thank you so much, I'll be happy to get your thoughts I hope the website will help with your advertising, please reach out if you like what I do and want to support the project! Disclaimers: the website looks a bit rough in terms of UI/UX, but we tried focusing on the functionality first available on mobile, works better on desktop I hope this doesn't come across as trying to advertise for my business or breaking any of the community rules. genuinely looking for feedback. Thank you

Just stop paying for social media scheduling tools!

If you wanna pay for something, just pay for features but not to schedule posts. In Dec 2024 I just decided to launch a social media scheduler that is free and unlimited. Because I still don't understand why many people are paying $50+ to schedule posts on multi platforms, I want to make it accessible since it does not represent a huge amount of money to maintain. My challenge is rather to convert free users and provide to them a bunch of tools (meme creators, AI content creations, advanced analytics,...) that could streamline their social media management. So far, I have received tons of really good feedback and got around 300 people signed up. In terms of social media, it supports: Youtube, Tiktok, Instagram, Facebook, X, Bluesky (I'll implement Thread and Linkedin very soon). If you wanna give it a try, that's 100% free and unlimited: https://qayle.ai Surprisingly, I haven't found any abuses so far, but I'm monitoring the usage! Stay safe everyone and I wish you a wonderful day :)

My Side Projects: From CEO to 4th Developer (Thanks, AI 🤖)

Hey Reddit 👋, I wanted to share a bit about some side projects I’ve been working on lately. Quick background for context: I’m the CEO of a mid-to-large-scale eCommerce company pulling in €10M+ annually in net turnover. We even built our own internal tracking software that’s now a SaaS (in early review stages on Shopify), competing with platforms like Lifetimely and TrueROAS. But! That’s not really the point of this post — there’s another journey I’ve been on that I’m super excited to share (and maybe get your feedback on!). AI Transformed My Role (and My Ideas List) I’m not a developer by trade — never properly learned how to code, and to be honest, I don’t intend to. But, I’ve always been the kind of guy who jots down ideas in a notes app and dreams about execution. My dev team calls me their “4th developer” (they’re a team of three) because I have solid theoretical knowledge and can kinda read code. And then AI happened. 🛠️ It basically turned my random ideas app into an MVP generation machine. I thought it’d be fun to share one of the apps I’m especially proud of. I am also planning to build this in public and therefore I am planning to post my progress on X and every project will have /stats page where live stats of the app will be available. Tackling My Task Management Problem 🚀 I’ve sucked at task management for YEARS, I still do! I’ve tried literally everything — Sheets, Todoist, Asana, ClickUp, Notion — you name it. I’d start… and then quit after a few weeks - always. What I struggle with the most is delegating tasks. As a CEO, I delegate a ton, and it’s super hard to track everything I’ve handed off to the team. Take this example: A few days ago, I emailed an employee about checking potential collaboration opportunities with a courier company. Just one of 10s of tasks like this I delegate daily. Suddenly, I thought: “Wouldn’t it be AMAZING if just typing out this email automatically created a task for me to track?” 💡 So… I jumped in. With the power of AI and a few intense days of work, I built a task manager that does just that. But of course, I couldn’t stop there. Research & Leveling It Up 📈 I looked at similar tools like TickTick and Todoist, scraped their G2 reviews (totally legally, promise! 😅), and ran them through AI for a deep SWOT analysis. I wanted to understand what their users liked/didn’t like and what gaps my app could fill. Some of the features people said they were missing didn’t align with the vision for my app (keeping it simple and personal), but I found some gold nuggets: Integration with calendars (Google) Reminders Customizable UX (themes) So, I started implementing what made sense and am keeping others on the roadmap for the future. And I’ve even built for that to, it still doesn’t have a name, however the point is you select on how many reviews of a specific app you want to make a SWOT analysis on and it will do it for you. Example for Todoist in comments. But more on that, some other time, maybe other post ... Key Features So Far: Here’s what’s live right now: ✅ Email to Task: Add an email as to, cc, or bcc — and it automatically creates a task with context, due dates, labels, etc. ✅ WhatsApp Reminders: Get nudged to handle your tasks via WhatsApp. ✅ WhatsApp to Task: Send a message like /task buy groceries — bam, it’s added with full context etc.. ✅ Chrome Extension (work-in-progress): Highlight text on any page, right-click, and send it straight to your task list. Next Steps: Build WITH the Community 👥 Right now, the app is 100% free while still in the early stages. But hey, API calls and server costs aren’t cheap, so pricing is something I’ll figure out with you as we grow. For now, my goal is to hit 100 users and iterate from there. My first pricing idea is, without monthly subscription, I don’t want to charge someone for something he didn’t use. So I am planning on charging "per task", what do you think? Here’s what I have planned: 📍 End of Year Goal: 100 users (starting from… 1 🥲). 💸 Revenue Roadmap: When we establish pricing, we’ll talk about that. 🛠️ Milestones: Post on Product Hunt when we hit 100 users. Clean up my self-written spaghetti code (hire a pro dev for review 🙃). Hire a part-time dev once we hit MRR that can cover its costs. You can check how are we doing on thisisatask.me/stats Other Side Projects I’m Working On: Because… what’s life without taking on too much, right? 😂 Full list of things I’m building: Internal HRM: Not public, tried and tested in-house. Android TV App: Syncs with HRM to post announcements to office TVs (streamlined and simple). Stats Tracker App: Connects to our internal software and gives me real-time company insights. Review Analyzer: Scrapes SaaS reviews (e.g., G2) and runs deep analysis via AI. This was originally for my Shopify SaaS but is quickly turning into something standalone. Coming soon! Mobile app game: secret for now. Let’s Build This Together! Would love it if you guys checked out https://thisisatask.me and gave it a spin! Still super early, super raw, but I’m pumped to hear your thoughts. Also, what’s a must-have task manager feature for you? Anything that frustrates you with current tools? I want to keep evolving this in public, so your feedback is gold. 🌟 Let me know, Reddit! Are you with me? 🙌

How I Made $0 in One Month with My AI Startup

How I Made $0 in One Month with My AI Startup Step 1: Built an AI writing tool. Step 2: Expected users to magically appear. Step 3: Checked my analytics—still just me and my mom using it. Step 4: Did what every founder does—refreshed the dashboard 47 times a day. Step 5: Launched on Product Hunt. Got 12 upvotes. Half were from my alternate accounts. Step 6: Thought about running ads. Remembered I had no budget. Step 7: Scrolled Twitter for "growth hacks." Implemented none. Step 8: Posted on LinkedIn. My post got 2 likes—one from a bot. Step 9: Checked my Stripe account. Still $0. Moral of the story? Just launching isn’t enough. If you’re building an AI tool (or anything), people won’t magically show up—you need to market, iterate, and actually talk to users. Speaking of AI tools, I ended up building Panda AI Studio because AI tools should be easy to use, not a headache. No complicated prompts, no figuring out how to "talk" to AI. Just 200+ tools that do what you need for writing, content, marketing, job hunting, and more. If that sounds like something you’d actually use, check it out. Maybe I’ll finally break the $1 mark next month. 😅

I spent 6 months on a web app as a side project, and got 0 users. Here is my story.

Edit Thank you all so much for your time reading my story. Your support, feedback, criticism, and skepticism; all helped me a lot, and I couldn't appreciate it enough \^\_\^ I very rarely have stuff to post on Reddit, but I share how my project is going on, just random stuff, and memes on X. In case few might want to keep up 👀 TL;DR I spent 6 months on a tool that currently has 0 users. Below is what I learned during my journey, sharing because I believe most mistakes are easily avoidable. Do not overestimate your product and assume it will be an exception to fundamental principles. Principles are there for a reason. Always look for validation before you start. Avoid building products with a low money-to-effort ratio/in very competitive fields. Unless you have the means, you probably won't make it. Pick a problem space, pick your target audience, and talk to them before thinking about a solution. Identify and match their pain points. Only then should you think of a solution. If people are not overly excited or willing to pay in advance for a discounted price, it might be a sign to rethink. Sell one and only one feature at a time. Avoid everything else. If people don't pay for that one core feature, no secondary feature will change their mind. Always spend twice as much time marketing as you do building. You will not get users if they don't know it exists. Define success metrics ("1000 users in 3 months" or "$6000 in the account at the end of 6 months") before you start. If you don't meet them, strongly consider quitting the project. If you can't get enough users to keep going, nothing else matters. VALIDATION, VALIDATION, VALIDATION. Success is not random, but most of our first products will not make a success story. Know when to admit failure, and move on. Even if a product of yours doesn't succeed, what you learned during its journey will turn out to be invaluable for your future. My story So, this is the story of a product that I’ve been working on for the last 6 months. As it's the first product I’ve ever built, after watching you all from the sidelines, I have learned a lot, made many mistakes, and did only a few things right. Just sharing what I’ve learned and some insights from my journey so far. I hope that this post will help you avoid the mistakes I made — most of which I consider easily avoidable — while you enjoy reading it, and get to know me a little bit more 🤓. A slow start after many years Summ isn’t the first product I really wanted to build. Lacking enough dev skills to even get started was a huge blocker for so many years. In fact, the first product I would’ve LOVED to build was a smart personal shopping assistant. I had this idea 4 years ago; but with no GPT, no coding skills, no technical co-founder, I didn’t have the means to make it happen. I still do not know if such a tool exists and is good enough. All I wanted was a tool that could make data-based predictions about when to buy stuff (“buy a new toothpaste every three months”) and suggest physical products that I might need or be strongly interested in. AFAIK, Amazon famously still struggles with the second one. Fast-forward a few years, I learned the very basics of HTML, CSS, and Vanilla JS. Still was not there to build a product; but good enough to code my design portfolio from scratch. Yet, I couldn’t imagine myself building a product using Vanilla JS. I really hated it, I really sucked at it. So, back to tutorial hell, and to learn about this framework I just heard about: React.React introduced so many new concepts to me. “Thinking in React” is a phrase we heard a lot, and with quite good reasons. After some time, I was able to build very basic tutorial apps, both in React, and React Native; but I have to say that I really hated coding for mobile. At this point, I was already a fan of productivity apps, and had a concept for a time management assistant app in my design portfolio. So, why not build one? Surely, it must be easy, since every coding tutorial starts with a todo app. ❌ WRONG! Building a basic todo app is easy enough, but building one good enough for a place in the market was a challenge I took and failed. I wasted one month on that until I abandoned the project for good. Even if I continued working on it, as the productivity landscape is overly competitive, I wouldn’t be able to make enough money to cover costs, assuming I make any. Since I was (and still am) in between jobs, I decided to abandon the project. 👉 What I learned: Do not start projects with a low ratio of money to effort and time. Example: Even if I get 500 monthly users, 200 of which are paid users (unrealistically high number), assuming an average subscription fee of $5/m (such apps are quite cheap, mostly due to the high competition), it would make me around $1000 minus any occurring costs. Any founder with a product that has 500 active users should make more. Even if it was relatively successful, due to the high competition, I wouldn’t make any meaningful money. PS: I use Todoist today. Due to local pricing, I pay less than $2/m. There is no way I could beat this competitive pricing, let alone the app itself. But, somehow, with a project that wasn’t even functional — let alone being an MVP — I made my first Wi-Fi money: Someone decided that the domain I preemptively purchased is worth something. By this point, I had already abandoned the project, certainly wasn’t going to renew the domain, was looking for a FT job, and a new project that I could work on. And out of nowhere, someone hands me some free money — who am I not to take it? Of course, I took it. The domain is still unused, no idea why 🤔. Ngl, I still hate the fact that my first Wi-Fi money came from this. A new idea worth pursuing? Fast-forward some weeks now. Around March, I got this crazy idea of building an email productivity tool. We all use emails, yet we all hate them. So, this must be fixed. Everyone uses emails, in fact everyone HAS TO use emails. So, I just needed to build a tool and wait for people to come. This was all, really. After all, the problem space is huge, there is enough room for another product, everyone uses emails, no need for any further validation, right? ❌ WRONG ONCE AGAIN! We all hear from the greatest in the startup landscape that we must validate our ideas with real people, yet at least some of us (guilty here 🥸) think that our product will be hugely successful and prove them to be an exception. Few might, but most are not. I certainly wasn't. 👉 Lesson learned: Always validate your ideas with real people. Ask them how much they’d pay for such a tool (not if they would). Much better if they are willing to pay upfront for a discount, etc. But even this comes later, keep reading. I think the difference between “How much” and “If” is huge for two reasons: (1) By asking them for “How much”, you force them to think in a more realistic setting. (2) You will have a more realistic idea on your profit margins. Based on my competitive analysis, I already had a solution in my mind to improve our email usage standards and email productivity (huge mistake), but I did my best to learn about their problems regarding those without pushing the idea too hard. The idea is this: Generate concise email summaries with suggested actions, combine them into one email, and send it at their preferred times. Save as much as time the AI you end up with allows. After all, everyone loves to save time. So, what kind of validation did I seek for? Talked with only a few people around me about this crazy, internet-breaking idea. The responses I got were, now I see, mediocre; no one got excited about it, just said things along the lines of “Cool idea, OK”. So, any reasonable person in this situation would think “Okay, not might not be working”, right? Well, I did not. I assumed that they were the wrong audience for this product, and there was this magical land of user segments waiting eagerly for my product, yet unknowingly. To this day, I still have not reached this magical place. Perhaps, it didn’t exist in the first place. If I cannot find it, whether it exists or not doesn’t matter. I am certainly searching for it. 👉 What I should have done: Once I decide on a problem space (time management, email productivity, etc.), I should decide on my potential user segments, people who I plan to sell my product to. Then I should go talk to those people, ask them about their pains, then get to the problem-solving/ideation phase only later. ❗️ VALIDATION COMES FROM THE REALITY OUTSIDE. What validation looks like might change from product to product; but what invalidation looks like is more or less the same for every product. Nico Jeannen told me yesterday “validation = money in the account” on Twitter. This is the ultimate form of validation your product could get. If your product doesn’t make any money, then something is invalidated by reality: Your product, you, your idea, who knows? So, at this point, I knew a little bit of Python from spending some time in tutorial hell a few years ago, some HTML/CSS/JS, barely enough React to build a working app. React could work for this project, but I needed easy-to-implement server interactivity. Luckily, around this time, I got to know about this new gen of indie hackers, and learned (but didn’t truly understand) about their approach to indie hacking, and this library called Nextjs. How good Next.js still blows my mind. So, I was back to tutorial hell once again. But, this time, with a promise to myself: This is the last time I would visit tutorial hell. Time to start building this "ground-breaking idea" Learning the fundamentals of Next.js was easier than learning of React unsurprisingly. Yet, the first time I managed to run server actions on Next.js was one of the rarest moments that completely blew my mind. To this day, I reject the idea that it is something else than pure magic under its hood. Did I absolutely need Nextjs for this project though? I do not think so. Did it save me lots of time? Absolutely. Furthermore, learning Nextjs will certainly be quite helpful for other projects that I will be tackling in the future. Already got a few ideas that might be worth pursuing in the head in case I decide to abandon Summ in the future. Fast-forward few weeks again: So, at this stage, I had a barely working MVP-like product. Since the very beginning, I spent every free hour (and more) on this project as speed is essential. But, I am not so sure it was worth it to overwork in retrospect. Yet, I know I couldn’t help myself. Everything is going kinda smooth, so what’s the worst thing that could ever happen? Well, both Apple and Google announced their AIs (Apple Intelligence and Google Gemini, respectively) will have email summarization features for their products. Summarizing singular emails is no big deal, after all there were already so many similar products in the market. I still think that what truly matters is a frictionless user experience, and this is why I built this product in a certain way: You spend less than a few minutes setting up your account, and you get to enjoy your email summaries, without ever visiting its website again. This is still a very cool concept I really like a lot. So, at this point: I had no other idea that could be pursued, already spent too much time on this project. Do I quit or not? This was the question. Of course not. I just have to launch this product as quickly as possible. So, I did something right, a quite rare occurrence I might say: Re-planned my product, dropped everything secondary to the core feature immediately (save time on reading emails), tried launching it asap. 👉 Insight: Sell only one core feature at one time. Drop anything secondary to this core feature. Well, my primary occupation is product design. So one would expect that a product I build must have stellar design. I considered any considerable time spent on design at this stage would be simply wasted. I still think this is both true and wrong: True, because if your product’s core benefits suck, no one will care about your design. False, because if your design looks amateurish, no one will trust you and your product. So, I always targeted an average level design with it and the way this tool works made it quite easy as I had to design only 2 primary pages: Landing page and user portal (which has only settings and analytics pages). However, even though I knew spending time on design was not worth much of my time, I got a bit “greedy”: In fact, I redesigned those pages three times, and still ended up with a so-so design that I am not proud of. 👉 What I would do differently: Unless absolutely necessary, only one iteration per stage as long as it works. This, in my mind, applies to everything. If your product’s A feature works, then no need to rewrite it from scratch for any reason, or even refactor it. When your product becomes a success, and you absolutely need that part of your codebase to be written, do so, but only then. Ready to launch, now is th etime for some marketing, right? By July 26, I already had a “launchable” product that barely works (I marked this date on a Notion docs, this is how I know). Yet, I had spent almost no time on marketing, sales, whatever. After all, “You build and they will come”. Did I know that I needed marketing? Of course I did, but knowingly didn’t. Why, you might ask. Well, from my perspective, it had to be a dev-heavy product; meaning that you spend most of your time on developing it, mostly coding skills. But, this is simply wrong. As a rule of thumb, as noted by one of the greatests, Marc Louvion, you should spend at least twice of the building time on marketing. ❗️ Time spent on building \* 2 people don’t know your product > they don’t use your product > you don’t get users > you don’t make money Easy as that. Following the same reasoning, a slightly different approach to planning a project is possible. Determine an approximate time to complete the project with a high level project plan. Let’s say 6 months. By the reasoning above, 2 months should go into building, and 4 into marketing. If you need 4 months for building instead of 2, then you need 8 months of marketing, which makes the time to complete the project 12 months. If you don’t have that much time, then quit the project. When does a project count as completed? Well, in reality, never. But, I think we have to define success conditions even before we start for indie projects and startups; so we know when to quit when they are not met. A success condition could look like “Make $6000 in 12 months” or “Have 3000 users in 6 months”. It all depends on the project. But, once you set it, it should be set in stone: You don’t change it unless absolutely necessary. I suspect there are few principles that make a solopreneur successful; and knowing when to quit and when to continue is definitely one of them. Marc Louvion is famously known for his success, but he got there after failing so many projects. To my knowledge, the same applies to Nico Jeannen, Pieter Levels, or almost everyone as well. ❗️ Determining when to continue even before you start will definitely help in the long run. A half-aed launch Time-leap again. Around mid August, I “soft launched” my product. By soft launch, I mean lazy marketing. Just tweeting about it, posting it on free directories. Did I get any traffic? Surely I did. Did I get any users? Nope. Only after this time, it hit me: “Either something is wrong with me, or with this product” Marketing might be a much bigger factor for a project’s success after all. Even though I get some traffic, not convincing enough for people to sign up even for a free trial. The product was still perfect in my eyes at the time (well, still is ^(\_),) so the right people are not finding my product, I thought. Then, a question that I should have been asking at the very first place, one that could prevent all these, comes to my mind: “How do even people search for such tools?” If we are to consider this whole journey of me and my so-far-failed product to be an already destined failure, one metric suffices to show why. Search volume: 30. Even if people have such a pain point, they are not looking for email summaries. So, almost no organic traffic coming from Google. But, as a person who did zero marketing on this or any product, who has zero marketing knowledge, who doesn’t have an audience on social media, there is not much I could do. Finally, it was time to give up. Or not… In my eyes, the most important element that makes a founder (solo or not) successful (this, I am not by any means) is to solve problems. ❗️ So, the problem was this: “People are not finding my product by organic search” How do I make sure I get some organic traffic and gets more visibility? Learn digital marketing and SEO as much as I can within very limited time. Thankfully, without spending much time, I came across Neil Patel's YT channel, and as I said many times, it is an absolute gold mine. I learned a lot, especially about the fundamentals, and surely it will be fruitful; but there is no magic trick that could make people visit your website. SEO certainly helps, but only when people are looking for your keywords. However, it is truly a magical solution to get in touch with REAL people that are in your user segments: 👉 Understand your pains, understand their problems, help them to solve them via building products. I did not do this so far, have to admit. But, in case you would like to have a chat about your email usage, and email productivity, just get in touch; I’d be delighted to hear about them. Getting ready for a ProductHunt launch The date was Sept 1. And I unlocked an impossible achievement: Running out of Supabase’s free plan’s Egres limit while having zero users. I was already considering moving out of their Cloud server and managing a Supabase CLI service on my Hetzner VPS for some time; but never ever suspected that I would have to do this quickly. The cheapest plan Supabase offers is $25/month; yet, at that point, I am in between jobs for such a long time, basically broke, and could barely afford that price. One or two months could be okay, but why pay for it if I will eventually move out of their Cloud service? So, instead of paying $25, I spent two days migrating out of Supabase Cloud. Worth my time? Definitely not. But, when you are broke, you gotta do stupid things. This was the first time that I felt lucky to have zero users: I have no idea how I would manage this migration if I had any. I think this is one of the core tenets of an indie hacker: Controlling their own environment. I can’t remember whose quote this is, but I suspect it was Naval: Entrepreneurs have an almost pathological need to control their own fate. They will take any suffering if they can be in charge of their destiny, and not have it in somebody else’s hands. What’s truly scary is, at least in my case, we make people around us suffer at the expense of our attempting to control our own fates. I know this period has been quite hard on my wife as well, as I neglected her quite a bit, but sadly, I know that this will happen again. It is something that I can barely help with. Still, so sorry. After working the last two weeks on a ProductHunt Launch, I finally launched it this Tuesday. Zero ranking, zero new users, but 36 kind people upvoted my product, and many commented and provided invaluable feedback. I couldn't be more grateful for each one of them 🙏. Considering all these, what lies in the future of Summ though? I have no idea, to be honest. On one hand, I have zero users, have no job, no income. So, I need a way to make money asap. On the other hand, the whole idea of it revolves around one core premise (not an assumption) that I am not so willing to share; and I couldn’t have more trust in it. This might not be the best iteration of it, however I certainly believe that email usage is one of the best problem spaces one could work on. 👉 But, one thing is for certain: I need to get in touch with people, and talk with them about this product I built so far. In fact, this is the only item on my agenda. Nothing else will save my brainchild <3. Below are some other insights and notes that I got during my journey; as they do not 100% fit into this story, I think it is more suitable to list them here. I hope you enjoyed reading this. Give Summ a try, it comes with a generous free trial, no credit card required. Some additional notes and insights: Project planning is one of the most underestimated skills for solopreneurs. It saves you enormous time, and helps you to keep your focus up. Building B2B products beats building B2C products. Businesses are very willing to pay big bucks if your product helps them. On the other hand, spending a few hours per user who would pay $5/m probably is not worth your time. It doesn’t matter how brilliant your product is if no one uses it. If you cannot sell a product in a certain category/niche (or do not know how to sell it), it might be a good idea not to start a project in it. Going after new ideas and ventures is quite risky, especially if you don’t know how to market it. On the other hand, an already established category means that there is already demand. Whether this demand is sufficient or not is another issue. As long as there is enough demand for your product to fit in, any category/niche is good. Some might be better, some might be worse. Unless you are going hardcore B2B, you will need people to find your product by means of organic search. Always conduct thorough keyword research as soon as possible.

I Made $20K in 2 Months by Building in Public on X

Hey everyone, I wanted to share my journey of making $20K in just 2 months by leveraging Twitter (X) and building in public. It’s been an exciting ride, and I hope my story inspires others to take action on their ideas. Here’s exactly what I did: Building in Public I started sharing everything about my work openly. My wins, struggles, and process. I showed: How I build MVPs for clients. The tools I use (Next.js, Supabase, Cursor AI, etc.). The challenges I face and how I solve them. Transparency builds trust, and trust brings clients. Consistency is Key For the past 2 months, I’ve posted consistently on X, even when I felt like no one was watching. Here’s what I focused on: Sharing value (pro tips, workflows, tools). Asking for advice and engaging with my community. Highlighting my projects and client work. Building an audience takes time, but showing up daily pays off. Personal Brand = Inbound Clients I never did any “engagement farming” or gimmicky posts. I just shared my knowledge, and it led to over 35M views on my tweets and 7K followers. Many of these followers turned into inbound client leads. I’ve always believed: Share value for free, and charge for implementation. The Power of Community Engaging with my community on X has been game-changing. People have: Helped refine my processes. Shared valuable tools and advice. Connected me to opportunities I wouldn’t have found otherwise. Key Takeaway: You don’t need a perfect process or a huge following to start. Be consistent. Build in public. Share your journey. In 2 months, I’ve gone from wondering if this would work to making $20K by simply showing up and adding value. If you’re thinking about building in public or starting a personal brand, DO IT. It works. Feel free to ask me anything. I’m happy to share more details about my process, tools, or lessons learned! Let’s build together.

A sample library that implements Generative AI-Augmented Program Execution (GAPE)

Recently I had a crazy idea. What if you would mix formal program logic with "common sense reasoning" done by an LLM? Like so: statement = "Planet Earth is a flat disk." istrue = applycommonsensereasoningbyan_llm(statement) if is_true: print("Welcome to flat earth society!") else: print("Welcome to the scientific community") This idea can be generalized to many more things. Need to filter a list of concepts (strings) by a certain criterion that is accessible through common sense reasoning? Need to sort a list of concepts by a certain criterion applying common sense reasoning? I call this approach Generative AI-Augmented Program Execution (GAPE). I created a small Python sample library called PyGAPE here: https://github.com/fkostadinov/pygape/ I would love to get some feedback. Some people I showed the idea to were fascinated, other bewildered, some found it completely useless, others immediately got what I was after.

How are you validating ideas?

Hey guys, I’m a non technical founder who built a prototype of my product using ai. It doesn’t work but it has a minimal front end with an idea of how it would work. My strategy is to create an organic audience while simultaneously trying to find atechnical confounder. But before even any of that, how are you validating ideas? My thoughts would be to message people on Reddit / x / instagram on viral posts related to my topic, send them a quick product demo video and a feedback form to see what they think and if they would even use it But curious to hear what others have done or are currently doing.

What are Boilerplates?

What are Boilerplates? Boilerplate originally referred to the rolled steel used to make boilers for steam engines in the 19th century. Over time, the term evolved to describe any standardized piece of text or code that can be reused without significant changes. Interest in SaaS has been on the rise, and many more people now want to build products. However, building products from scratch takes a lot of time, and it can be extremely frustrating. Enter SaaS Boilerplates With the standardization of stacks and basic systems that govern SaaS tools, it has become evident that there was a need, and the time was ripe for SaaS Boilerplates. SaaS Boilerplates come with landing pages, website components, authentication modules, payment modules, and various other standard features that can save developers a significant amount of time and cost. The market is flooded with Boilerplates for various tech stacks, such as NextJS, Laravel, Swift, NuxtJS, and so forth. Pros and Cons of Boilerplates Pros Save a significant amount of time and money Reduce frustration for developers as the redundant tasks are taken care of Boilerplates often follow best practices For anywhere between $49 and $299, they provide terrific value for those looking to build something very quickly Most importantly, Boilerplates also enable aspiring founders and builders with limited technical resources or abilities to ship their products faster and more cheaply. They are beacons of hope for non-technical founders looking to build a product quickly. Cons Limited flexibility May become outdated fairly quickly Setting them up still requires time Similar landing pages and design themes can make the product look like a clone Marc Lou’s Shipfast For most of us, Marc Lou popularized the idea of SaaS Boilerplate. Marc Lou launched Shipfast in August 2023. He had built 27 projects prior to this and Shipfast was nothing but all his basic code organised properly. At that time, there were no solid NextJS boilerplates, and Shipfast just took off. He got traction via Product Hunt, Twitter and Hacker News and soon Shipfast went viral. Shipfast now generates $130K/mo, just 9 months after its launch. Marc has been building Shipfast in public, which has led to a lot of interest in SaaS Boilerplates. The market is now flooded with boilerplates for every major tech stack. Marc reaped the benefits of the first mover’s advantage as well as the social proof via his Shipfast community. I don’t think any other boilerplates are as successful as Shipfast, but there are quite a few good ones out there. Shipixen* has grossed over $20K in the 5 months Makerkit* does \~$3500/mo Moreover, there are many open-source boilerplates available for popular stacks such as NextJS. The Evolution of Boilerplates Boilerplates are quickly turning into no-code/low-code code generation tools. For instance, Shipixen allows you to generate custom code for landing pages, waitlist pages and blogs using a simple User Interface. Boilerplates are perfectly posied to sit between code and no-code. Allow the flexibility of code with the interface of a no-code tool — that will be the core value proposition of SaaS boilerplates. Should you build a Boilerplate? Well, the market is flooded, but I believe there’s still an opportunity to leverage boilerplates. You can build boilerplates for certain types of apps or tools, such as Chrome extensions Boilerplates can act as a great lead funnel for building out a great productized services business No-code/low-code code generation boilerplates can become a big thing if you can help build complex tools Niche tech stack boilerplates may still be lucrative Known strategies for successfully building a boilerplate 👇🏻 Shipfast thrives because of social proof and community SaaSRock generates most of its traffic from its Gumroad listings and blogs Usenextbase and Shipixen are being built in public Many boilerplates start with waitlists They have a very clear value proposition around saving time and cost Design & No-Code Boilerplates Here is the corrected version with improved grammar and clarity: While SaaS (code) boilerplates have become fairly popular, other types of boilerplates are emerging in the market, such as design boilerplates and no-code boilerplates. To be honest, design boilerplates have been around for a while. You will find numerous landing page packs, component libraries, and so forth. Makers are now building kits that leverage standard libraries and technologies such as Tailwind CSS, Daisy UI, and more. Nick Buzz from the famous baked.design has this *50 Landing Page Design Kit* in Tailwind CSS & Figma which is wildly popular. Lastly, there is a trend of no-code boilerplates as well. Mohit is building a Bubble Boilerplate for the popular no-code platform — Bubble. All in all, I think that people want to build products and build them fast. Boilerplates help them save a significant amount of time and cost. More importantly, boilerplates are impulse purchases for people who have not shipped but who want to ship. Introducing BuilderKit.ai We have been building AI SaaS tools for quite a while now. 10+ products across text, image, speech, RAG — we have built em all. We figured that it seems easy but actually building these so called AI Wrappers can be time consuming and frustrating — there is a lot of nuance to it. So we built BuidlerKit.ai — a NextJS SaaS Boilerpalte It takes care of everything from landing pages, authentication, dashboarding, emails, SEO to payments — everything that you need to build your tool. It also comes with 8+ production-ready apps. Moreover, the BuilderKit community is an exclusive community of AI SaaS builders (Pro Only Access) The Pre Orders are now live at https://www.builderkit.ai (First 100 Customers get $100 Off — I think we have already done \~20 odd orders since the announcement yesterday, Grab your seat asap!) Starter Plan $49, Pro Plan @ $99

Launch your landing page and marketing website faster even if you aren't a designer

As a frontend engineer  who is also good with UI/UX design,  aside from building dashboard and web apps all the time, one other thing I get to build is a landing page or marketing website to sell the product we are building. And just like dashboards, there are lots of repeatable sections in marketing website, just the uniqueness of designs. I find myself always building marketing websites from scratch always, which led me to building astrolandingpage.com , with my years of experience designing and building landing pages, I thought, this is good for me to do. to help me Save time and cut cost Launch early and validate my idea faster Launch beautiful landing page even if you are not a designer With copies that helps you converts, as each templates comes with examples copies and how to write them Although, I’ve been scared to launch this, because I think people might judge me, I probably wont make any sale, all because of how AI is turning out to be. With astrolandingpage, either you are a developer, a non technical person, a freelancer, an agency, a startup founder, you can launch beautiful and modern designs full fledge template in 20 minutes You get to pick from lots of templates and also UI components that you can copy and paste without the need to redesign  I believe this would be of great value to you and also I want to have fun building this. check it our here Astrolandingpage wesbite

I am building my agency to help founders build AI startups after 2 successful AI SaaS exits and 4 failures

Hey everyone, I have been building AI products before ChatGPT was launched. In these years, I have managed to launch, scale and exit 2 SaaS products successfully. Today I am launching a new service offering - Query Labs - Helping you build AI agents for your startups. Like all my previous products, I will be building this in public and share my learning along the way. Here's what I have built so far : Microsponsors ( Fail ) My first product ever. I tried to create a marketplace for newsletter writers to find sponsorship opportunity. Got a few very big newsletter listed on the marketplace as well. However, building marketplace is tough. I found it very difficult to bring in sponsors. Ended up shutting it down, AI Query (Exit - Pre revenue ) It was the second half of 2022 and GPT-3 was the most advance AI on the market. I decided to build a tool that can help developers and non-technical folks write SQL queries by just asking in plain english. I got my first taste of success with this. Had a decent offer even before I figured out monetisation. Accepted the offer to focus on my next product which had already started gaining traction AI Excel Bot ( Exit - Revenue Generating ) AI Excel Bot was my wild success. I had worked hard on the SEO for the site, along with the UI / UX to make it the best AI to write excel formulas and general excel task. There was already a large competitor in the market. However, the reality is that you don't need to be the top player. There is always room for multiple players to survive in a large market. You just need to find the good differentiating factor For AI Excel Bot, the differentiator was the chrome extension, that helped users access it anywhere on the internet. Scaled the product to more than 40k users at the time of exit. However, in the end I decided to exit and focus on my software service business that needed more time. Tutore AI ( Fail ) I wanted to build something useful for students to help them learn better. Tutore was my idea to build AI tools for students. I did launch quickly with multiple tools. However, wasn't motivated enough to continue with the grind. I have decided to sell the product. Have had some meetings with potential buyers but didn't agree on price. Prompt Hackers ( 1k users but no revenue ) Prompt Hackers is a directory of AI prompts for all the use cases you can image. I focused a lot on bringing traffic and newsletter subscription from the day 1. I have never had a problem bringing initial set of users to my products. Prompt Hackers was getting close to 20k page views a month. At the same time we had close to 1k newsletter subscribers. Since our target customers were people choosing to use ChatGPT / Bard instead of some specific software for their task, I built a Prompt Generation and Prompt Optimisation AI. Along with this I also created features to build private prompt library. To make the experience even better, I launched a Chrome Extension that helps users access the prompt generation AI and their prompt library while using ChatGPT. However, I couldn't figure out monetisation. I still get close to 4k page views per month with no marketing at all. There are users who use the AI tools and the prompt library feature daily. But, since I couldn't figure out monetisation, I decided to not put time into the project. There you go. These are all the products I have built in the last 3 years. I have been heavy investing myself in the latest tech in LLMs and AI agents. I know the biggest challenge for AI founders is the AI agents and backend pipelines. That's why I am launching Query Labs. To help you build the best AI implementation for your innovative AI startup. I would love to hear feedback from the community. I will be sharing my learning with my new service along the way. Thanks!

Solopreneur making $40k MRR with a No Code SaaS sideproject

Hey, I'm Elias and I do case studies analyzing successful startups and solopreneurs. I wanted to share the summarized version of this one with you because this entrepreneurial journey blew my mind. This post will be about FormulaBot (ExcelFormulaBot), an AI No Code SaaS founded by David Bressler back in August 2022. FormulaBot is currently making $40k MRR (monthly recurring revenue). How did the founder come up with the idea. David is a data guy who worked in analytics for several years. In July 2022, David got really interested in AI, especially ChatGPT. One night, he tried it out at home, just like we all did back in the time. But in his case, trying ChatGPT gave him a big idea. That idea ended up making him a lot of money and changing the life of 750 million people who use Excel. That night David started by asking GPT easy questions, then complex ones. Since he used Excel a lot and helped his colleagues with it, he thought about an AI that could make Excel easier, like generating formulas from text. He looked online but found nothing. Seeing a big chance, he decided to do something about it. What challenges did the founder face. But David didn’t have any idea about how to develop an app. However, with no-code tools this is not a problem anymore. He discovered Bubble, a no-code web app tool that could connect with the OpenAI API.After, learning Bubble from YouTube tutorials and through trial and error and spending his nights studying the OpenAI API documentation, he launched the first version of the app in around three weeks. Strategies that made the project successful. David validated his idea by posting about ExcelFormulaBot on a Reddit Excel subreddit, receiving surprising attention with 10,000 upvotes. This encouraged him to offer the tool for free to gather feedback. Facing a hefty $4,999 API bill after the Reddit post, David quickly monetized his product with a subscription-based SaaS website. On launch day, 82 customers signed up, surpassing his expectations. A successful Product Hunt launch followed, generating $2.4k in sales within 24 hours, and a TikTok influencer with 4.5 million followers brought in thousands of new users overnight with a viral video. Marketing approach: -Paid ads: FormulaBot boosted website traffic with Paid Ads, notably on Google Ads, prioritizing Quality Score. This ensured ads aligned better with user searches, maximizing visibility and cost-efficiency, targeting those seeking Excel formula assistance. -SEO: a) Content/Keyword optimization: FormulaBot improved its SEO by making helpful pages about Excel formulas, like guides on topics such as "How to use SUMIFS." b) Site Speed Enhancement: David boosted FormulaBot's marketing site speed by moving it from Bubble to Framer, aiming to improve user experience and SEO performance. c) On-page optimization: David optimized FormulaBot's on-page elements by adjusting title tags, meta descriptions, and content to enhance SEO performance and align with search intent. These strategic refinements aimed to address ranking declines and emphasize FormulaBot's uniqueness, ultimately improving its visibility and competitiveness in search results. -Virality: FormulaBot went viral as users found it highly useful and cool. Influencers on platforms like TikTok and Twitter shared it with their followers because they found it valuable. Offering numerous free features further enhanced its appeal. Lessons: successes and mistakes. ✅ Leverage industry expertise: David identified a problem in analytics and used his experience to start an online business addressing it, turning an industry challenge into a profitable venture. ✅ Embrace learning new skills: Despite lacking initial technical know-how, David learned what he needed to develop the software himself, demonstrating a commitment to continuous learning and adaptability crucial for success. ❌ Minimize dependency on third parties: Relying solely on the ChatGPT API poses risks for FormulaBot. Any issues with the API could disrupt functionality and limit scalability. ⁉️ Caution with free tools: Offering a free tool can attract users and drive viral growth, but converting them to paying customers is challenging. Avoid relying solely on a 100% free model unless your revenue comes from non-user sources like ads. For businesses dependent on user subscriptions or purchases, balancing user attraction with conversion challenges is crucial. How could you replicate this idea step-by-step. To replicate the success of FormulaBot and similar AI wrapper startups, it's crucial to tread carefully in a competitive market. Avoid mere replication of existing solutions unless you can offer something distinct or superior. Consider these steps to effectively develop an AI Wrapper/ChatGPT wrapper product using Bubble as a no-code tool: Design the user interface: Utilize Bubble's drag-and-drop editor to create a user-friendly interface with input fields, buttons, and result displays. Set up workflows: Define workflows to connect the interface with the ChatGPT API, enabling seamless interaction between users and the AI. Integrate the ChatGPT API: Obtain the API key from OpenAI and integrate it into your app using Bubble's API connector feature. Test and gather feedback: Thoroughly test your app, soliciting feedback to refine functionality and usability. Refine and optimize: Continuously improve your app based on user input and testing results to enhance performance and user experience. The in-depth version of the case study was originally posted here. Feel free to comment if you have any questions, and let me know which similar ideas you'd like me to analyze.

Introducing Vest: Your AI-Powered Due Diligence Partner - Looking for feedback!

TLDR; We are introducing Vest, an AI powered due-diligence and stock recommendation platform. We have bootstrapped ourselves so far and are wanting to get as much feedback from Reddit as we can to see where we can improve, but also what we are doing right. So please have a look around, give us feedback and if you like it, feel free to use it. Hi Reddit, My name is Drian and I'm one of the founders of Vest. We believe we are crafting something special at Vest and we want to get the word out and gather as much feedback as possible! Our major goal at Vest is to help new retail investors make sense of the investment landscape and get AI powered assistance, or even help experienced investors get confirmation of their potential moves. Overall, we want people to start their journey to financial freedom and not be daunted by the complexity of it. So how do we do this? Vest is a user-friendly service that harnesses fundamental metrics, social and news sentiment, and technical analysis, that we feed into some advanced AI models to generate clear buy, sell, or hold signals for US-based (for now!) stocks, offering our users transparent due-diligence for confident investing. The service is currently free with no ads - however, at some point we do plan on adding a paid tier. What's included: &#x200B; Financial Metrics. Our financial metrics take all the potentially complex mathematical equations and present the fundamentals of a company to users in a simple 1 pager, with a score displaying if the metric is positive for a stock. We also provide publicly available analyst ratings from investment banks as well as price targets they have set. News Sentiment. We take publications about a specific stock from new articles, journals and socials and give these all a rating to determine if social sentiment is positive around a stock or not. Each article and its rating is visible to our users through through our dashboard. AI assisted Stock Signals. We have developed an algorithm to take all the metrics, sentiment and technical analysis we collate and analyze this with historic performance data for every stock to attempt to figure out if a stock is undervalued (great time to buy) or overvalued (great time to sell). 155 US stock tickers and counting. We currently have trained our models for around 155 US based stocks on the NASDAQ and NYSE exchanges. As we get more funding/runway we do plan on adding more, with the eventual goal to expand to more exchanges, countries and securities. Knowledge base and community. Our knowledge base & community contains explanations and articles for all metrics and the other good stuff behind Vest. We don’t want to just tell users what to do, but to also assist in their financial education. We hope our knowledge base can also become a thriving community where users can interact with us and each, ask questions around investing and keep gaining knowledge. Is it 100% accurate? Absolutely not. While we do a pretty great job at tracking and surfacing signals, we are not presenting a fool-proof, silver bullet with a guarantee here - rather a starting point for users to make more informed decisions, find potential new investment opportunities and hopefully learn about investing as they do so. We encourage our users to do their own research and due-diligence and not just take our signals as gospel - we know each and every person has a different risk appetite and goals, and we encourage you to use Vest in a way that fits with your own financial goals and risk appetite. We also display our win rates, average returns, and comparisons with buy and hold for each stock - and we are transparent about it when we’ve fallen short. Next steps: &#x200B; Hope over to vestapp.ai and sign-up From the dashboard, play around, inspect our stock information and add some stocks to your watchlist. If you like what you see, and you’ve done your homework - use your favourite brokerage account to make an investment and watch Vest for changes in a stocks signals. If you don’t have one, we have a pop-up when you click buy/sell on any given stock with some non-affiliated brokerage options for the US, Australia and New Zealand - we don’t get a kickback from these brokerages, they are just what we’ve personally been using. FEEDBACK - We’re just getting started and we know the value of a fresh pair of eyes - our current mission is to get as much feedback as possible - anything you think of please send it through here or on the dedicated feedback form on our website in the sidebar on the left. Features we’re working on We're quietly thrilled about the direction Vest is headed, and we want to give you a sneak peek of what's in store for the next couple of quarters. Some of these may roll out as premium features, but we're diligently fine-tuning the details. Here's what you can expect: &#x200B; Insider Trading Insights: Get daily reports on major stock moves by whales and company insiders. Institutional Holders: We're adding daily reports on institutional holders, keeping you informed about their moves. Lobbying Activity: We're actively working on daily updates about lobbying activities, so you can stay informed. Government Contracts Data: We'll provide a quarterly snapshot of government contract values for the companies you're tracking. US Congress Stock Activity: Keep an eye on daily trading actions of House and Senate members. Daily Summaries & Signal Alerts: We're currently hard at work on this feature. Soon, receive daily email summaries covering signals, watchlist updates, and key news. Personalized Risk Management: Tailor signals to match your unique risk management strategy. Your investments, your way. AI Assistant: Our LLM integration is almost ready, allowing you to ask it straightforward questions about particular securities in plain English. It will provide you with real-time context on fundamentals, news, and all the metrics and data points we monitor.

Running and selling multiple side projects alongside a 9-5

My current side project started 56 days ago when I started writing 1,000 words per day. My core businesses are an agency and job board, and I just needed a creative outlet. The likes of Chris Guillebeau and Nathan Barry attribute their progression to writing so I thought I’d see if it might do the same for me. At first I was just vomiting words onto the screen, I made a blog and wrote mainly technical guides related to my skills. Over time I realised I was writing more and more about running a business as a solopreneur, or lean operator. There is tons of content out there giving you the Birds Eye of going from 0 to £10m. Inspiring stuff, but I think there is a void in real content, explaining the nuts and bolts of the how.  What is the day-to-day like for the solopreneurs who make a good living and have plenty of free time? That’s what I’m striving for anyway. I’m not talking about the 7-figure outliers. Or the ones teaching you to make content so you can have a business teaching others how to make content, and so on. I’m also sick of the ‘I made $X in 5 minutes and how you can too’  So, I started chatting to people in my network who run lean businesses and/or side hustles. I ask them a bit about their journey and ask them to teach something - how they operate, or a skill/process/system/tool that other people like you/me will find useful. One of my first chats was with Sam Dickie, who runs multiple side projects so thought I’d share here, see if others find it useful and get some feedback. I’ve removed all links as I’ve never posted on Reddit before so conscious of not being promotional, I’m posting this stuff to a tiny email list of friends with no upsells. Just finding my feet on whether others find it useful or not: — Sam is a serial entrepreneur who builds projects in his spare time whilst working a 9-5. He’s scaled and sold multiple ventures and currently runs one of the best newsletters out there for builders and entrepreneurs. Building audience through newsletters has always been a cornerstone strategy for him, so, along with sharing his advice on solopreneurism, he’s also generously shared his lean newsletter writing process. About Sam Sam is a Senior Product Manager who has spent the last 15 years working in the tech sector after starting his career as a town planner. In addition to his job he spends some of his spare time building side projects. These have included a 3D printing startup, a tech directory, a newsletter, a beta product directory, and consultancy. Sam is the epitome of making a success out of following your interest and curiosity. It’s clear he enjoys his business ventures and builds in a risk-free way.   It’s often touted by business gurus to avoid building around your interests, but Sam bucks the trend successfully. I think he’s someone who has already found his 1,000 true fans.  Descending rabbit holes, Sam’s journey of invention and curation 3D printing Sam’s first foray into launching a startup was with Fiilo, a 3D printing business. This was at the height of the 3D printing craze and he self-admits that he used the launch as an excuse to buy a 3D printer. He ended up with two and launching a product called GrowGo. GrowGo is a sustainable 3D-printed product that turns any bottle into somewhere that you can grow plants and herbs. He eventually sold this business and the printers, making around £10k. Along the way, he was exposed to various business tasks, including building a website in Weebly, the biggest nocode website builder of the time, and built an API that enabled print on demand for his product. NoCode.Tech The experiences of building as someone non-technical led to numerous friends asking how he built all of this tech. Back then, nocode wasn’t popular, and it had almost zero search volume, so Sam created a basic directory. A quick landing page on Weebly with a basic value prop, a short explanation and a list of the tools he had used before. It hit the top spot on Product Hunt, and he landed 2,000 subscribers in the first 48 hours. But, he hadn’t built it at this point, so he set about getting to work. He built the directory and list to 30,000 subs and monetised the site through advertising. At its peak with Sam, it was receiving about £2,000 per month in ad revenue. He was still working his 9-5 at this point, so thought it might be a good time to exit. The site was still growing, but it was becoming anxiety inducing whilst he was still working full-time. So, he ended up selling the site and making friend’s with the buyer. Fast forwarding a bit, Nocode.tech was eventually acquired by Stackr, a nocode app. Sam was working for their competitor at the time and ended up being offered a job by his friend who acquired the site. All of this from a side project in his area of passion. Creator Club After selling the directory, Sam lost his outlet for sharing his tools and learnings.  Being fascinated with curation and loving sifting through for nuggets, he invested more time into his personal website and launched Creator Club newsletter. Sam writes monthly and currently has over 8,000 subs. It’s one of the few newsletters that I let bypass my email filters and land in my main inbox. Life as a Part-Time Multipreneur Side Hustler If it’s not obvious already Sam is a curiosity led business creator. He’s found that the products without a revenue focus or intention have ironically outperformed those created for the sole purpose of creating money. He enjoys working on his side hustles. He could have run the Nocode.Tech for 10 more years and wouldn’t have tired of it as it’s a byproduct of his interest. For this reason, he has also created the Beta Directory, simply because he loves unearthing early-stage products. He admits he gets the fear when he thinks about quitting his 9-5, although he suspects if he devoted the same energy to one of his projects it could replace his income (no doubts from me here). This same fear means that he can run his ventures with less fear. This way, he can experiment with freedom and isn’t risking the ranch with a young family to consider. For example, recently he stopped paid sponsors on his newsletter as it was more stress than the value of the income to him. Sam divides his time on evenings and weekends (unequally) between the following: Creator Club Validation Co Beta directory Consultancy The pure side hustle status magnifies the need to run lean, let’s jump into his process…. Sam’s lean newsletter curation and creation process Starting out publishing his personal newsletter Going against his expertise, Sam originally over-engineered his process.  He curated with Feedly and tried to automate the full writing process with Zapier. The trouble is that there are too many points of failure which can lead the whole  chain to break down, and you spend more time fixing the system. For a 200 subscriber newsletter, he needed to pare things back. His set-up now Sam scaled back and now simple builds automations when he needs them. He keeps the process simple, right down to the design and any welcome automations. Keeping things real We touched on the trend that keeping things raw is better. Content has come full circle with the advent of AI. Everything looks too perfect and consequently, people’s tastes are changing. Sam mentioned watermarks that show content isn’t AI written, and we referenced content such as Greg Isenberg’s sketches, and Chris Donnelly’s image posts. \\Step by Step Process:\\ Using Stoop Inbox to manage sources Curation with Pocket Managing content with Airtable and Zapier Using Bearly to summarise Substack for writing Monitoring content sources Sam uses Stoop Inbox, an RSS curation tool, to manage his content sources. It gives him a dedicated email address for newsletters and he follows an Inbox Zero methodology. He checks in daily in Stoop, and on X, Reddit and IndieHackers. With X, he just uses the standard interface but has been careful to curate his feed, sometimes adding in extra notifications to hear from interesting people. Highlighting content When curating links, Sam uses Arc browser and the Pocket extension to save links. It’s super simple and lightweight. He creates tags which trigger an automation that curates the link to Airtable. If you watch the video, here’s a shoutout to Alice, the AI interface I use which has recently featured on Product Hunt. It’s a fantastic tool with bags of potential to enhance a solopreneur’s life. Ranking and sorting content He sends the links indexed using Pocket to a basic Airtable base via Zapier. From there, he grades the content and sets aside some time to read it in more depth. Pocket pulls through the title, metadata, and URL link. Review Sam does this manually but has used a tool as a shortcut for digesting long form content — Bearly.ai. Bearly.ai was created by Trung Phan and linking back to raw content, Trung is 1/3 of the hosts on the Not Investment Advice podcast. Its irreverent style and thumbnail are an example of a successful podcast that doesn’t over polish. Writing it all up Being a huge Notion fan (check out the free templates on his site), Sam originally used Notion for writing and linked it into Revue. When Elon sunsetted Revue, he switched to Substack. He loves the Substack interface so drafts in Substack based on a duplication of last month’s edition. Before publishing, Sam runs through a 10-point Notion checklist, which he shared with me. Parting Advice Keep your tool stack as lean as possible. Avoid tool switching to the shiny new object. Getting launched quickly is key. Don’t think that you have to be everywhere for distribution, Sam sticks with what he knows on X and LinkedIn. Overall, he advises just keeping things simple and therefore minimising risk. Resources He says they’re cliche, but I don’t agree; they’re timeless. Paul Graham of Y Combinator is someone Sam recommends following. He doesn’t write much, which is great as Sam gets anxiety when someone good often writes and he can’t keep up with the writing. His content is well thought out and distills complex concepts in entrepreneurship and startups. In addition, Sam loves Naval Ravikant’s approach. He mentions checking out the Almanac of Naval Ravikant for collected wisdom. Follow Sam’s Journey Again, not going to link here but you can find Sam’s stuff easily enough if you want to. His personal website is beautiful and contains loads of free downloads. He has also curated personal websites he admires if you need some inspiration. Sam is a super nice guy so reach out to him, I did before I started my personal blog recently, and he gave me some great advice. Also, worth keeping an eye on Validation Co, where he aims to help early-stage makers and creators validate their ideas. He’s building super slow — trying to enjoy the process without unachievable deadlines. Maintaining his stamina and passion. Amazing, I hope he writes more about that soon! -- That’s my second shot at an interview, hope you enjoyed it and found something useful in it. I’m talking to a marketplace founder who spends 2–3 hours per month his project, a multiple job board owner with a 9-5 and a leading book designer next. As this is my side project, should I keep going?

How I Built a $6k/mo Business with Cold Email

I scaled my SaaS to a $6k/mo business in under 6 months completely using cold email. However, the biggest takeaway for me is not a business that’s potentially worth 6-figure. It’s having a glance at the power of cold emails in the age of AI. It’s a rapidly evolving yet highly-effective channel, but no one talks about how to do it properly. Below is the what I needed 3 years ago, when I was stuck with 40 free users on my first app. An app I spent 2 years building into the void. Entrepreneurship is lonely. Especially when you are just starting out. Launching a startup feel like shouting into the dark. You pour your heart out. You think you have the next big idea, but no one cares. You write tweets, write blogs, build features, add tests. You talk to some lukewarm leads on Twitter. You do your big launch on Product Hunt. You might even get your first few sales. But after that, crickets... Then, you try every distribution channel out there. SEO Influencers Facebook ads Affiliates Newsletters Social media PPC Tiktok Press releases The reality is, none of them are that effective for early-stage startups. Because, let's face it, when you're just getting started, you have no clue what your customers truly desire. Without understanding their needs, you cannot create a product that resonates with them. It's as simple as that. So what’s the best distribution channel when you are doing a cold start? Cold emails. I know what you're thinking, but give me 10 seconds to change your mind: When I first heard about cold emailing I was like: “Hell no! I’m a developer, ain’t no way I’m talking to strangers.” That all changed on Jan 1st 2024, when I actually started sending cold emails to grow. Over the period of 6 months, I got over 1,700 users to sign up for my SaaS and grew it to a $6k/mo rapidly growing business. All from cold emails. Mastering Cold Emails = Your Superpower I might not recommend cold emails 3 years ago, but in 2024, I'd go all in with it. It used to be an expensive marketing channel bootstrapped startups can’t afford. You need to hire many assistants, build a list, research the leads, find emails, manage the mailboxes, email the leads, reply to emails, do meetings. follow up, get rejected... You had to hire at least 5 people just to get the ball rolling. The problem? Managing people sucks, and it doesn’t scale. That all changed with AI. Today, GPT-4 outperforms most human assistants. You can build an army of intelligent agents to help you complete tasks that’d previously be impossible without human input. Things that’d take a team of 10 assistants a week can now be done in 30 minutes with AI, at far superior quality with less headaches. You can throw 5000 names with website url at this pipeline and you’ll automatically have 5000 personalized emails ready to fire in 30 minutes. How amazing is that? Beyond being extremely accessible to developers who are already proficient in AI, cold email's got 3 superpowers that no other distribution channels can offer. Superpower 1/3 : You start a conversation with every single user. Every. Single. User. Let that sink in. This is incredibly powerful in the early stages, as it helps you establish rapport, bounce ideas off one another, offer 1:1 support, understand their needs, build personal relationships, and ultimately convert users into long-term fans of your product. From talking to 1000 users at the early stage, I had 20 users asking me to get on a call every week. If they are ready to buy, I do a sales call. If they are not sure, I do a user research call. At one point I even had to limit the number of calls I took to avoid burnout. The depth of the understanding of my customers’ needs is unparalleled. Using this insight, I refined the product to precisely cater to their requirements. Superpower 2/3 : You choose exactly who you talk to Unlike other distribution channels where you at best pick what someone's searching for, with cold emails, you have 100% control over who you talk to. Their company Job title Seniority level Number of employees Technology stack Growth rate Funding stage Product offerings Competitive landscape Social activity (Marital status - well, technically you can, but maybe not this one…) You can dial in this targeting to match your ICP exactly. The result is super low CAC and ultra high conversion rate. For example, My competitors are paying $10 per click for the keyword "HARO agency". I pay $0.19 per email sent, and $1.92 per signup At around $500 LTV, you can see how the first means a non-viable business. And the second means a cash-generating engine. Superpower 3/3 : Complete stealth mode Unlike other channels where competitors can easily reverse engineer or even abuse your marketing strategies, cold email operates in complete stealth mode. Every aspect is concealed from end to end: Your target audience Lead generation methods Number of leads targeted Email content Sales funnel This secrecy explains why there isn't much discussion about it online. Everyone is too focused on keeping their strategies close and reaping the rewards. That's precisely why I've chosen to share my insights on leveraging cold email to grow a successful SaaS business. More founders need to harness this channel to its fullest potential. In addition, I've more or less reached every user within my Total Addressable Market (TAM). So, if any competitor is reading this, don't bother trying to replicate it. The majority of potential users for this AI product are already onboard. To recap, the three superpowers of cold emails: You start a conversation with every single user → Accelerate to PMF You choose exactly who you talk to → Super-low CAC Complete stealth mode → Doesn’t attract competition By combining the three superpowers I helped my SaaS reach product-marketing-fit quickly and scale it to $6k per month while staying fully bootstrapped. I don't believe this was a coincidence. It's a replicable strategy for any startup. The blueprint is actually straightforward: Engage with a handful of customers Validate the idea Engage with numerous customers Scale to $5k/mo and beyond More early-stage founders should leverage cold emails for validation, and as their first distribution channel. And what would it do for you? Update: lots of DM asking about more specifics so I wrote about it here. https://coldstartblueprint.com/p/ai-agent-email-list-building

Looking for a technical co-founder to build LinkedIn’s rival

How do you connect with likeminded people? You see the polished wins everywhere, but what about the messy drafts , the awkward pitches and the moments you’re not sure you’ve got it right? Problem: The whole idea of founding and starting a business can be super intimidating for some people, specially those who don’t know any founders personally, those who don’t have a large network, those who don’t have rich parents with large networks, those not inserted in an entrepreneurial culture like in the US for example (which is my case). Sometimes all you need is the right support network, and too see others do what you want, to know that it’s possible! Everyone has an “ultimate guide” to make 7 figures or build a business on YouTube but NO ONE shoes you the HOW, just the results… I’ve tried joining founder communities, LinkedIn ,Reddit … you name it. Most of these founder communities are inaccessible for regular people and often ask for you to have an already existing business with a min ARR… or their simply geography based and if you’re not in a certain area you can’t really participate… As of LinkedIn… full of empty AI generated posts about how some random dude raised $10m in 7 days. Okay Jonathan, but what about the HOW?? How did you write your first pitch? How many rejection calls did you get? What is an MVP? There simply isn’t a platform out there to document your founding journey and find inspiration within a community of people who are doing the same as you. What better way to feel motivated then to see someone actually document their process? Solution: I’m working on building a social media platform for aspiring/founders to connect through the RAW, UNFILTERED process of turning ideas into reality in REAL time. It’s all gonna be around the “building in public “ concept and content creation. Picture an instagram/tiktok profile where instead of seeing someone’s dog you see them documenting their founding process—from the moment they had the idea, to the moment they launched, you’re going to see the successes, the fails, the rejected calls, all documented through actual content and not some AI generated LinkedIn post. Imagine if you wanted to learn about how Steve Jobs started Apple , you could simply go through his profile on this app—exactly. To make sure all interactions are meaningful people would have to apply. It’s a truly curated community, with REAL people, building REAL things in REAL time, and not just tell us the story of how they did it… Audience: I’m targeting people who have a burning desire of building a business and early stage founders starting their founder journeys, that don’t have a support network and simply don’t know where to start. People who are tired of watching 30 min “ultimate guides “ on how to make it on YouTube from “business gurus” selling courses. People who haven’t reached the min ARR required to join an “exclusive “ founder a community. People who can’t simply just move to the US to get into the “exclusive” YC combinator. People who want to connect with real people building real things and not anonymous people on Reddit, or LinkedIn influencers again trying to promote their services. I believe in the idea because I’m also part of my audience. Have always wanted to start my own thing just never knew how to and where to find a community of likeminded people . I don’t know any founders myself, I come from a non-entrepreneurial society and I’d pay good money to access a community of REAL passionate founders building REAL things, in REAL time. This would be my first ever business, and I want to share my journey building it and hopefully inspire others to just start so I’ve created a mailing list to keep anyone interested in the project updated on my fails , learnings and successes. I’m not worried about “making it” but just “starting” and hopefully reach the right audience and inspire anyone to start whatever they have marinating in their thoughts. If you’re a founder struggling with staying consistent or an aspiring founder with an insane desire of starting and don’t know how to start, I’d love to get your feedback on what’s stopping you, your challenges starting out and what you’d find useful in such platform. And finally would this be something that interests you?? Feel free to subscribe to get new updates 🫶🏼 : https://mailchi.mp/037c56b89994/d-founder PS: casually looking for a technical co-founder

I built an AI Sales Copilot for Reps & Sales Engineers

I had this problem as a founder that it was really hard to transfer everything I knew about my product and industry to the reps & Sales Engineers I was hiring. This problem also exists for non-founders, say the SE manager or VP Sales ramping new teammates I solved this problem by building HeySam, the AI Sales Copilot that shadows your top reps and SEs on calls, learning the “tribal knowledge” around positioning, objection handling, and technical questions. Customize Sam with your documentation, Slack, and sales collateral to create your team's perfect sales copilot for: Sales calls with live help on objections and questions Call Intelligence to summarize meetings, identify competitive pressures, and update the CRM Meeting Prep with prospect briefs combining account research, past interactions, and competitive insights Contact Tracking to follow key relationships as people change roles. RFPs completed in minutes Slack responses to sales teams’ technical questions, freeing up SE and engineering time Docs and community for self-serve customer education You can start with any of the seven powerful use cases. One AI Agent. That’s Sam.

Just reached 300 users in 3 months!!!

Just reached 300 users after 3 months live!!! My co-founder has been posting a bit here and always got some strong support and he suggested I share my side of things so here it is: How it started I co-founded AirMedia almost a year ago and we both didn’t know much about design/marketing/coding (just studied programming during my 6-month exchange period. The quickest way to get started seemed to get a no-code product that we could put in front of users and get feedback. My co-founder then started learning about bubble and we put together a basic platform to show users. I was working on a custom-code database in the meantime and decided after month 2 that we wanted to get something better I.e. AI would be interacting with the UI and had to do everything custom-code for it. We’re now month 3 and started from scratch again. While I was working on the code, we started talking to some potential users and selling lifetime deals to validate the idea (this is where I would start if I had to do it over again). Well I progressively found out it was more complicated than expected and we only released our first beta product last August (6 months later) Some challenges pre-launch: Getting the Meta/LinkedIn permissions for scheduling took around 1 month As the whole process took more time than expected, the waitlist of 300 that we managed to put together only converted by 10% (into free users). Please don’t make our mistakes and always keep your waitlist updated on what’s going on. Some challenges post-launch: Getting the right feedback and how to prioritise Getting users Monetising (yes - we’re bootstrapped) To get the best feedback we implemented some tracking (according to GDPR of course) on the platform and implemented Microsoft Clarity. The latter is a game-changer, if you have a SaaS and don’t use it you’re missing out. I wasn’t really into getting users as my co-founder handled that but it’s mainly manual and personalised LinkedIn outreach at the beginning and Reddit sharing about the progress, answering questions and getting some feedback at the same time. To monetise we realised we’re too common and there are 100+ other nice schedulers around so we’re now focusing on cracking the content creation side of AI (to be released next week 👀) as there’s much less competitors and it seems like that’s our users want. In the meantime of growing the company, we had to find a way to pay the bills as it’s two of us living together. So my co-founder started using the bubble skills gained and doing some freelance. He did around 7 platforms the last 6 months and we’re now just launching a bubble agency as a part of the main company to get your idea of a SaaS done in 30 days. That’s QuickMVP. It seemed like the right move to help other people (I met many non-technical founder looking for someone to bring their idea to life that didn’t cost $10k and was reliable) and include the AirMedia subscription in the package so let’s see how this next step plays out. Thanks for reading until here :)

I built an ai startup, got paying customers—then made it free because it felt like a scam

A few months ago, I launched my first AI startup, AppScriptor. It was an AI-powered tool that could generate mobile apps automatically. At first, I was thrilled—I got a lot of reactions, paying customers, and people excited about the idea. But the more I worked on it, the more I realized a major flaw: real-time app previews were nearly impossible. Users wanted instant updates and fast iterations, but the technology just wasn’t there yet. I felt guilty charging people for something that wasn’t delivering the experience they expected. It wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t good enough. I didn’t want to keep collecting payments while knowing I couldn’t improve it quickly enough—so I made it completely free. Eventually, I shut it down. That experience taught me a crucial lesson: people don’t just want an MVP; they want something useful. That’s why I built StarterPilot—an AI-driven platform that helps entrepreneurs validate ideas, generate branding assets, and build landing pages effortlessly. This time, I’m making sure it actually delivers. What’s the hardest part of launching a startup for you? Would love to hear your experiences!

How I went from $27 to $3K as a solopreneur still in a 9-5

My journey started back in November 2023. I was scrolling through Twitter and YouTube and saw a word that I had never come across before. Solopreneur. The word caught my eye. Mainly because I was pretty sure I knew what it meant even though it's not a word you'll find in the dictionary. I liked what it was describing. A solo entrepreneur. A one man business. It completely resonated with me. As a software engineer by trade I'm used to working alone, especially since the pandemic hit and we were forced to work remotely. See, I always wanted to ditch the 9-5 thing but thought that was too big and too scary for a single person to do. Surely you would need a lot of money to get started, right? Surely you would need investors? The whole concept seemed impossible to me. That was until I found all the success stories. I became obsessed with the concept of solopreneurship. As I went further down the rabbit hole I found people like Justin Welsh, Kieran Drew and Marc Louvion to name a few. All of whom have one person businesses making huge money every year. So I thought, if they can do it, why can't I? People like this have cleared the pathway for those looking to escape the 9-5 grind. I decided 2024 would be the year I try this out. My main goal for the year? Build a one man business, earn my first $ online and learn a sh\*t ton along the way. My main goal in general? Build my business to $100K per year, quit my 9-5 and live with freedom. From December 2023 to February 2024 I began brainstorming ideas. I was like a lost puppy looking for his ball. How on earth did people find good ideas? I began writing everything and anything that came to mind down in my notes app on my phone. By February I would have approximately 70 ideas. Each as weird and whacky as the other. I was skeptical though. If I went through all the trouble of building a product for one of these ideas how would I know if anyone would even be interested in using it? I got scared and took a break for a week. All these ideas seemed too big and the chance that they would take off into the atmosphere was slim (in my mind anyways). I was learning more and more about solopreneurship as the weeks went on so I decided to build a product centered around everything I was learning about. The idea was simple. Enter a business idea and use AI to give the user details about how to market it, who their target customers were, what to write on their landing page, etc. All for a measly $27 per use. I quickly built it and launched on March 3rd 2024. I posted about it on Indie Hackers, Reddit and Hacker News. I was so excited about the prospect of earning my first internet $! Surely everyone wanted to use my product! Nope...all I got was crickets. I was quickly brought back down to earth. That was until 5 days later. I looked at my phone and had a new Stripe notification! Cha-ching! My first internet $. What a feeling! That was goal number 1 complete. It would be another 6 days before I would get my second sale...and then another 15 days to get my third. It was an emotional rollercoaster. I went from feeling like quitting the 9-5 was actually possible to thinking that maybe the ups and downs aren't worth it. On one hand I had made my first internet dollar so I should my ecstatic, and don't get me wrong, I was but I wanted more. More validation that I could do this long term. By May I was starting to give up on the product. I had learned so much in the past few months about marketing, SEO, building an audience, etc. and I wanted to build something that I thought could have more success so I focused on one critical thing that I had learned about. What was it? Building a product that had SEO potential. A product that I knew hundreds of people were looking for. See this was my thinking - If I could find a keyword that people were searching for on Google hundreds/thousands of times every month and it was easy to rank high on search engines then I would go all in (in SEO land this equates to a Keyword that has a Keyword Difficulty of = 500). I began researching and found that the keyword "micro saas ideas" was being searched for around 600 times each month. Micro Saas was something that really interested me. It was perfect for solopreneurs. Small software products that 1 person could build. What's not to like if you're in the game of software and solopreneurship? Researching keywords like this became like a game for me. I was hooked. I was doing it every day, finding gems that were being searched for hundreds and thousands of times every month that still had potential. That's when I came up with my next product idea. I decided to create a database of Micro Saas Ideas all with this sort of SEO potential. See if you can build a product that you know people are looking for then that's all the validation you need. So I put this theory to the test. I created a database of Micro Saas Ideas with SEO Potential and launched it in June 2024. This time it was different. I made $700 in the first week of launching. A large contrast to my previous failed attempt at becoming the worlds greatest solopreneur. Since launch I have grown the product to $3K and I couldn't be happier. I know what you're saying, $3K isn't a lot. But it's validation. It's validation that I can earn $ online. Validation that I can grow a business and it gives me hope that one day I'll be able to quit that 9-5 grind. My plan is to keep growing the business. I expect there to be a few challenges up ahead but I'll tackle them as I go and learn from the failures and successes. I have a newsletter where I share Micro Saas Ideas with SEO potential every week which I'll leave below in the first comment. Feel free to come along for the ride. If not I hope this post brings you some value If you're thinking about starting as a solopreneur, stop thinking and start doing, you won't regret it.

I spent 6 months on a web app as a side project, and got 0 users. Here is my story.

Edit Thank you all so much for your time reading my story. Your support, feedback, criticism, and skepticism; all helped me a lot, and I couldn't appreciate it enough \^\_\^ I very rarely have stuff to post on Reddit, but I share how my project is going on, just random stuff, and memes on X. In case few might want to keep up 👀 TL;DR I spent 6 months on a tool that currently has 0 users. Below is what I learned during my journey, sharing because I believe most mistakes are easily avoidable. Do not overestimate your product and assume it will be an exception to fundamental principles. Principles are there for a reason. Always look for validation before you start. Avoid building products with a low money-to-effort ratio/in very competitive fields. Unless you have the means, you probably won't make it. Pick a problem space, pick your target audience, and talk to them before thinking about a solution. Identify and match their pain points. Only then should you think of a solution. If people are not overly excited or willing to pay in advance for a discounted price, it might be a sign to rethink. Sell one and only one feature at a time. Avoid everything else. If people don't pay for that one core feature, no secondary feature will change their mind. Always spend twice as much time marketing as you do building. You will not get users if they don't know it exists. Define success metrics ("1000 users in 3 months" or "$6000 in the account at the end of 6 months") before you start. If you don't meet them, strongly consider quitting the project. If you can't get enough users to keep going, nothing else matters. VALIDATION, VALIDATION, VALIDATION. Success is not random, but most of our first products will not make a success story. Know when to admit failure, and move on. Even if a product of yours doesn't succeed, what you learned during its journey will turn out to be invaluable for your future. My story So, this is the story of a product that I’ve been working on for the last 6 months. As it's the first product I’ve ever built, after watching you all from the sidelines, I have learned a lot, made many mistakes, and did only a few things right. Just sharing what I’ve learned and some insights from my journey so far. I hope that this post will help you avoid the mistakes I made — most of which I consider easily avoidable — while you enjoy reading it, and get to know me a little bit more 🤓. A slow start after many years Summ isn’t the first product I really wanted to build. Lacking enough dev skills to even get started was a huge blocker for so many years. In fact, the first product I would’ve LOVED to build was a smart personal shopping assistant. I had this idea 4 years ago; but with no GPT, no coding skills, no technical co-founder, I didn’t have the means to make it happen. I still do not know if such a tool exists and is good enough. All I wanted was a tool that could make data-based predictions about when to buy stuff (“buy a new toothpaste every three months”) and suggest physical products that I might need or be strongly interested in. AFAIK, Amazon famously still struggles with the second one. Fast-forward a few years, I learned the very basics of HTML, CSS, and Vanilla JS. Still was not there to build a product; but good enough to code my design portfolio from scratch. Yet, I couldn’t imagine myself building a product using Vanilla JS. I really hated it, I really sucked at it. So, back to tutorial hell, and to learn about this framework I just heard about: React.React introduced so many new concepts to me. “Thinking in React” is a phrase we heard a lot, and with quite good reasons. After some time, I was able to build very basic tutorial apps, both in React, and React Native; but I have to say that I really hated coding for mobile. At this point, I was already a fan of productivity apps, and had a concept for a time management assistant app in my design portfolio. So, why not build one? Surely, it must be easy, since every coding tutorial starts with a todo app. ❌ WRONG! Building a basic todo app is easy enough, but building one good enough for a place in the market was a challenge I took and failed. I wasted one month on that until I abandoned the project for good. Even if I continued working on it, as the productivity landscape is overly competitive, I wouldn’t be able to make enough money to cover costs, assuming I make any. Since I was (and still am) in between jobs, I decided to abandon the project. 👉 What I learned: Do not start projects with a low ratio of money to effort and time. Example: Even if I get 500 monthly users, 200 of which are paid users (unrealistically high number), assuming an average subscription fee of $5/m (such apps are quite cheap, mostly due to the high competition), it would make me around $1000 minus any occurring costs. Any founder with a product that has 500 active users should make more. Even if it was relatively successful, due to the high competition, I wouldn’t make any meaningful money. PS: I use Todoist today. Due to local pricing, I pay less than $2/m. There is no way I could beat this competitive pricing, let alone the app itself. But, somehow, with a project that wasn’t even functional — let alone being an MVP — I made my first Wi-Fi money: Someone decided that the domain I preemptively purchased is worth something. By this point, I had already abandoned the project, certainly wasn’t going to renew the domain, was looking for a FT job, and a new project that I could work on. And out of nowhere, someone hands me some free money — who am I not to take it? Of course, I took it. The domain is still unused, no idea why 🤔. Ngl, I still hate the fact that my first Wi-Fi money came from this. A new idea worth pursuing? Fast-forward some weeks now. Around March, I got this crazy idea of building an email productivity tool. We all use emails, yet we all hate them. So, this must be fixed. Everyone uses emails, in fact everyone HAS TO use emails. So, I just needed to build a tool and wait for people to come. This was all, really. After all, the problem space is huge, there is enough room for another product, everyone uses emails, no need for any further validation, right? ❌ WRONG ONCE AGAIN! We all hear from the greatest in the startup landscape that we must validate our ideas with real people, yet at least some of us (guilty here 🥸) think that our product will be hugely successful and prove them to be an exception. Few might, but most are not. I certainly wasn't. 👉 Lesson learned: Always validate your ideas with real people. Ask them how much they’d pay for such a tool (not if they would). Much better if they are willing to pay upfront for a discount, etc. But even this comes later, keep reading. I think the difference between “How much” and “If” is huge for two reasons: (1) By asking them for “How much”, you force them to think in a more realistic setting. (2) You will have a more realistic idea on your profit margins. Based on my competitive analysis, I already had a solution in my mind to improve our email usage standards and email productivity (huge mistake), but I did my best to learn about their problems regarding those without pushing the idea too hard. The idea is this: Generate concise email summaries with suggested actions, combine them into one email, and send it at their preferred times. Save as much as time the AI you end up with allows. After all, everyone loves to save time. So, what kind of validation did I seek for? Talked with only a few people around me about this crazy, internet-breaking idea. The responses I got were, now I see, mediocre; no one got excited about it, just said things along the lines of “Cool idea, OK”. So, any reasonable person in this situation would think “Okay, not might not be working”, right? Well, I did not. I assumed that they were the wrong audience for this product, and there was this magical land of user segments waiting eagerly for my product, yet unknowingly. To this day, I still have not reached this magical place. Perhaps, it didn’t exist in the first place. If I cannot find it, whether it exists or not doesn’t matter. I am certainly searching for it. 👉 What I should have done: Once I decide on a problem space (time management, email productivity, etc.), I should decide on my potential user segments, people who I plan to sell my product to. Then I should go talk to those people, ask them about their pains, then get to the problem-solving/ideation phase only later. ❗️ VALIDATION COMES FROM THE REALITY OUTSIDE. What validation looks like might change from product to product; but what invalidation looks like is more or less the same for every product. Nico Jeannen told me yesterday “validation = money in the account” on Twitter. This is the ultimate form of validation your product could get. If your product doesn’t make any money, then something is invalidated by reality: Your product, you, your idea, who knows? So, at this point, I knew a little bit of Python from spending some time in tutorial hell a few years ago, some HTML/CSS/JS, barely enough React to build a working app. React could work for this project, but I needed easy-to-implement server interactivity. Luckily, around this time, I got to know about this new gen of indie hackers, and learned (but didn’t truly understand) about their approach to indie hacking, and this library called Nextjs. How good Next.js still blows my mind. So, I was back to tutorial hell once again. But, this time, with a promise to myself: This is the last time I would visit tutorial hell. Time to start building this "ground-breaking idea" Learning the fundamentals of Next.js was easier than learning of React unsurprisingly. Yet, the first time I managed to run server actions on Next.js was one of the rarest moments that completely blew my mind. To this day, I reject the idea that it is something else than pure magic under its hood. Did I absolutely need Nextjs for this project though? I do not think so. Did it save me lots of time? Absolutely. Furthermore, learning Nextjs will certainly be quite helpful for other projects that I will be tackling in the future. Already got a few ideas that might be worth pursuing in the head in case I decide to abandon Summ in the future. Fast-forward few weeks again: So, at this stage, I had a barely working MVP-like product. Since the very beginning, I spent every free hour (and more) on this project as speed is essential. But, I am not so sure it was worth it to overwork in retrospect. Yet, I know I couldn’t help myself. Everything is going kinda smooth, so what’s the worst thing that could ever happen? Well, both Apple and Google announced their AIs (Apple Intelligence and Google Gemini, respectively) will have email summarization features for their products. Summarizing singular emails is no big deal, after all there were already so many similar products in the market. I still think that what truly matters is a frictionless user experience, and this is why I built this product in a certain way: You spend less than a few minutes setting up your account, and you get to enjoy your email summaries, without ever visiting its website again. This is still a very cool concept I really like a lot. So, at this point: I had no other idea that could be pursued, already spent too much time on this project. Do I quit or not? This was the question. Of course not. I just have to launch this product as quickly as possible. So, I did something right, a quite rare occurrence I might say: Re-planned my product, dropped everything secondary to the core feature immediately (save time on reading emails), tried launching it asap. 👉 Insight: Sell only one core feature at one time. Drop anything secondary to this core feature. Well, my primary occupation is product design. So one would expect that a product I build must have stellar design. I considered any considerable time spent on design at this stage would be simply wasted. I still think this is both true and wrong: True, because if your product’s core benefits suck, no one will care about your design. False, because if your design looks amateurish, no one will trust you and your product. So, I always targeted an average level design with it and the way this tool works made it quite easy as I had to design only 2 primary pages: Landing page and user portal (which has only settings and analytics pages). However, even though I knew spending time on design was not worth much of my time, I got a bit “greedy”: In fact, I redesigned those pages three times, and still ended up with a so-so design that I am not proud of. 👉 What I would do differently: Unless absolutely necessary, only one iteration per stage as long as it works. This, in my mind, applies to everything. If your product’s A feature works, then no need to rewrite it from scratch for any reason, or even refactor it. When your product becomes a success, and you absolutely need that part of your codebase to be written, do so, but only then. Ready to launch, now is th etime for some marketing, right? By July 26, I already had a “launchable” product that barely works (I marked this date on a Notion docs, this is how I know). Yet, I had spent almost no time on marketing, sales, whatever. After all, “You build and they will come”. Did I know that I needed marketing? Of course I did, but knowingly didn’t. Why, you might ask. Well, from my perspective, it had to be a dev-heavy product; meaning that you spend most of your time on developing it, mostly coding skills. But, this is simply wrong. As a rule of thumb, as noted by one of the greatests, Marc Louvion, you should spend at least twice of the building time on marketing. ❗️ Time spent on building \* 2 people don’t know your product > they don’t use your product > you don’t get users > you don’t make money Easy as that. Following the same reasoning, a slightly different approach to planning a project is possible. Determine an approximate time to complete the project with a high level project plan. Let’s say 6 months. By the reasoning above, 2 months should go into building, and 4 into marketing. If you need 4 months for building instead of 2, then you need 8 months of marketing, which makes the time to complete the project 12 months. If you don’t have that much time, then quit the project. When does a project count as completed? Well, in reality, never. But, I think we have to define success conditions even before we start for indie projects and startups; so we know when to quit when they are not met. A success condition could look like “Make $6000 in 12 months” or “Have 3000 users in 6 months”. It all depends on the project. But, once you set it, it should be set in stone: You don’t change it unless absolutely necessary. I suspect there are few principles that make a solopreneur successful; and knowing when to quit and when to continue is definitely one of them. Marc Louvion is famously known for his success, but he got there after failing so many projects. To my knowledge, the same applies to Nico Jeannen, Pieter Levels, or almost everyone as well. ❗️ Determining when to continue even before you start will definitely help in the long run. A half-aed launch Time-leap again. Around mid August, I “soft launched” my product. By soft launch, I mean lazy marketing. Just tweeting about it, posting it on free directories. Did I get any traffic? Surely I did. Did I get any users? Nope. Only after this time, it hit me: “Either something is wrong with me, or with this product” Marketing might be a much bigger factor for a project’s success after all. Even though I get some traffic, not convincing enough for people to sign up even for a free trial. The product was still perfect in my eyes at the time (well, still is ^(\_),) so the right people are not finding my product, I thought. Then, a question that I should have been asking at the very first place, one that could prevent all these, comes to my mind: “How do even people search for such tools?” If we are to consider this whole journey of me and my so-far-failed product to be an already destined failure, one metric suffices to show why. Search volume: 30. Even if people have such a pain point, they are not looking for email summaries. So, almost no organic traffic coming from Google. But, as a person who did zero marketing on this or any product, who has zero marketing knowledge, who doesn’t have an audience on social media, there is not much I could do. Finally, it was time to give up. Or not… In my eyes, the most important element that makes a founder (solo or not) successful (this, I am not by any means) is to solve problems. ❗️ So, the problem was this: “People are not finding my product by organic search” How do I make sure I get some organic traffic and gets more visibility? Learn digital marketing and SEO as much as I can within very limited time. Thankfully, without spending much time, I came across Neil Patel's YT channel, and as I said many times, it is an absolute gold mine. I learned a lot, especially about the fundamentals, and surely it will be fruitful; but there is no magic trick that could make people visit your website. SEO certainly helps, but only when people are looking for your keywords. However, it is truly a magical solution to get in touch with REAL people that are in your user segments: 👉 Understand your pains, understand their problems, help them to solve them via building products. I did not do this so far, have to admit. But, in case you would like to have a chat about your email usage, and email productivity, just get in touch; I’d be delighted to hear about them. Getting ready for a ProductHunt launch The date was Sept 1. And I unlocked an impossible achievement: Running out of Supabase’s free plan’s Egres limit while having zero users. I was already considering moving out of their Cloud server and managing a Supabase CLI service on my Hetzner VPS for some time; but never ever suspected that I would have to do this quickly. The cheapest plan Supabase offers is $25/month; yet, at that point, I am in between jobs for such a long time, basically broke, and could barely afford that price. One or two months could be okay, but why pay for it if I will eventually move out of their Cloud service? So, instead of paying $25, I spent two days migrating out of Supabase Cloud. Worth my time? Definitely not. But, when you are broke, you gotta do stupid things. This was the first time that I felt lucky to have zero users: I have no idea how I would manage this migration if I had any. I think this is one of the core tenets of an indie hacker: Controlling their own environment. I can’t remember whose quote this is, but I suspect it was Naval: Entrepreneurs have an almost pathological need to control their own fate. They will take any suffering if they can be in charge of their destiny, and not have it in somebody else’s hands. What’s truly scary is, at least in my case, we make people around us suffer at the expense of our attempting to control our own fates. I know this period has been quite hard on my wife as well, as I neglected her quite a bit, but sadly, I know that this will happen again. It is something that I can barely help with. Still, so sorry. After working the last two weeks on a ProductHunt Launch, I finally launched it this Tuesday. Zero ranking, zero new users, but 36 kind people upvoted my product, and many commented and provided invaluable feedback. I couldn't be more grateful for each one of them 🙏. Considering all these, what lies in the future of Summ though? I have no idea, to be honest. On one hand, I have zero users, have no job, no income. So, I need a way to make money asap. On the other hand, the whole idea of it revolves around one core premise (not an assumption) that I am not so willing to share; and I couldn’t have more trust in it. This might not be the best iteration of it, however I certainly believe that email usage is one of the best problem spaces one could work on. 👉 But, one thing is for certain: I need to get in touch with people, and talk with them about this product I built so far. In fact, this is the only item on my agenda. Nothing else will save my brainchild <3. Below are some other insights and notes that I got during my journey; as they do not 100% fit into this story, I think it is more suitable to list them here. I hope you enjoyed reading this. Give Summ a try, it comes with a generous free trial, no credit card required. Some additional notes and insights: Project planning is one of the most underestimated skills for solopreneurs. It saves you enormous time, and helps you to keep your focus up. Building B2B products beats building B2C products. Businesses are very willing to pay big bucks if your product helps them. On the other hand, spending a few hours per user who would pay $5/m probably is not worth your time. It doesn’t matter how brilliant your product is if no one uses it. If you cannot sell a product in a certain category/niche (or do not know how to sell it), it might be a good idea not to start a project in it. Going after new ideas and ventures is quite risky, especially if you don’t know how to market it. On the other hand, an already established category means that there is already demand. Whether this demand is sufficient or not is another issue. As long as there is enough demand for your product to fit in, any category/niche is good. Some might be better, some might be worse. Unless you are going hardcore B2B, you will need people to find your product by means of organic search. Always conduct thorough keyword research as soon as possible.

How me and my team made 15+ apps and not made a single sale in 2023

Hey, my name is Michael, I am in Auckland NZ. This year was the official beginning of my adult life. I graduated from university and started a full-time job. I’ve also really dug into indiehacking/bootstrapping and started 15 projects (and it will be at least 17 before the year ends). I think I’ve learned a lot but I consciously repeated mistakes. Upto (Nov) Discord Statuses + Your Location + Facebook Poke https://preview.redd.it/4nqt7tp2tf5c1.png?width=572&format=png&auto=webp&s=b0223484bc54b45b5c65e0b1afd0dc52f9c02ad1 This was the end of uni, I often messaged (and got messaged) requests of status and location to (and from my) friends. I thought, what if we make a social app that’s super basic and all it does is show you where your friends are? To differentiate from snap maps and others we wanted something with more privacy where you select the location. However, never finished the codebase or launched it. This is because I slowly started to realize that B2C (especially social networks) are way too hard to make into an actual business and the story with Fistbump would repeat itself. However, this decision not to launch it almost launched a curse on our team. From that point, we permitted ourselves to abandon projects even before launching. Lessons: Don’t do social networks if your goal is 10k MRR ASAP. If you build something to 90% competition ship it or you will think it’s okay to abandon projects Insight Bites (Nov) Youtube Summarizer Extension &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/h6drqej4tf5c1.jpg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0f211456c390ac06f4fcb54aa51f9d50b0826658 Right after Upto, we started ideating and conveniently the biggest revolution in the recent history of tech was released → GPT. We instantly began ideating. The first problem we chose to use AI for is to summarize YouTube videos. Comical. Nevertheless, I am convinced we have had the best UX because you could right-click on a video to get a slideshow of insights instead of how everyone else did it. We dropped it because there was too much competition and unit economics didn’t work out (and it was a B2C). PodPigeon (Dec) Podcast → Tweet Threads https://preview.redd.it/0ukge245tf5c1.png?width=2498&format=png&auto=webp&s=23303e1cab330578a3d25cd688fa67aa3b97fb60 Then we thought, to make unit economics work we need to make this worthwhile for podcasters. This is when I got into Twitter and started seeing people summarize podcasts. Then I thought, what if we make something that converts a podcast into tweets? This was probably one of the most important projects because it connected me with Jason and Jonaed, both of whom I regularly stay in contact with and are my go-to experts on ideas related to content creation. Jonaed was even willing to buy Podpigeon and was using it on his own time. However, the unit economics still didn’t work out (and we got excited about other things). Furthermore, we got scared of the competition because I found 1 - 2 other people who did similar things poorly. This was probably the biggest mistake we’ve made. Very similar projects made 10k MRR and more, launching later than we did. We didn’t have a coherent product vision, we didn’t understand the customer well enough, and we had a bad outlook on competition and a myriad of other things. Lessons: I already made another post about the importance of outlook on competition. Do not quit just because there are competitors or just because you can’t be 10x better. Indiehackers and Bootstrappers (or even startups) need to differentiate in the market, which can be via product (UX/UI), distribution, or both. Asking Ace Intro.co + Crowdsharing &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/0hu2tt16tf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3d397568ef2331e78198d64fafc1a701a3e75999 As I got into Twitter, I wanted to chat with some people I saw there. However, they were really expensive. I thought, what if we made some kind of crowdfunding service for other entrepreneurs to get a private lecture from their idols? It seemed to make a lot of sense on paper. It was solving a problem (validated via the fact that Intro.co is a thing and making things cheaper and accessible is a solid ground to stand on), we understood the market (or so we thought), and it could monetize relatively quickly. However, after 1-2 posts on Reddit and Indiehackers, we quickly learned three things. Firstly, no one cares. Secondly, even if they do, they think they can get the same information for free online. Thirdly, the reasons before are bad because for the first point → we barely talked to people, and for the second people → we barely talked to the wrong people. However, at least we didn’t code anything this time and tried to validate via a landing page. Lessons Don’t give up after 1 Redditor says “I don’t need this” Don’t be scared to choose successful people as your audience. Clarito Journaling with AI analyzer https://preview.redd.it/8ria2wq6tf5c1.jpg?width=1108&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=586ec28ae75003d9f71b4af2520b748d53dd2854 Clarito is a classic problem all amateur entrepreneurs have. It’s where you lie to yourself that you have a real problem and therefore is validated but when your team asks you how much you would pay you say I guess you will pay, maybe, like 5 bucks a month…? Turns out, you’d have to pay me to use our own product lol. We sent it off to a few friends and posted on some forums, but never really got anything tangible and decided to move away. Honestly, a lot of it is us in our own heads. We say the market is too saturated, it’ll be hard to monetize, it’s B2C, etc. Lessons: You use the Mom Test on other people. You have to do it yourself as well. However, recognizing that the Mom Test requires a lot of creativity in its investigation because knowing what questions to ask can determine the outcome of the validation. I asked myself “Do I journal” but I didn’t ask myself “How often do I want GPT to chyme in on my reflections”. Which was practically never. That being said I think with the right audience and distribution, this product can work. I just don’t know (let alone care) about the audience that much (and I thought I was one of them)/ Horns & Claw Scrapes financial news texts you whether you should buy/sell the stock (news sentiment analysis) &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/gvfxdgc7tf5c1.jpg?width=1287&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=63977bbc33fe74147b1f72913cefee4a9ebec9c2 This one we didn’t even bother launching. Probably something internal in the team and also seemed too good to be true (because if this works, doesn’t that just make us ultra-rich fast?). I saw a similar tool making 10k MRR so I guess I was wrong. Lessons: This one was pretty much just us getting into our heads. I declared that without an audience it would be impossible to ship this product and we needed to start a YouTube channel. Lol, and we did. And we couldn’t even film for 1 minute. I made bold statements like “We will commit to this for at least 1 year no matter what”. Learnery Make courses about any subject https://preview.redd.it/1nw6z448tf5c1.jpg?width=1112&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f2c73e8af23b0a6c3747a81e785960d4004feb48 This is probably the most “successful” project we’ve made. It grew from a couple of dozen to a couple of hundred users. It has 11 buy events for $9.99 LTD (we couldn’t be bothered connecting Stripe because we thought no one would buy it anyway). However what got us discouraged from seriously pursuing it more is, that this has very low defensibility, “Why wouldn’t someone just use chatGPT?” and it’s B2C so it’s hard to monetize. I used it myself for a month or so but then stopped. I don’t think it’s the app, I think the act of learning a concept from scratch isn’t something you do constantly in the way Learnery delivers it (ie course). I saw a bunch of similar apps that look like Ass make like 10k MRR. Lessons: Don’t do B2C, or if you do, do it properly Don’t just Mixpanel the buy button, connect your Stripe otherwise, it doesn’t feel real and you won’t get momentum. I doubt anyone (even me) will make this mistake again. I live in my GPT bubble where I make assumptions that everyone uses GPT the same way and as much as I do. In reality, the argument that this has low defensibility against GPT is invalid. Platforms that deliver a differentiated UX from ChatGPT to audiences who are not tightly integrated into the habit of using ChatGPT (which is like - everyone except for SOME tech evangelists). CuriosityFM Make podcasts about any subject https://preview.redd.it/zmosrcp8tf5c1.jpg?width=638&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d04ddffabef9050050b0d87939273cc96a8637dc This was our attempt at making Learnery more unique and more differentiated from chatGPT. We never really launched it. The unit economics didn’t work out and it was actually pretty boring to listen to, I don’t think I even fully listened to one 15-minute episode. I think this wasn’t that bad, it taught us more about ElevenLabs and voice AI. It took us maybe only 2-3 days to build so I think building to learn a new groundbreaking technology is fine. SleepyTale Make children’s bedtime stories https://preview.redd.it/14ue9nm9tf5c1.jpg?width=807&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=267e18ec6f9270e6d1d11564b38136fa524966a1 My 8-year-old sister gave me that idea. She was too scared of making tea and I was curious about how she’d react if she heard a bedtime story about that exact scenario with the moral that I wanted her to absorb (which is that you shouldn’t be scared to try new things ie stop asking me to make your tea and do it yourself, it’s not that hard. You could say I went full Goebbels on her). Zane messaged a bunch of parents on Facebook but no one really cared. We showed this to one Lady at the place we worked from at Uni and she was impressed and wanted to show it to her kids but we already turned off our ElevenLabs subscription. Lessons: However, the truth behind this is beyond just “you need to be able to distribute”. It’s that you have to care about the audience. I don’t particularly want to build products for kids and parents. I am far away from that audience because I am neither a kid anymore nor going to be a parent anytime soon, and my sister still asked me to make her tea so the story didn’t work. I think it’s important to ask yourself whether you care about the audience. The way you answer that even when you are in full bias mode is, do you engage with them? Are you interested in what’s happening in their communities? Are you friends with them? Etc. User Survey Analyzer Big User Survey → GPT → Insights Report Me and my coworker were chatting about AI when he asked me to help him analyze a massive survey for him. I thought that was some pretty decent validation. Someone in an actual company asking for help. Lessons Market research is important but moving fast is also important. Ie building momentum. Also don’t revolve around 1 user. This has been a problem in multiple projects. Finding as many users as possible in the beginning to talk to is key. Otherwise, you are just waiting for 1 person to get back to you. AutoI18N Automated Internationalization of the codebase for webapps This one I might still do. It’s hard to find a solid distribution strategy. However, the idea came from me having to do it at my day job. It seems a solid problem. I’d say it’s validated and has some good players already. The key will be differentiation via the simplicity of UX and distribution (which means a slightly different audience). In the backlog for now because I don’t care about the problem or the audience that much. Documate - Part 1 Converts complex PDFs into Excel https://preview.redd.it/8b45k9katf5c1.jpg?width=1344&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=57324b8720eb22782e28794d2db674b073193995 My mom needed to convert a catalog of furniture into an inventory which took her 3 full days of data entry. I automated it for her and thought this could have a big impact but there was no distribution because there was no ICP. We tried to find the ideal customers by talking to a bunch of different demographics but I flew to Kazakhstan for a holiday and so this kind of fizzled out. I am not writing this blog post linearity, this is my 2nd hour and I am tired and don’t want to finish this later so I don’t even know what lessons I learned. Figmatic Marketplace of high-quality Figma mockups of real apps https://preview.redd.it/h13yv45btf5c1.jpg?width=873&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=aaa2896aeac2f22e9b7d9eed98c28bb8a2d2cdf1 This was a collab between me and my friend Alex. It was the classic Clarito where we both thought we had this problem and would pay to fix it. In reality, this is a vitamin. Neither I, nor I doubt Alex have thought of this as soon as we bought the domain. We posted it on Gumroad, sent it to a bunch of forums, and called it a day. Same issue as almost all the other ones. No distribution strategy. However, apps like Mobin show us that this concept is indeed profitable but it takes time. It needs SEO. It needs a community. None of those things, me and Alex had or was interested in. However shortly after HTML → Figma came out and it’s the best plugin. Maybe that should’ve been the idea. Podcast → Course Turns Podcaster’s episodes into a course This one I got baited by Jason :P I described to him the idea of repurposing his content for a course. He told me this was epic and he would pay. Then after I sent him the demo, he never checked it out. Anyhow during the development, we realized that doesn’t actually work because A podcast doesn’t have the correct format for the course, the most you can extract are concepts and ideas, seldom explanations. Most creators want video-based courses to be hosted on Kajabi or Udemy Another lesson is that when you pitch something to a user, what you articulate is a platform or a process, they imagine an outcome. However, the end result of your platform can be a very different outcome to what they had in mind and there is even a chance that what they want is not possible. You need to understand really well what the outcome looks like before you design the process. This is a classic problem where we thought of the solution before the problem. Yes, the problem exists. Podcasters want to make courses. However, if you really understand what they want, you can see how repurposing a podcast isn’t the best way to get there. However I only really spoke to 1-2 podcasters about this so making conclusions is dangerous for this can just be another asking ace mistake with the Redditor. Documate Part 2 Same concept as before but now I want to run some ads. We’ll see what happens. https://preview.redd.it/xb3npj0ctf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3cd4884a29fd11d870d010a2677b585551c49193 In conclusion https://preview.redd.it/2zrldc9dtf5c1.jpg?width=1840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2b3105073e752ad41c23f205dbd1ea046c1da7ff It doesn’t actually matter that much whether you choose to do a B2C, or a social network or focus on growing your audience. All of these can make you successful. What’s important is that you choose. If I had to summarize my 2023 in one word it’s indecision. Most of these projects succeeded for other people, nothing was as fundamentally wrong about them as I proclaimed. In reality that itself was an excuse. New ideas seduce, and it is a form of discipline to commit to a single project for a respectful amount of time. https://preview.redd.it/zy9a2vzdtf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=901c621227bba0feb4efdb39142f66ab2ebb86fe Distribution is not just posting on Indiehackers and Reddit. It’s an actual strategy and you should think of it as soon as you think of the idea, even before the Figma designs. I like how Denis Shatalin taught me. You have to build a pipeline. That means a reliable way to get leads, launch campaigns at them, close deals, learn from them, and optimize. Whenever I get an idea now I always try to ask myself “Where can I find 1000s leads in one day?” If there is no good answer, this is not a good project to do now. &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/2boh3fpetf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1c0d5d7b000716fcbbb00cbad495e8b61e25be66 Talk to users before doing anything. Jumping on designing and coding to make your idea a reality is a satisfying activity in the short term. Especially for me, I like to create for the sake of creation. However, it is so important to understand the market, understand the audience, understand the distribution. There are a lot of things to understand before coding. https://preview.redd.it/lv8tt96ftf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6c8735aa6ad795f216ff9ddfa2341712e8277724 Get out of your own head. The real reason we dropped so many projects is that we got into our own heads. We let the negative thoughts creep in and kill all the optimism. I am really good at coming up with excuses to start a project. However, I am equally as good at coming up with reasons to kill a project. And so you have this yin and yang of starting and stopping. Building momentum and not burning out. I can say with certainty my team ran out of juice this year. We lost momentum so many times we got burnt out towards the end. Realizing that the project itself has momentum is important. User feedback and sales bring momentum. Building also creates momentum but unless it is matched with an equal force of impact, it can stomp the project down. That is why so many of our projects died quickly after we launched. The smarter approach is to do things that have a low investment of momentum (like talking to users) but result in high impact (sales or feedback). Yes, that means the project can get invalidated which makes it more short-lived than if we built it first, but it preserves team life energy. At the end of 2023 here is a single sentence I am making about how I think one becomes a successful indiehacker. One becomes a successful Indiehacker when one starts to solve pain-killer problems in the market they understand, for an audience they care about and consistently engage with for a long enough timeframe. Therefore an unsuccessful Indiehacker in a single sentence is An unsuccessful Indiehacker constantly enters new markets they don’t understand to build solutions for people whose problems they don’t care about, in a timeframe that is shorter than than the time they spent thinking about distribution. However, an important note to be made. Life is not just about indiehacking. It’s about learning and having fun. In the human world, the best journey isn’t the one that gets you the fastest to your goals but the one you enjoy the most. I enjoyed making those silly little projects and although I do not regret them, I will not repeat the same mistakes in 2024. But while it’s still 2023, I have 2 more projects I want to do :) EDIT: For Devs, frontend is always react with vite (ts) and backend is either node with express (ts) or python. For DB either Postgres or mongo (usually Prisma for ORM). For deployment all of it is on AWS (S3, EC2). In terms of libraries/APIs Whisper.cpp is best open source for transcription Obviously the gpt apis Eleven labs for voice related stuff And other random stuff here and there

Solo Entrepreneurs, This One’s for You! After Studying 15+ AI Directories, I’m Building a New Hub for AI, SaaS, and Tools (but the concept is unique)—Submit Yours for FREE 🚀 (Big Companies, Please Stay Away)

I’ve been in your shoes—tight budgets, limited resources, and a constant search for marketing solutions that actually work. Lately, I’ve been checking out more than 15 AI directories here on Reddit, and honestly, they all seem to have the same issues. They’re cluttered, confusing, and often filled with sponsored listings that don’t really help anyone. This got me thinking: if these tools aren’t helping users, how can any of our tools succeed? After a lot of thought (and some serious brainstorming), I’ve come up with an idea that I think could be a game-changer. This isn’t just another directory. I’m aiming to build something that’s genuinely useful for solo entrepreneurs and regular users alike. My goal is to create a platform that people actually want to use, because when that happens, your tools get natural, organic exposure. I’m also planning to integrate AI into the platform to make it even more powerful. I can’t spill all the details just yet If you want to get in early, I’m offering to add your tools to the platform for free, especially if you’re a solo entrepreneur. I’m still working out the details, but I’m aiming to launch within the next 1-2 months. Here’s how you can get involved: comment below with the name of your SaaS, AI, or tool, along with a short description of why it’s helpful and why it should be included. I haven’t finalized the domain yet, but for now, I’m planning to host it on my subdomain: toolkit dot unwiring dot tech

We've built an AI-powered business building platform, and we're looking for entrepreneurs to try out the MVP!

Hey r/sideproject! I'm Felix, co-founder of Buildpad, and we're excited to share our latest project with you. https://reddit.com/link/1eve8n4/video/ahktfda2bgjd1/player Buildpad is an AI-powered (Claude Sonnet 3.5) business-building platform that guides entrepreneurs through every step of creating and growing a business. Here's what makes it unique: Idea validation: Leverage Reddit's API to get real-world data on your ideas through posts, comments and discussions. Structured process: Follow a clear roadmap from idea validation to launch and beyond. Team collaboration: Work with co-founders, all assisted by the same AI. Central context bank: Our AI remembers everything about your project for consistent, informed guidance. We're solving the common problem of entrepreneurs not knowing what to do next, especially during idea generation and validation phases. With Buildpad, you can validate your ideas by searching for relevant keywords across Reddit, helping you understand if people are actually experiencing the problems you're aiming to solve. We're in the MVP stage and looking for early adopters to test the platform and provide feedback. We'd love to hear from you: Does this solution resonate with your entrepreneurial challenges? What features would you find most valuable in a tool like this? Any thoughts or concerns about using AI for startup guidance? If you're interested in trying out Buildpad or have any questions, please comment below or DM me. Thanks for checking it out! buildpad.io

I built an app to find who’s interested in your app by monitoring social media

Hi everyone! I hope you’re all doing great folks! I’d love to know your thoughts about what I’ve been working on recently! 🙏 If you’re busy or wanna see the app scroll to the bottom to see the video demo, otherwise, continue reading. Very brief presentation of myself first: I’m Marvin, and I live in Florence, Italy, 👋 This year I decided to go all-in on solopreneurship, I’ve been in tech as Software Engineer first, and then in Engineering Leadership for 10+ years, I’ve always worked in startups, except for last year, when I was the Director of Engineering at the Linux Foundation. Follow me on X or subscribe to my newsletter if you’re curious about this journey. The vision Most founders start building digital startups because they love crafting and being impactful by helping other people or companies. First-time founders then face reality when they realize that nailing distribution is key. All other founders already learned this, most likely the hard way. The outcome is the same: a great product will unlikely succeed without great distribution. Letting people know about your product should be easier and not an unfair advantage. The following meme is so true, but also quite sad. I wanna help this to change by easing the marketing and distribution part. https://preview.redd.it/g52pz46upqtd1.png?width=679&format=png&auto=webp&s=cf8398a3592f25c05c396bb2ff5d028331a36315 The story behind Distribution is a huge space: lead generation, demand generation, content marketing, social media marketing, cold outreach, etc. I cannot solve everything altogether. A few months ago I was checking the traffic to a job board I own (NextCommit). That's when I noticed that the “baseline” traffic increased by almost 10x. 🤯 I started investigating why. I realized that the monthly traffic from Reddit increased from 10-ish to 350+. Yeah, the job board doesn’t get much traffic in total, but this was an interesting finding. After digging more, it seems that all that increase came from a single Reddit comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/remotework/comments/1crwcei/comment/l5fb1yy/ This is the moment when I realized two things: It’s cool that someone quoted it! Engaging with people on Reddit, even just through comments, can be VERY powerful. And this was just one single comment! https://preview.redd.it/nhxcv4h2qqtd1.png?width=1192&format=png&auto=webp&s=d31905f56ae59426108ddbb61f2d6b668eedf27a Some weeks later I started noticing a few apps like ReplyGuy. These were automatically engaging with Reddit posts identified through keywords. I decided to sign up for the free plan of ReplyGuy to know more, but many things didn’t convince me: One of the keywords I used for my job board was “remote” and that caused a lot of false positives, The generated replies were good as a kickstart, but most of the time they needed to be tuned to sound more like me. The latter is expected. In the end, the platform doesn’t know me, doesn’t know my opinions, doesn’t know my story, etc.. The only valuable feature left for me was identifying the posts, but that also didn’t work well for me due to false positives. I ended up using it after only 15 minutes. I’m not saying they did a poor job, but it was not working well for me. In the end, the product got quite some traction, so it helped confirm there’s interest in that kind of tool. What bothered me was the combination of auto-replies that felt non-authentic. It’s not that I’m against bots, automation is becoming more common, and people are getting used to it. But in this context, I believe bots should act as an extension of ourselves, enhancing our interactions rather than just generating generic responses (like tools such as HeyGen, Synthesia, PhotoAI). I’m not there yet with my app, but a lot can be done. I'd love to reach the point where a user feels confident to automate the replies because they sound as written by themselves. I then decided to start from the same space, helping engage with Reddit posts, for these reasons: I experienced myself that it can be impactful, It aligns with my vision to ease distribution, Some competitors validated that there’s interest in this specific feature and I could use it as a starting point, I’m confident I can provide a better experience even with what I already have. The current state The product currently enables you to: Create multiple projects and assign keywords, Find the posts that are relevant for engagement using a fuzzy match of keywords and post-filtered using AI to avoid false positives, Provide an analysis of each post to assess the best way to engage, Generate a helpful reply that you’d need to review and post. So currently the product is more on the demand gen side, but this is just the beginning. I’m speaking with people from Marketing, Sales, RevOps, and Growth agencies to better understand their lives, struggles, and pain points. This will help me ensure that I build a product that enables them to help users find the products they need. I’m currently looking for up to 10 people to join the closed beta for free. If you’re interested in joining or to get notified once generally available you can do it here! https://tally.so/r/3XYbj4 After the closed beta, I will start onboarding people in batches. This will let me gather feedback, iterate, and provide a great experience to everyone aligned with my vision. I’m not going to add auto-reply unless the conditions I explained above are met or someone convinces me there’s a good reason for doing so. Each batch will probably get bigger with an increasing price until I’m confident about making it generally available. The next steps The next steps will depend on the feedback I get from the customers and the learnings from the discovery calls I’m having. I will talk about future developments in another update, but I have some ideas already. Check out the demo video below, and I'd love to hear your thoughts! ❤️ Oh and BTW, the app is called HaveYouHeard! https://reddit.com/link/1fzsnrd/video/34lat9snpqtd1/player This is the link to Loom in case the upload doesn't work: https://www.loom.com/share/460c4033b1f94e3bb5e1d081a05eedfd

How to start online business in 7 days ?

Easy to do now. There are several tips that I can give you to start your own digital business. 1) Solve your own problem. If you use the Internet, you know that there are a lot of problems that need to be solved. But focus on your problem first. Once you can figure it out and solve your problem. You can move on to solving people's problems. Ideally, to use tools and technology you know. If you don't know, use NO-CODE tools to build it. For example, if you need to create a website, use landing page builder. If you want to automate your own work, like booking meetings, use Zapier to automate tasks. If you want to create a game, sure, use AI Tools to solve it. I don't care what you will use. Use whatever you want. All I want from you is to solve that problem. 2) After solving your own problem. You can focus on people's problems. Because if you can't solve your own shit, why do you want to solve others problems? Remember that always. If you need to build e-commerce, use Shopify. If you need to build a directory, use directory builder. If you need to build landing pages, use landing page builders. Rule of thumb: Niche, Niche, Niche. Try to focus on a specific niche, solve their problem, and make money on it. Then only thinking about exploring new opportunities. You can use No-Code builders or AI tools or hire developers or hire agencies to do it. It depends on your choice. If you are good at coding, build on your own or delegate to a developer or agency. If you have enough time, use AI Tools to build your own thing. If you want to solve a common problem but with a different perspective, yeah, sure, use No-Code builders for that. 3) Digital business works exactly the same as offline business with one difference. You can move a lot faster, build a lot faster, risk a lot faster, fail a lot faster, earn a lot faster, sell a lot faster, and scale a lot faster. In one week, you can build e-commerce. In the second week, you can build SaaS. In the third week, you can build an AI agent. In the fourth week, you can build your own channel on social media. 4) It gives more power. With great power comes great responsibility. From day one, invest in SEO, social media presence, traffic, and acquiring customers. Don't focus on tech stuff. Don't focus on tools. Focus on the real problem: • Traffic • Marketing • Sales • Conversion rate

Built a side project to help validate... side projects 🤔

Hey builders! Long-time lurker, first-time poster. Wanted to share something I've been working on after hours. The Problem Like many of you, I was building side projects at night while working full-time. My pattern was painfully consistent: \- Get excited about an idea \- Spend precious evening hours coding \- Launch on Reddit/Twitter \- \crickets\ \- Realize I should've validated first \- Repeat 🥲 The worst part? I was trying to do validation on Reddit, but with limited time after work, I couldn't: \- Properly research different communities \- Keep track of all the responses \- Find people actually interested in what I was building \- Or figure out what features to prioritize in my limited dev time The Solution So I built RediScope (yes, another side project 😅). It automates the Reddit validation process: Quick Loom demo How it works: Tell it what you're trying to validate AI helps write natural-sounding questions for each community Get instant analysis of responses Automatically spot potential early users The goal? Instead of spending your limited free time scrolling through Reddit, get clear validation and potential users in 48 hours. Tech Stack (since we all love this part): \- Frontend: React + Tailwind \- Backend: Node.js \- AI: OpenAI for the smart bits \- DB: PostgreSQL \- Hosting: Digital Ocean Current Status: \- ✅ Core validation engine working \- ✅ Community analysis \- ✅ Response analytics \- ✅ User dashboard \- 🔎 Lead Generator (in progress) \- 📋 API (planned) This is very much a nights-and-weekends project (like everything else we build 😄). Would love feedback from fellow side project builders: \- How do you validate your ideas currently? \- What would make this useful for your next project? \- Any features you'd want to see? Drop your thoughts below! If you want to try it when it launches: https://www.rediscope.app Also huge shoutout to this community - been learning so much from everyone's posts here 🙏

I’ve Compiled the Best AI Side Project Playbooks and Tested Them Myself—Anyone Interested?

I’ve spent the past year diving deep into AI-powered side projects, testing out all the best playbooks I could find. Some worked amazingly well, some flopped, and I learned a ton along the way. Now, I’ve compiled everything—only the most effective, step-by-step playbooks that actually work. These cover everything from idea validation to scaling, and I’ve tested them all myself to make sure they’re legit. Some of the things I’ve successfully built with AI: ✅ Automated content businesses ✅ Niche websites that generate passive income ✅ AI-powered digital product businesses ✅ Simple AI tools that people actually pay for ✅ AI-assisted freelancing strategies Would anyone be interested in checking these out? Just trying to see if there’s demand before I share more! Let me know what kind of AI side hustle you’d want to try.

I need feedback insights and your precious comment on the following idea

AI Agent for Digital Adoption. Problem Companies spend a lot of time, effort and money on user onboarding,  troubleshooting for users. Solution OpenAI Vision enabled AI agent that could assist to provide guidance. Version 1: Guidance in a floating panel on screen over any app. In floating panel instruction given in chat and application record screen.  Version 2.0: Over layer it will give virtual signs like an arrow or drawing which  direct the user to click the button. Final Version: Fully automated AI Agent to solve the issue. Customers B2b: SaaS companies for their employees and their customer companies. D2c: People who are starting to learn new things. Using new software. Competitors ?? Future Market Evolution??

Built an AI to stop me from procrastinating on Reddit, it actually spies on my browser tabs & it's kinda freaking me out (but it works)

hey guys, So, I have a problem. A major procrastination problem. You know the type? I start all good, like, "ok, I'm gonna spend the next 2 hrs REALLY researching this specific Reddit thread about optimizing workflow automation for small businesses." (That's literally what I'm supposed to be doing rn, lol) And then... BAM. Suddenly I'm 15 posts deep into r/aww looking at baby sloths, or somehow I've ended up on Wikipedia reading about competitive hot dog eating. It's like my brain has a mind of its own, seriously. I've tried everything. Cold Turkey, Freedom, all those blocker apps. And honestly? They kinda suck. They're so... blunt. Like, "NO REDDIT FOR U!!" But I need Reddit for my actual research! It is my research, ffs. The problem is those apps just see a URL and block it. They don't understand context. They're just digital bouncers, and terrible ones. Total roadblocks, and a complete pain. That's why I got desperate. I even spent, like, 3 solid hrs one night just chatting with an AI cuz I was too embarrassed to admit to my friends how bad I was at staying on track. Pathetic, I know. But that's when it hit me. I needed something that understood what I was supposed to be doing, and then actively, intelligently, stopped me when I got sidetracked. Something that, like, gets that this is what I meant to use, so it blocks other posts or subs. So, I built it. It's a Chrome extension, and it's basically like having a tiny, hyper-observant AI therapist/drill sergeant living in my browser. Here's the freaky part: it actually watches what I'm doing. Like, it learns my specific task. If I tell it I'm researching on Reddit, it lets me use Reddit, but only for that specific research. If I try to sneak off to r/funny or check my notifs, it knows. It's not just blocking URLs; it's analyzing the content of the pages I'm on and comparing it to what I'm supposed to be doing. It even has these lil "achievement" things, which sound cheesy, but seeing "Focused for 90 mins straight!" pop up is weirdly motivating. And it has this brutal feature that shows u, in plain numbers, how much time you've wasted. Ouch. It's been working, which is amazing, and scary at the same time! Like, the scary part is, it feels weird sharing my own edge over procrastination. I mean, if u use my lil tool too! It also kinda gives off that creepy, AI overlord watching my thoughts vibe? Why I'm even posting this: I'm looking for a few (maybe 5?) people who are as desperate as I was. People who've tried every productivity hack, app, and technique, and are still staring at the ceiling at 3 am, filled with regret. If this sounds familiar, DM "DM me". Tell me your worst procrastination story. The winner (loser?) gets a copy. I need honest, brutally honest, feedback. Does this actually work for anyone else, or am I just fooling myself? Edit: shared the extension with some of you, and for others you can give it a spin here i made it live to the chrome store: https://getfocusai.com/

My humble analysis on how @levelsio grew PhotoAI to 155K/m

In 2023,@levelsiol aunched PhotoAi and nailed perfect timing with the AI-generated photo trend He saw the rise of AI Image Generators as early as Jan 2023—when search volume was just 246K. Fast forward to now, that’s exploded to 1M+ searches/month! @levelsio didn’t guess—he tracked this exponential growth, built fast, and launched a product that people needed before they even realized it themselves. That’s how you go from idea to$155K/month in revenue. But why does this work? Demand Explosion: The need for AI tools like PhotoAI surged as more creators, marketers, and businesses searched for automated ways to generate images (graph 1 shows this insane growth curve). Timing is everything: When trends move this fast, you have to act quicker. He launched at the right time, capturing the early adopters and setting the foundation for sustainable revenue (graph 2 showcases the clear spike). Build based on data, not assumptions: The growth of AI Character Generators also hit major traction (graph 3). Both trends signaled an opportunity, and he jumped in before the market was saturated. Lesson: Don’t guess what people want—watch the trends and build fast. Trends show you what’s working, before the mainstream even knows it. This is how you launch products that solve real problems. Check out the graphs for context: AI Image Generator Growth \(graph 1\) Search volume spiking \(graph 2\) AI Character Generators \(graph 3\) Use data, not just intuition. Track the trends and execute. Simple but powerful. I hope you liked this thread.

How me and my team made 15+ apps and not made a single sale in 2023

Hey, my name is Michael, I am in Auckland NZ. This year was the official beginning of my adult life. I graduated from university and started a full-time job. I’ve also really dug into indiehacking/bootstrapping and started 15 projects (and it will be at least 17 before the year ends). I think I’ve learned a lot but I consciously repeated mistakes. Upto (Nov) Discord Statuses + Your Location + Facebook Poke https://preview.redd.it/4nqt7tp2tf5c1.png?width=572&format=png&auto=webp&s=b0223484bc54b45b5c65e0b1afd0dc52f9c02ad1 This was the end of uni, I often messaged (and got messaged) requests of status and location to (and from my) friends. I thought, what if we make a social app that’s super basic and all it does is show you where your friends are? To differentiate from snap maps and others we wanted something with more privacy where you select the location. However, never finished the codebase or launched it. This is because I slowly started to realize that B2C (especially social networks) are way too hard to make into an actual business and the story with Fistbump would repeat itself. However, this decision not to launch it almost launched a curse on our team. From that point, we permitted ourselves to abandon projects even before launching. Lessons: Don’t do social networks if your goal is 10k MRR ASAP. If you build something to 90% competition ship it or you will think it’s okay to abandon projects Insight Bites (Nov) Youtube Summarizer Extension &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/h6drqej4tf5c1.jpg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0f211456c390ac06f4fcb54aa51f9d50b0826658 Right after Upto, we started ideating and conveniently the biggest revolution in the recent history of tech was released → GPT. We instantly began ideating. The first problem we chose to use AI for is to summarize YouTube videos. Comical. Nevertheless, I am convinced we have had the best UX because you could right-click on a video to get a slideshow of insights instead of how everyone else did it. We dropped it because there was too much competition and unit economics didn’t work out (and it was a B2C). PodPigeon (Dec) Podcast → Tweet Threads https://preview.redd.it/0ukge245tf5c1.png?width=2498&format=png&auto=webp&s=23303e1cab330578a3d25cd688fa67aa3b97fb60 Then we thought, to make unit economics work we need to make this worthwhile for podcasters. This is when I got into Twitter and started seeing people summarize podcasts. Then I thought, what if we make something that converts a podcast into tweets? This was probably one of the most important projects because it connected me with Jason and Jonaed, both of whom I regularly stay in contact with and are my go-to experts on ideas related to content creation. Jonaed was even willing to buy Podpigeon and was using it on his own time. However, the unit economics still didn’t work out (and we got excited about other things). Furthermore, we got scared of the competition because I found 1 - 2 other people who did similar things poorly. This was probably the biggest mistake we’ve made. Very similar projects made 10k MRR and more, launching later than we did. We didn’t have a coherent product vision, we didn’t understand the customer well enough, and we had a bad outlook on competition and a myriad of other things. Lessons: I already made another post about the importance of outlook on competition. Do not quit just because there are competitors or just because you can’t be 10x better. Indiehackers and Bootstrappers (or even startups) need to differentiate in the market, which can be via product (UX/UI), distribution, or both. Asking Ace Intro.co + Crowdsharing &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/0hu2tt16tf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3d397568ef2331e78198d64fafc1a701a3e75999 As I got into Twitter, I wanted to chat with some people I saw there. However, they were really expensive. I thought, what if we made some kind of crowdfunding service for other entrepreneurs to get a private lecture from their idols? It seemed to make a lot of sense on paper. It was solving a problem (validated via the fact that Intro.co is a thing and making things cheaper and accessible is a solid ground to stand on), we understood the market (or so we thought), and it could monetize relatively quickly. However, after 1-2 posts on Reddit and Indiehackers, we quickly learned three things. Firstly, no one cares. Secondly, even if they do, they think they can get the same information for free online. Thirdly, the reasons before are bad because for the first point → we barely talked to people, and for the second people → we barely talked to the wrong people. However, at least we didn’t code anything this time and tried to validate via a landing page. Lessons Don’t give up after 1 Redditor says “I don’t need this” Don’t be scared to choose successful people as your audience. Clarito Journaling with AI analyzer https://preview.redd.it/8ria2wq6tf5c1.jpg?width=1108&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=586ec28ae75003d9f71b4af2520b748d53dd2854 Clarito is a classic problem all amateur entrepreneurs have. It’s where you lie to yourself that you have a real problem and therefore is validated but when your team asks you how much you would pay you say I guess you will pay, maybe, like 5 bucks a month…? Turns out, you’d have to pay me to use our own product lol. We sent it off to a few friends and posted on some forums, but never really got anything tangible and decided to move away. Honestly, a lot of it is us in our own heads. We say the market is too saturated, it’ll be hard to monetize, it’s B2C, etc. Lessons: You use the Mom Test on other people. You have to do it yourself as well. However, recognizing that the Mom Test requires a lot of creativity in its investigation because knowing what questions to ask can determine the outcome of the validation. I asked myself “Do I journal” but I didn’t ask myself “How often do I want GPT to chyme in on my reflections”. Which was practically never. That being said I think with the right audience and distribution, this product can work. I just don’t know (let alone care) about the audience that much (and I thought I was one of them)/ Horns & Claw Scrapes financial news texts you whether you should buy/sell the stock (news sentiment analysis) &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/gvfxdgc7tf5c1.jpg?width=1287&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=63977bbc33fe74147b1f72913cefee4a9ebec9c2 This one we didn’t even bother launching. Probably something internal in the team and also seemed too good to be true (because if this works, doesn’t that just make us ultra-rich fast?). I saw a similar tool making 10k MRR so I guess I was wrong. Lessons: This one was pretty much just us getting into our heads. I declared that without an audience it would be impossible to ship this product and we needed to start a YouTube channel. Lol, and we did. And we couldn’t even film for 1 minute. I made bold statements like “We will commit to this for at least 1 year no matter what”. Learnery Make courses about any subject https://preview.redd.it/1nw6z448tf5c1.jpg?width=1112&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f2c73e8af23b0a6c3747a81e785960d4004feb48 This is probably the most “successful” project we’ve made. It grew from a couple of dozen to a couple of hundred users. It has 11 buy events for $9.99 LTD (we couldn’t be bothered connecting Stripe because we thought no one would buy it anyway). However what got us discouraged from seriously pursuing it more is, that this has very low defensibility, “Why wouldn’t someone just use chatGPT?” and it’s B2C so it’s hard to monetize. I used it myself for a month or so but then stopped. I don’t think it’s the app, I think the act of learning a concept from scratch isn’t something you do constantly in the way Learnery delivers it (ie course). I saw a bunch of similar apps that look like Ass make like 10k MRR. Lessons: Don’t do B2C, or if you do, do it properly Don’t just Mixpanel the buy button, connect your Stripe otherwise, it doesn’t feel real and you won’t get momentum. I doubt anyone (even me) will make this mistake again. I live in my GPT bubble where I make assumptions that everyone uses GPT the same way and as much as I do. In reality, the argument that this has low defensibility against GPT is invalid. Platforms that deliver a differentiated UX from ChatGPT to audiences who are not tightly integrated into the habit of using ChatGPT (which is like - everyone except for SOME tech evangelists). CuriosityFM Make podcasts about any subject https://preview.redd.it/zmosrcp8tf5c1.jpg?width=638&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d04ddffabef9050050b0d87939273cc96a8637dc This was our attempt at making Learnery more unique and more differentiated from chatGPT. We never really launched it. The unit economics didn’t work out and it was actually pretty boring to listen to, I don’t think I even fully listened to one 15-minute episode. I think this wasn’t that bad, it taught us more about ElevenLabs and voice AI. It took us maybe only 2-3 days to build so I think building to learn a new groundbreaking technology is fine. SleepyTale Make children’s bedtime stories https://preview.redd.it/14ue9nm9tf5c1.jpg?width=807&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=267e18ec6f9270e6d1d11564b38136fa524966a1 My 8-year-old sister gave me that idea. She was too scared of making tea and I was curious about how she’d react if she heard a bedtime story about that exact scenario with the moral that I wanted her to absorb (which is that you shouldn’t be scared to try new things ie stop asking me to make your tea and do it yourself, it’s not that hard. You could say I went full Goebbels on her). Zane messaged a bunch of parents on Facebook but no one really cared. We showed this to one Lady at the place we worked from at Uni and she was impressed and wanted to show it to her kids but we already turned off our ElevenLabs subscription. Lessons: However, the truth behind this is beyond just “you need to be able to distribute”. It’s that you have to care about the audience. I don’t particularly want to build products for kids and parents. I am far away from that audience because I am neither a kid anymore nor going to be a parent anytime soon, and my sister still asked me to make her tea so the story didn’t work. I think it’s important to ask yourself whether you care about the audience. The way you answer that even when you are in full bias mode is, do you engage with them? Are you interested in what’s happening in their communities? Are you friends with them? Etc. User Survey Analyzer Big User Survey → GPT → Insights Report Me and my coworker were chatting about AI when he asked me to help him analyze a massive survey for him. I thought that was some pretty decent validation. Someone in an actual company asking for help. Lessons Market research is important but moving fast is also important. Ie building momentum. Also don’t revolve around 1 user. This has been a problem in multiple projects. Finding as many users as possible in the beginning to talk to is key. Otherwise, you are just waiting for 1 person to get back to you. AutoI18N Automated Internationalization of the codebase for webapps This one I might still do. It’s hard to find a solid distribution strategy. However, the idea came from me having to do it at my day job. It seems a solid problem. I’d say it’s validated and has some good players already. The key will be differentiation via the simplicity of UX and distribution (which means a slightly different audience). In the backlog for now because I don’t care about the problem or the audience that much. Documate - Part 1 Converts complex PDFs into Excel https://preview.redd.it/8b45k9katf5c1.jpg?width=1344&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=57324b8720eb22782e28794d2db674b073193995 My mom needed to convert a catalog of furniture into an inventory which took her 3 full days of data entry. I automated it for her and thought this could have a big impact but there was no distribution because there was no ICP. We tried to find the ideal customers by talking to a bunch of different demographics but I flew to Kazakhstan for a holiday and so this kind of fizzled out. I am not writing this blog post linearity, this is my 2nd hour and I am tired and don’t want to finish this later so I don’t even know what lessons I learned. Figmatic Marketplace of high-quality Figma mockups of real apps https://preview.redd.it/h13yv45btf5c1.jpg?width=873&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=aaa2896aeac2f22e9b7d9eed98c28bb8a2d2cdf1 This was a collab between me and my friend Alex. It was the classic Clarito where we both thought we had this problem and would pay to fix it. In reality, this is a vitamin. Neither I, nor I doubt Alex have thought of this as soon as we bought the domain. We posted it on Gumroad, sent it to a bunch of forums, and called it a day. Same issue as almost all the other ones. No distribution strategy. However, apps like Mobin show us that this concept is indeed profitable but it takes time. It needs SEO. It needs a community. None of those things, me and Alex had or was interested in. However shortly after HTML → Figma came out and it’s the best plugin. Maybe that should’ve been the idea. Podcast → Course Turns Podcaster’s episodes into a course This one I got baited by Jason :P I described to him the idea of repurposing his content for a course. He told me this was epic and he would pay. Then after I sent him the demo, he never checked it out. Anyhow during the development, we realized that doesn’t actually work because A podcast doesn’t have the correct format for the course, the most you can extract are concepts and ideas, seldom explanations. Most creators want video-based courses to be hosted on Kajabi or Udemy Another lesson is that when you pitch something to a user, what you articulate is a platform or a process, they imagine an outcome. However, the end result of your platform can be a very different outcome to what they had in mind and there is even a chance that what they want is not possible. You need to understand really well what the outcome looks like before you design the process. This is a classic problem where we thought of the solution before the problem. Yes, the problem exists. Podcasters want to make courses. However, if you really understand what they want, you can see how repurposing a podcast isn’t the best way to get there. However I only really spoke to 1-2 podcasters about this so making conclusions is dangerous for this can just be another asking ace mistake with the Redditor. Documate Part 2 Same concept as before but now I want to run some ads. We’ll see what happens. https://preview.redd.it/xb3npj0ctf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3cd4884a29fd11d870d010a2677b585551c49193 In conclusion https://preview.redd.it/2zrldc9dtf5c1.jpg?width=1840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2b3105073e752ad41c23f205dbd1ea046c1da7ff It doesn’t actually matter that much whether you choose to do a B2C, or a social network or focus on growing your audience. All of these can make you successful. What’s important is that you choose. If I had to summarize my 2023 in one word it’s indecision. Most of these projects succeeded for other people, nothing was as fundamentally wrong about them as I proclaimed. In reality that itself was an excuse. New ideas seduce, and it is a form of discipline to commit to a single project for a respectful amount of time. https://preview.redd.it/zy9a2vzdtf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=901c621227bba0feb4efdb39142f66ab2ebb86fe Distribution is not just posting on Indiehackers and Reddit. It’s an actual strategy and you should think of it as soon as you think of the idea, even before the Figma designs. I like how Denis Shatalin taught me. You have to build a pipeline. That means a reliable way to get leads, launch campaigns at them, close deals, learn from them, and optimize. Whenever I get an idea now I always try to ask myself “Where can I find 1000s leads in one day?” If there is no good answer, this is not a good project to do now. &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/2boh3fpetf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1c0d5d7b000716fcbbb00cbad495e8b61e25be66 Talk to users before doing anything. Jumping on designing and coding to make your idea a reality is a satisfying activity in the short term. Especially for me, I like to create for the sake of creation. However, it is so important to understand the market, understand the audience, understand the distribution. There are a lot of things to understand before coding. https://preview.redd.it/lv8tt96ftf5c1.jpg?width=1456&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6c8735aa6ad795f216ff9ddfa2341712e8277724 Get out of your own head. The real reason we dropped so many projects is that we got into our own heads. We let the negative thoughts creep in and kill all the optimism. I am really good at coming up with excuses to start a project. However, I am equally as good at coming up with reasons to kill a project. And so you have this yin and yang of starting and stopping. Building momentum and not burning out. I can say with certainty my team ran out of juice this year. We lost momentum so many times we got burnt out towards the end. Realizing that the project itself has momentum is important. User feedback and sales bring momentum. Building also creates momentum but unless it is matched with an equal force of impact, it can stomp the project down. That is why so many of our projects died quickly after we launched. The smarter approach is to do things that have a low investment of momentum (like talking to users) but result in high impact (sales or feedback). Yes, that means the project can get invalidated which makes it more short-lived than if we built it first, but it preserves team life energy. At the end of 2023 here is a single sentence I am making about how I think one becomes a successful indiehacker. One becomes a successful Indiehacker when one starts to solve pain-killer problems in the market they understand, for an audience they care about and consistently engage with for a long enough timeframe. Therefore an unsuccessful Indiehacker in a single sentence is An unsuccessful Indiehacker constantly enters new markets they don’t understand to build solutions for people whose problems they don’t care about, in a timeframe that is shorter than than the time they spent thinking about distribution. However, an important note to be made. Life is not just about indiehacking. It’s about learning and having fun. In the human world, the best journey isn’t the one that gets you the fastest to your goals but the one you enjoy the most. I enjoyed making those silly little projects and although I do not regret them, I will not repeat the same mistakes in 2024. But while it’s still 2023, I have 2 more projects I want to do :) EDIT: For Devs, frontend is always react with vite (ts) and backend is either node with express (ts) or python. For DB either Postgres or mongo (usually Prisma for ORM). For deployment all of it is on AWS (S3, EC2). In terms of libraries/APIs Whisper.cpp is best open source for transcription Obviously the gpt apis Eleven labs for voice related stuff And other random stuff here and there

I retired at 32 from my side project. Here's the path I took.

EDIT 2: Thanks for the award kind stranger! I've stopped responding to reddit comments for this post. I'm adding an FAQ to the original post based on the most common high quality questions. If you have a question that you're dying to know the answer to and that only I can help you with (vs. Google, ChatGPT, etc.), DM me. EDIT: I love how controversial this post has become (50% upvote rate), and only in this subreddit (vs. other subreddits that I posted the same content in). I trust that the open-minded half of you will find something useful in this post and my other posts and comments. I retired at 32 years old, in large part thanks to a B2C SaaS app that I developed on my own. Now, I don't have to work in order to cover my living expenses, and wouldn't have to work for quite a while. In other words, I can finally sip mai tais at the beach. I've condensed how I got there into this post. First, a super simplified timeline of events, followed by some critical details. Timeline 2013 Graduated college in the US 2013 Started first corporate job 2013 Started side project (B2C app) that would eventually lead to my retirement 2020 Started charging for use of my B2C app (was free, became freemium) 2021 Quit my last corporate job 2022 Retired: time freedom attained Details First, some summary statistics of my path to retirement: 9 years: time between graduating college and my retirement. 8 years: total length of my career where I worked at some corporate day job. 7 years: time it took my B2C app to make its first revenue dollar 2 years: time between my first dollar of SaaS revenue and my retirement. "Something something overnight success a decade in the making". I got extremely lucky on my path to retirement, both in terms of the business environment I was in and who I am as a person. I'd also like to think that some of the conscious decisions I made along the way contributed to my early retirement. Lucky Breaks Was born in the US middle class. Had a natural affinity for computer programming and entrepreneurial mindset (initiative, resourcefulness, pragmatism, courage, growth mindset). Had opportunities to develop these mindsets throughout life. Got into a good college which gave me the credentials to get high paying corporate jobs. Was early to a platform that saw large adoption (see "barnacle on whale" strategy). Business niche is shareworthy: my SaaS received free media. Business niche is relatively stable, and small enough to not be competitive. "Skillful" Decisions I decided to spend the nights and weekends of my early career working on side projects in the hopes that one would hit. I also worked a day job to support myself and build my savings. My launch funnel over roughly 7 years of working on side projects: Countless side projects prototyped. 5 side projects publically launched. 2 side projects made > $0. 1 side project ended up becoming the SaaS that would help me retire. At my corporate day jobs, I optimized for learning and work-life balance. My learning usually stalled after a year or two at one company, so I’d quit and find another job. I invested (and continute to do so) in physical and mental wellbeing via regular workouts, meditation, journaling, traveling, and good food. My fulfilling non-work-life re-energized me for my work-life, and my work-life supported my non-work-life: a virtuous cycle. I automated the most time-consuming aspects of my business (outside of product development). Nowadays, I take long vacations and work at most 20 hours a week / a three-day work week . I decided to keep my business entirely owned and operated by me. It's the best fit for my work-style (high autonomy, deep focus, fast decision-making) and need to have full creative freedom and control. I dated and married a very supportive and inspiring partner. I try not to succumb to outrageous lifestyle creep, which keeps my living expenses low and drastically extends my burn-rate. Prescription To share some aphorisms I’ve leaned with the wantrepreneurs or those who want to follow a similar path: Maximize your at bats, because you only need one hit. Bias towards action. Launch quickly. Get your ideas out into the real world for feedback. Perfect is the enemy of good. If you keep swinging and improving, you'll hit the ball eventually. Keep the big picture in mind. You don't necessarily need a home-run to be happy: a base hit will often do the job. Think about what matters most to you in life: is it a lot of money or status? Or is it something more satisfying, and often just as if not more attainable, like freedom, loving relationships, or fulfillment? Is what you’re doing now a good way to get what you want? Or is there a better way? At more of a micro-level of "keep the big picture in mind", I often see talented wantrepreneurs get stuck in the weeds of lower-level optimizations, usually around technical design choices. They forget (or maybe subconsciously avoid) the higher-level and more important questions of customer development, user experience, and distribution. For example: “Are you solving a real problem?” or “Did you launch an MVP and what did your users think?” Adopt a growth mindset. Believe that you are capable of learning whatever you need to learn in order to do what you want to do. The pain of regret is worse than the pain of failure. I’ve noticed that fear of failure is the greatest thing holding people back from taking action towards their dreams. Unless failure means death in your case, a debilitating fear of failure is a surmountable mental block. You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. When all is said and done, we often regret the things we didn't do in life than the things we did. There’s more to life than just work. Blasphemous (at least among my social circle)! But the reality is that many of the dying regret having worked too much in their lives. As Miss Frizzle from The Magic Schoolbus says: "Take chances, make mistakes, get messy!" Original post

Looking for Innovators to Join my Stealth-Mode AI and Automation Startup

Hi everyone, I’m currently working on building a stealth-mode startup that focuses on AI, automation, management consulting, and streamlining business processes. Right now, it’s just me working on this, and I’m looking for passionate, creative people to join me and help shape the future of the company. A bit about me: I’m from the UK and have a Business Management degree and an IT diploma, so I’ve got a good mix of business and tech knowledge to push this forward. I’m currently using tools like UiPath, Python, Make.com, Automation Anywhere, and others to create innovative solutions, but I’m not tied to these. I’m open to using any tools or technologies that fit the business and help us succeed. This is unpaid for now, but once we hit revenue targets, the plan is to transition into paid positions. If you’re excited about startups, innovation, and building something meaningful, this might be for you. I’m building AI-powered tools that solve real business problems, workflows to automate processes, and management consulting services to help businesses streamline and work smarter. It’s about combining tech innovation with business strategy to deliver something that really works. I’d love to work with people who have skills in things like Python, TensorFlow, UiPath, Automation Anywhere, web development (frontend, backend, or full-stack), or just a talent for improving workflows. If you’re great at problem-solving, strategy, or even just brainstorming new ideas, there’s a place for you. What’s in it for you? First off, you’ll get real-world experience in AI, automation, and consulting. You’ll also get the chance to help shape the company as part of the founding team and grow with it. Once the startup hits revenue goals, paid roles will follow. It’s flexible too, work remotely and set your own schedule. If this sounds interesting to you, just comment or send me a DM with a bit about your experience, any projects you’ve worked on, and how you think you could contribute to the startup. I’ll be running interviews soon to chat with people and see how we can work together. If you’re excited about joining a startup from the ground up, let’s connect. I’d love to hear from you.

I recreated a voice AI that 2x’d booked calls in 30 days for a business

I’ve been fascinated by AI and specifically how different businesses have leveraged it to eliminate time consuming tasks. I recently came across a case study where a voice agent helped a business double their booked calls and conversions in 30 days and wanted to try and recreate something similar. I’ve added the case study below along with a number to the demo voice agent I created to see if this is something people would really be interested in. This tech is improving really fast and I’m looking to dive deeper into this space. Case Study A family owned HVAC company was having challenges managing the volume of customer calls, including after hours and weekend calls, leading to missed opportunities and unmanaged leads. Building a call support team would have proved to be more expensive than they’d like. Solution With some help, the company implemented an AI system to autonomously handle calls, collect customer needs, and alert service technicians via SMS, with capabilities for live call transfers. Impact Within the first week, the company saw a 20% increase in bookings and conversions. The system's efficiency in capturing leads and managing tasks enabled the staff to handle more leads and outsource overflow. Details The AI integration included custom features like a Service Titan integration, live call transfers, SMS/email alerts, calendar and CRM integration, and Zapier automation. Results The company doubled its booked calls and conversions in 30 days through these AI call agents. With the average service visit in the U.S. being around $250, and the average unit install being around $4500 this quickly led to increased revenue as well as time savings and reduced churn. Here’s the number to the demo agent I created: +1 (714) 475-7285 I’d love to hear some honest thoughts on it and what industry you think could benefit the most from something like this.

I recreated an AI phone calling agent that increased booked calls by 30% for a plumbing business in 30 days

AI has always intrigued me, especially when it comes to automating repetitive tasks and streamlining business operations. Recently, I found a compelling case study about a voice agent that significantly enhanced customer service and lead capture for a plumbing company. Motivated by the potential of this technology, I decided to build a similar system to see how it could be adapted for other industries. I’ve added the case study below along with a number to the demo voice agent I created to see if this is something people would really be interested in. AI technology is advancing rapidly, and I’m excited to dive deeper into this space. Case Study A family-owned plumbing business was facing challenges managing a high volume of customer calls. They were missing potential leads, particularly during after-hours and weekends, which meant lost revenue opportunities. Hiring a dedicated call support team was considered but deemed too expensive and hard to scale. Solution To solve these issues, the company deployed an AI-powered voice agent capable of handling calls autonomously. The system collected essential customer information, identified service needs, and sent real-time alerts to service technicians via SMS. It also had the ability to transfer calls to human agents if necessary, ensuring a seamless experience for customers. Impact The AI voice agent quickly proved its worth by streamlining call management and improving response times. With the AI handling routine inquiries and initial call filtering, the plumbing business saw a noticeable improvement in how quickly they could respond to customer needs. Details The AI-powered voice agent included several advanced features designed to optimize customer service: Answer Calls Anytime: Ensured every call received a friendly and professional response, regardless of the time of day. Spot Emergencies Fast: Quickly identified high-priority issues that required urgent attention. Collect Important Info: Accurately recorded critical customer details to facilitate seamless follow-ups and service scheduling. Send Alerts Right Away: Immediately notified service technicians about emergencies, enabling faster response times. Live Transfers: Live call transfer options when human assistance was needed. Results The AI-powered voice agent delivered measurable improvements across key performance metrics: 100% Call Answer Rate: No missed calls ensured that every customer inquiry was addressed promptly. 5-minute Emergency Response Time: The average response time for urgent calls was reduced significantly. 30% Increase in Lead Capture: The business saw more qualified leads, improving their chances of conversion. 25% Improvement in Resource Efficiency: Better allocation of resources allowed the team to focus on high-priority tasks. By implementing the AI-powered voice agent, the plumbing business enhanced its ability to capture more leads and provide better service to its customers. The improved call handling efficiency helped reduce missed opportunities and boosted overall customer satisfaction. Here’s the number to the demo agent I created: +1 (210) 405-0982 I’d love to hear some honest thoughts on it and which industries you think could benefit the most from this technology.

Request for landing page draft review (AI SaaS targeted at food businesses)

Hi there, I decided to make a customer pivot by making a new landing page - this time a squeeze page - in hopes of replacing my existing SaaS homepage. Initially it was targeted at ecommerce stores, however I had a few people come to me when they (or their clients) are running food businesses so I decided to make a customer pivot. Here is my quick screencap of my landing page. Let me know what I need to change before I publish it live. However, it's based of a template I got from a landing page software so I may not be able to replicate all the feedback such as animated text. Thanks so much https://reddit.com/link/1gm8fyf/video/w05h4lapclzd1/player

Where Do You Save Your Business Ideas? I made an AI-powered notepad that does all the research for your business ideas

Coming up with business ideas is fun… until you realize how much research you need to do for each one—market size, competitors, target audience… it’s a lot. So I built AIdea—a notepad where you write down your idea, and the AI does the research for you. Drop in a rough concept, and it comes back with: Pitch deck: Value Prop, pain points, gain points, unique selling points ICP: Demographic info and how to reach them Branding & names: How to brand the idea and various kinds of names for the idea Execution strategies: How to validate the idea, how to build MVP (recommended tech stack), funding route to take etc Monetization strategies: pros and cons for various ways to make money from this idea Market analysis: TAM, SAM, SOM + Market trends related to the idea (with sources) Competitor analysis: competitors description, strengths, weaknesses (with sources) User sentiments: Summaries of reddit posts, quora questions, articles and key points about what people think about concepts related to your ideas (with sources) Here’s the landing page: https://aidea-app.framer.website/ App store link: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/aidea-idea-to-startup/id6737747359 It’s still early, so I’d love to hear what you think. Would this save you time? What else would you want it to do? Appreciate any feedback! 🚀

I recreated an AI phone calling agent that increased booked calls by 30% for a plumbing business in 30 days

AI has always intrigued me, especially when it comes to automating repetitive tasks and streamlining business operations. Recently, I found a compelling case study about a voice agent that significantly enhanced customer service and lead capture for a plumbing company. Motivated by the potential of this technology, I decided to build a similar system to see how it could be adapted for other industries. I’ve added the case study below along with a number to the demo voice agent I created to see if this is something people would really be interested in. AI technology is advancing rapidly, and I’m excited to dive deeper into this space. Case Study A family-owned plumbing business was facing challenges managing a high volume of customer calls. They were missing potential leads, particularly during after-hours and weekends, which meant lost revenue opportunities. Hiring a dedicated call support team was considered but deemed too expensive and hard to scale. Solution To solve these issues, the company deployed an AI-powered voice agent capable of handling calls autonomously. The system collected essential customer information, identified service needs, and sent real-time alerts to service technicians via SMS. It also had the ability to transfer calls to human agents if necessary, ensuring a seamless experience for customers. Impact The AI voice agent quickly proved its worth by streamlining call management and improving response times. With the AI handling routine inquiries and initial call filtering, the plumbing business saw a noticeable improvement in how quickly they could respond to customer needs. Details The AI-powered voice agent included several advanced features designed to optimize customer service: Answer Calls Anytime: Ensured every call received a friendly and professional response, regardless of the time of day. Spot Emergencies Fast: Quickly identified high-priority issues that required urgent attention. Collect Important Info: Accurately recorded critical customer details to facilitate seamless follow-ups and service scheduling. Send Alerts Right Away: Immediately notified service technicians about emergencies, enabling faster response times. Live Transfers: Live call transfer options when human assistance was needed. Results The AI-powered voice agent delivered measurable improvements across key performance metrics: 100% Call Answer Rate: No missed calls ensured that every customer inquiry was addressed promptly. 5-minute Emergency Response Time: The average response time for urgent calls was reduced significantly. 30% Increase in Lead Capture: The business saw more qualified leads, improving their chances of conversion. 25% Improvement in Resource Efficiency: Better allocation of resources allowed the team to focus on high-priority tasks. By implementing the AI-powered voice agent, the plumbing business enhanced its ability to capture more leads and provide better service to its customers. The improved call handling efficiency helped reduce missed opportunities and boosted overall customer satisfaction. Here’s the number to the demo agent I created: +1 (210) 405-0982 I’d love to hear some honest thoughts on it and which industries you think could benefit the most from this technology.

I recreated a voice AI that 2x’d booked calls in 30 days for a business

I’ve been fascinated by AI and specifically how different businesses have leveraged it to eliminate time consuming tasks. I recently came across a case study where a voice agent helped a business double their booked calls and conversions in 30 days and wanted to try and recreate something similar. I’ve added the case study below along with a number to the demo voice agent I created to see if this is something people would really be interested in. This tech is improving really fast and I’m looking to dive deeper into this space. Case Study A family owned HVAC company was having challenges managing the volume of customer calls, including after hours and weekend calls, leading to missed opportunities and unmanaged leads. Building a call support team would have proved to be more expensive than they’d like. Solution With some help, the company implemented an AI system to autonomously handle calls, collect customer needs, and alert service technicians via SMS, with capabilities for live call transfers. Impact Within the first week, the company saw a 20% increase in bookings and conversions. The system's efficiency in capturing leads and managing tasks enabled the staff to handle more leads and outsource overflow. Details The AI integration included custom features like a Service Titan integration, live call transfers, SMS/email alerts, calendar and CRM integration, and Zapier automation. Results The company doubled its booked calls and conversions in 30 days through these AI call agents. With the average service visit in the U.S. being around $250, and the average unit install being around $4500 this quickly led to increased revenue as well as time savings and reduced churn. Here’s the number to the demo agent I created: +1 (714) 475-7285 I’d love to hear some honest thoughts on it and what industry you think could benefit the most from something like this.

I acquired a SaaS for ~5 figures to solve my content problem

In 2023 I bought a SaaS called Cuppa AI. I actually found the product on twitter, run by a very talented engineer in the UK.  I’ve spent tens of thousands of dollars on content for various media companies. In one consumer health company, it cost us around $200-$500 for each SEO optimized article. This adds up pretty quickly. Not forgetting the 20 hours of edits! This isn’t just an isolated problem for a single company. It’s industry wide and affects small business + agency owners alike. I spent over a decade in media, and have seen many agency founders complain about long lead times and high costs for low output.  This is an issue. Large swathes of would-be customers that prefer to consume content before buying are being ignored - either because it takes too long or costs too much for founders to scale this channel.   I eventually became tired of the media content game in 2022 and looked into using SaaS to solve my previous life’s challenges. I started building, acquiring and scaling a portfolio of products that I found useful in my day to day. But the content issue was still there.  So I started to look for ways to reduce the time + cost content burden for my own portfolio.   I initially discovered Cuppa using it for my own personal pains of content research, editing, publishing, and scaling. But then I saw potential. I wanted to turn it into an end to end solution for the content gap that myself and other business owners weren’t taking advantage of because of time, cost, or other priorities.  I sent a DM. Then a few calls later, I acquired it in June 2023.  I chose cuppa vs other competing products for a few reasons:  The founder gave excellent support during and post acquisition  It already had a large, loyal existing user base I’d personally used it and solved a pain with it. I saw the potential to solve many others for more people like me  The founder has put a ton of quality and care into it. There wasn’t a risk of picking up a patchy product, plus it already had great social distribution  It naturally fits my expertise from the ‘other side’. I was the original customer of it, so I knew I could evolve it with features that could create content at scale without losing the human touch  Since then we’ve added a lot of new stuff: Chat with articles Image generation for articles API keys to reduce cost Brand / persona voice custom prompts  Month on month iterative content improvement  Full stack content team that blends AI and human editors for agencies I’m still in full build mode with the team. I want to take it to a place where agencies and SMB owners can trust the AI + human content model enough to see this product as a no-brainer for their biz. I don’t believe in AI slop - there’s enough of that out there - I DO believe in using AI to do the grunt work, but to always have that human element a machine can’t quite mimic.  We have a lot more to get through, but I’m very excited about it. View of the done for you content workflow

My experience trying to scrape google maps with no code

A few months back I was working on a project to help founders that sell to SMBs get better quality leads (Current solutions like Zoominfo and Apollo don’t do very well for the SMB market). Of course, I wanted to do this as quickly as possible with as little code as possible.  We found that people were manually going through Google Maps to find SMBs. They would use the search and manually type in the businesses they were looking for. For example, they would type “restaurants” and manually call/email them. What we decided to do was gather the Google Maps data autonomously and surface that to our customers so they could take all of it. The problem was that we would need a bunch of data from Google Maps to pull it off. We would need to grab all the SMBs across the United States which is a huge undertaking.  Initially, I tried no-code AI web scraping solutions and they worked horribly. For some reason, I couldn’t even get them to scroll down on the page. I was also able to reverse engineer their open-source code and discover that they were taking the entire web page and passing it into GPT to extract data. That just burned my Openai bill.  I then tried the semi-code approach (sorry no-code subreddit) where I would use something like Apify or Google Places API to scrape the businesses. This worked better but still, there was an issue of price at the scale we wanted. Eventually, we ended up writing our scraper for the task.  This experience was so horrible I ended up creating potarix.com. Firstly, we provide scraping as a service in conjunction with AI. We all know AI is shit and keeping this human in the loop allows the AI to do 90% of the work and then for us to tweak the script to 100% completion. Also since we use AI to create the scraper instead of using AI to scrape, we can run it for large scale tasks at a low cost.

What I learn from my $200 MRR App I built 4 months ago

4 month ago, I am just a 10-years experienced product manager without any software development experience. I have an $3K/month job, but I am so tired, I don’t like my life, don’t like my boss, don’t like my daily work, that make me feeling I already died however I am still living. I yearn for freedom and want to live each day the way I want to. So I quit my job, and become a Indie developer to build my own business, my own app, even my own life. I am so grateful for this time and experience, now my app reach $200 MRR, still very little compared to my previous salary, but I never regret. I have learned lots of things from this time and experience, more than I had in last 10 years. Here is the time-line of my App: &#x200B; Sep 2023: Launch first version to iOS App store Oct 2023: Release in-app-purchase features and have first subscriber, the revenue in October is $154 Nov 2023: Change from subscription to pay per use, and I did lots of marketing jobs in November, however, the revenue reduced to only $40. Dec 2023: Change back to subscription, and stop some invalid marketing jobs, only keep the ones that actually work. I almost did nothing in December, and the revenue come to $243. During this process, I have learned lots of things, there are some of them that I think could help you as well. Web or App My App is an iOS app that only can running on Apple’s device such like iPhone/iPad or Mac with Apple silicon. Many people ask me why my product is an iOS app not a website, because they don’t have any Apple device. It's true that promoting an app is much harder than promoting a website. However I am now very glad I made an App and not a website! If I make a website, I don't think it's possible to make $100 in the first month. My App is about keyword research, to help people find some ideas from search keyword, because every keyword people searched in Google are representing a real need of them, also can be used in SEO field. However there are a lot of website tools about keyword research, some of them are famous like Ahrefs, SEMrush… I have no intention of competing with them. Actually I don’t have any chance. While in app store, there are little apps about keyword research, each of them have terrible data and user experience, that means if my app has better data and experience that could be my chance. In fact, the App store brings me 20 organic installs a day that Google would never have been able to bring me if I had a website, at least for the first few months. Furthermore, Apple nearly did everything for developer, I don’t need to care about user login, payment and so on, Apple did everything, I just need to call their API, that save lots of time, if I build a website, I need to implement login and payment by myself, that would add some extra work. Not to mention I'd need to buy servers and domains, that would cost me a lot of money. Although Apple will take 30% of the revenue, I can live with that in the early stages because the most important thing for me is to get the product to market as soon as possible. Actually thought Apple’s SMB program, the take rate is 15% now. So Web or App is not important in the early stage, time is important, if people need my product, it's easy to make a website one. More Users or More Valuable Users In November, I notice some users would like use my app, and they were meet paywall, but they never subscribe. I provided 7 day free trail, but it seem that they don’t like it. So I decide to change subscription to pay per use. Because as a user, I don’t like subscription as well, pay per use seem like more friendly. So I change from subscription to pay per use. People can afford $9.99 to subscribe monthly for unlimited use or pay $1.99 for each data they want(First purchase is $0.99 then $1.99). I was expecting more user to pay, but it was the complete opposite! Some users who would have paid a higher subscription fee are switching to a lower priced single payment. Users are encountering paywalls more often, and each time they need to make a decision about whether or not to pay, which increases the probability that they will abandon payment. This resulted in a 75% decrease in revenue in November. In fact, the mostly of my revenue comes from a handful of long-cycle subscribers, such as annual subscription. Few bring in most of the revenue, that is the most important thing I learned. You don't need a lot of customers, you just need more valuable ones. That's why it's only right to design a mechanism to filter out high-value customers and focus on them, all the things you want do is just let more people into the filter, and from that point of view, subscription with free trial period is the best way, even if most people don't like it. The rule of 20/80 will always be there. The most important thing is always focus on the 20 percent things and people. Effort does not always guarantee rewards. Unless one engages in deep thinking, or most efforts are invalid. I have been working very hard to promote my product for a period of time. It’s about in November. I did a lot of job, such as write script to send message to my potential clients on Fiverr, post and write comments on others post on Reddit, find related questions and answer them on Quora, post and comments on Twitte, etc. During that period, I was exhausted every day, but the outcome did not meet my expectations. There is only little growth on App installation, even less revenue than before. That make me frustrated. I finally realized that If I need to put in a tremendous amount of effort just to make a little progress, there is must something wrong. So I stop 80% of promote work I have ever did, only keep app store search ad, which will bring a installation with less than $0.5 cost. Then I dive into long time and deeply thinking, I spent more time on reading books, investigate other product with great MRR, watch interviews with people who are already living the kind of life I aspire to live, for example, u/levelsio. These things have given me great inspiration, and my life has become easier. It seems that the life I anticipated when I resigned is getting closer. I also have a clearer understanding of my app. Meanwhile, MRR has been growing. This experience let me learn that effort does not always guarantee results. Many times, our efforts are just wishful thinking, they are invalid, do the right thing after deeply thinking is more important. What Next? My goal is reach $3K MRR, as same as my job payment, I will never stop to building things, and I will keep my currently lifestyle. I still don't know how to get more people to use my app, but levelsio's interviews give me some inspiration that I can verified something by manually instead of build a software. I plan to launch a trend analysis product based on the keyword data provided by my current app. I have always wanted to combine AI to build such a product, but I didn't know how to do it. Now I intend to manually complete it first and start software development once there are paying users. If you are interested to my App, you could try it. Gotrends

Why no code tools for building ai models failed?

Business folks have tasks where neural networks could help but they don’t know Python or deep learning, right? Meanwhile ML engineers know AI models but often don’t have an actual problem to solve. So the first group hires the second. Same thing happened with websites a while ago—at first you had to code everything then came drag-and-drop editors, no-code tools, and now even this "vibe coding" stuff. It’s not the most flexible or maintainable, but it works for a lot of people who just need to get something done without spending months learning to code. So why isn’t the same thing happening with building AI models? Like if I run a business I could save a ton of money by automating manual tasks with models trained on my own data. But I have zero clue what Jupyter Notebook or Keras are, and honestly, I don’t want to know. So I have to hire an ML engineer just to get it done because there’s no viable no-code solution for this.

[D] Why I'm Lukewarm on Graph Neural Networks

TL;DR: GNNs can provide wins over simpler embedding methods, but we're at a point where other research directions matter more I also posted it on my blog here, has footnotes, a nicer layout with inlined images, etc. I'm only lukewarm on Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). There, I said it. It might sound crazy GNNs are one of the hottest fields in machine learning right now. [There][1] were at least [four][2] [review][3] [papers][4] just in the last few months. I think some progress can come of this research, but we're also focusing on some incorrect places. But first, let's take a step back and go over the basics. Models are about compression We say graphs are a "non-euclidean" data type, but that's not really true. A regular graph is just another way to think about a particular flavor of square matrix called the [adjacency matrix][5], like this. It's weird, we look at run-of-the-mill matrix full of real numbers and decide to call it "non-euclidean". This is for practical reasons. Most graphs are fairly sparse, so the matrix is full of zeros. At this point, where the non-zero numbers are matters most, which makes the problem closer to (computationally hard) discrete math rather than (easy) continuous, gradient-friendly math. If you had the full matrix, life would be easy If we step out of the pesky realm of physics for a minute, and assume carrying the full adjacency matrix around isn't a problem, we solve a bunch of problems. First, network node embeddings aren't a thing anymore. A node is a just row in the matrix, so it's already a vector of numbers. Second, all network prediction problems are solved. A powerful enough and well-tuned model will simply extract all information between the network and whichever target variable we're attaching to nodes. NLP is also just fancy matrix compression Let's take a tangent away from graphs to NLP. Most NLP we do can be [thought of in terms of graphs][6] as we'll see, so it's not a big digression. First, note that Ye Olde word embedding models like [Word2Vec][7] and [GloVe][8] are [just matrix factorization][9]. The GloVe algorithm works on a variation of the old [bag of words][10] matrix. It goes through the sentences and creates a (implicit) [co-occurence][11] graph where nodes are words and the edges are weighed by how often the words appear together in a sentence. Glove then does matrix factorization on the matrix representation of that co-occurence graph, Word2Vec is mathematically equivalent. You can read more on this in my [post on embeddings][12] and the one (with code) on [word embeddings][13]. Even language models are also just matrix compression Language models are all the rage. They dominate most of the [state of the art][14] in NLP. Let's take BERT as our main example. BERT predicts a word given the context of the rest of the sentence. This grows the matrix we're factoring from flat co-occurences on pairs of words to co-occurences conditional on the sentence's context, like this We're growing the "ideal matrix" we're factoring combinatorially. As noted by [Hanh & Futrell][15]: [...] human language—and language modelling—has infinite statistical complexity but that it can be approximated well at lower levels. This observation has two implications: 1) We can obtain good results with comparatively small models; and 2) there is a lot of potential for scaling up our models. Language models tackle such a large problem space that they probably approximate a compression of the entire language in the [Kolmogorov Complexity][16] sense. It's also possible that huge language models just [memorize a lot of it][17] rather than compress the information, for what it's worth. Can we upsample any graph like language models do? We're already doing it. Let's call a first-order embedding of a graph a method that works by directly factoring the graph's adjacency matrix or [Laplacian matrix][18]. If you embed a graph using [Laplacian Eigenmaps][19] or by taking the [principal components][20] of the Laplacian, that's first order. Similarly, GloVe is a first-order method on the graph of word co-occurences. One of my favorites first order methods for graphs is [ProNE][21], which works as well as most methods while being two orders of magnitude faster. A higher-order method embeds the original matrix plus connections of neighbours-of-neighbours (2nd degree) and deeper k-step connections. [GraRep][22], shows you can always generate higher-order representations from first order methods by augmenting the graph matrix. Higher order method are the "upsampling" we do on graphs. GNNs that sample on large neighborhoods and random-walk based methods like node2vec are doing higher-order embeddings. Where are the performance gain? Most GNN papers in the last 5 years present empirical numbers that are useless for practitioners to decide on what to use. As noted in the [OpenGraphsBenchmark][4] (OGB) paper, GNN papers do their empirical section on a handful of tiny graphs (Cora, CiteSeer, PubMed) with 2000-20,000 nodes. These datasets can't seriously differentiate between methods. Recent efforts are directly fixing this, but the reasons why researchers focused on tiny, useless datasets for so long are worth discussing. Performance matters by task One fact that surprises a lot of people is that even though language models have the best performance in a lot of NLP tasks, if all you're doing is cram sentence embeddings into a downstream model, there [isn't much gained][23] from language models embeddings over simple methods like summing the individual Word2Vec word embeddings (This makes sense, because the full context of the sentence is captured in the sentence co-occurence matrix that is generating the Word2Vec embeddings). Similarly, [I find][24] that for many graphs simple first-order methods perform just as well on graph clustering and node label prediction tasks than higher-order embedding methods. In fact higher-order methods are massively computationally wasteful for these usecases. Recommended first order embedding methods are ProNE and my [GGVec with order=1][25]. Higher order methods normally perform better on the link prediction tasks. I'm not the only one to find this. In the BioNEV paper, they find: "A large GraRep order value for link prediction tasks (e.g. 3, 4);a small value for node classification tasks (e.g.1, 2)" (p.9). Interestingly, the gap in link prediction performance is inexistant for artificially created graphs. This suggests higher order methods do learn some of the structure intrinsic to [real world graphs][26]. For visualization, first order methods are better. Visualizations of higher order methods tend to have artifacts of their sampling. For instance, Node2Vec visualizations tend to have elongated/filament-like structures which come from the embeddings coming from long single strand random walks. See the following visualizations by [Owen Cornec][27] created by first embedding the graph to 32-300 dimensions using a node embedding algorithm, then mapping this to 2d or 3d with the excellent UMAP algorithm, like this Lastly, sometimes simple methods soundly beat higher order methods (there's an instance of it in the OGB paper). The problem here is that we don't know when any method is better than another and we definitely don't know the reason. There's definitely a reason different graph types respond better/worse to being represented by various methods. This is currently an open question. A big part of why is that the research space is inundated under useless new algorithms because... Academic incentives work against progress Here's the cynic's view of how machine learning papers are made: Take an existing algorithm Add some new layer/hyperparameter, make a cute mathematical story for why it matters Gridsearch your hyperparameters until you beat baselines from the original paper you aped Absolutely don't gridsearch stuff you're comparing against in your results section Make a cute ACRONYM for your new method, put impossible to use python 2 code on github (Or no code at all!) and bask in the citations I'm [not][28] the [only one][29] with these views on the state reproducible research. At least it's gotten slightly better in the last 2 years. Sidebar: I hate Node2Vec A side project of mine is a [node embedding library][25] and the most popular method in it is by far Node2Vec. Don't use Node2Vec. [Node2Vec][30] with p=1; q=1 is the [Deepwalk][31] algorithm. Deepwalk is an actual innovation. The Node2Vec authors closely followed the steps 1-5 including bonus points on step 5 by getting word2vec name recognition. This is not academic fraud -- the hyperparameters [do help a tiny bit][32] if you gridsearch really hard. But it's the presentable-to-your-parents sister of where you make the ML community worse off to progress your academic career. And certainly Node2Vec doesn't deserve 7500 citations. Progress is all about practical issues We've known how to train neural networks for well over 40 years. Yet they only exploded in popularity with [AlexNet][33] in 2012. This is because implementations and hardware came to a point where deep learning was practical. Similarly, we've known about factoring word co-occurence matrices into Word embeddings for at least 20 years. But word embeddings only exploded in 2013 with Word2Vec. The breakthrough here was that the minibatch-based methods let you train a Wikipedia-scale embedding model on commodity hardware. It's hard for methods in a field to make progress if training on a small amount of data takes days or weeks. You're disincentivized to explore new methods. If you want progress, your stuff has to run in reasonable time on commodity hardware. Even Google's original search algorithm [initially ran on commodity hardware][34]. Efficiency is paramount to progress The reason deep learning research took off the way it did is because of improvements in [efficiency][35] as well as much better libraries and hardware support. Academic code is terrible Any amount of time you spend gridsearching Node2Vec on p and q is all put to better use gridsearching Deepwalk itself (on number of walks, length of walks, or word2vec hyperparameters). The problem is that people don't gridsearch over deepwalk because implementations are all terrible. I wrote the [Nodevectors library][36] to have a fast deepwalk implementation because it took 32 hours to embed a graph with a measly 150,000 nodes using the reference Node2Vec implementation (the same takes 3min with Nodevectors). It's no wonder people don't gridsearch on Deepwalk a gridsearch would take weeks with the terrible reference implementations. To give an example, in the original paper of [GraphSAGE][37] they their algorithm to DeepWalk with walk lengths of 5, which is horrid if you've ever hyperparameter tuned a deepwalk algorithm. From their paper: We did observe DeepWalk’s performance could improve with further training, and in some cases it could become competitive with the unsupervised GraphSAGE approaches (but not the supervised approaches) if we let it run for >1000× longer than the other approaches (in terms of wall clock time for prediction on the test set) I don't even think the GraphSAGE authors had bad intent -- deepwalk implementations are simply so awful that they're turned away from using it properly. It's like trying to do deep learning with 2002 deep learning libraries and hardware. Your architectures don't really matter One of the more important papers this year was [OpenAI's "Scaling laws"][38] paper, where the raw number of parameters in your model is the most predictive feature of overall performance. This was noted even in the original BERT paper and drives 2020's increase in absolutely massive language models. This is really just [Sutton' Bitter Lesson][39] in action: General methods that leverage computation are ultimately the most effective, and by a large margin Transformers might be [replacing convolution][40], too. As [Yannic Kilcher said][41], transformers are ruining everything. [They work on graphs][6], in fact it's one of the [recent approaches][42], and seems to be one of the more succesful [when benchmarked][1] Researchers seem to be putting so much effort into architecture, but it doesn't matter much in the end because you can approximate anything by stacking more layers. Efficiency wins are great -- but neural net architectures are just one way to achieve that, and by tremendously over-researching this area we're leaving a lot of huge gains elsewhere on the table. Current Graph Data Structure Implementations suck NetworkX is a bad library. I mean, it's good if you're working on tiny graphs for babies, but for anything serious it chokes and forces you to rewrite everything in... what library, really? At this point most people working on large graphs end up hand-rolling some data structure. This is tough because your computer's memory is a 1-dimensional array of 1's and 0's and a graph has no obvious 1-d mapping. This is even harder when we take updating the graph (adding/removing some nodes/edges) into account. Here's a few options: Disconnected networks of pointers NetworkX is the best example. Here, every node is an object with a list of pointers to other nodes (the node's edges). This layout is like a linked list. Linked lists are the [root of all performance evil][43]. Linked lists go completely against how modern computers are designed. Fetching things from memory is slow, and operating on memory is fast (by two orders of magnitude). Whenever you do anything in this layout, you make a roundtrip to RAM. It's slow by design, you can write this in Ruby or C or assembly and it'll be slow regardless, because memory fetches are slow in hardware. The main advantage of this layout is that adding a new node is O(1). So if you're maintaining a massive graph where adding and removing nodes happens as often as reading from the graph, it makes sense. Another advantage of this layout is that it "scales". Because everything is decoupled from each other you can put this data structure on a cluster. However, you're really creating a complex solution for a problem you created for yourself. Sparse Adjacency Matrix This layout great for read-only graphs. I use it as the backend in my [nodevectors][25] library, and many other library writers use the [Scipy CSR Matrix][44], you can see graph algorithms implemented on it [here][45]. The most popular layout for this use is the [CSR Format][46] where you have 3 arrays holding the graph. One for edge destinations, one for edge weights and an "index pointer" which says which edges come from which node. Because the CSR layout is simply 3 arrays, it scales on a single computer: a CSR matrix can be laid out on a disk instead of in-memory. You simply [memory map][47] the 3 arrays and use them on-disk from there. With modern NVMe drives random seeks aren't slow anymore, much faster than distributed network calls like you do when scaling the linked list-based graph. I haven't seen anyone actually implement this yet, but it's in the roadmap for my implementation at least. The problem with this representation is that adding a node or edge means rebuilding the whole data structure. Edgelist representations This representation is three arrays: one for the edge sources, one for the edge destinations, and one for edge weights. [DGL][48] uses this representation internally. This is a simple and compact layout which can be good for analysis. The problem compared to CSR Graphs is some seek operations are slower. Say you want all the edges for node #4243. You can't jump there without maintaining an index pointer array. So either you maintain sorted order and binary search your way there (O(log2n)) or unsorted order and linear search (O(n)). This data structure can also work on memory mapped disk array, and node append is fast on unsorted versions (it's slow in the sorted version). Global methods are a dead end Methods that work on the entire graph at once can't leverage computation, because they run out of RAM at a certain scale. So any method that want a chance of being the new standard need to be able to update piecemeal on parts of the graph. Sampling-based methods Sampling Efficiency will matter more in the future Edgewise local methods. The only algorithms I know of that do this are GloVe and GGVec, which they pass through an edge list and update embedding weights on each step. The problem with this approach is that it's hard to use them for higher-order methods. The advantage is that they easily scale even on one computer. Also, incrementally adding a new node is as simple as taking the existing embeddings, adding a new one, and doing another epoch over the data Random Walk sampling. This is used by deepwalk and its descendants, usually for node embeddings rather than GNN methods. This can be computationally expensive and make it hard to add new nodes. But this does scale, for instance [Instagram][49] use it to feed their recommendation system models Neighbourhood sampling. This is currently the most common one in GNNs, and can be low or higher order depending on the neighborhood size. It also scales well, though implementing efficiently can be challenging. It's currently used by [Pinterest][50]'s recommendation algorithms. Conclusion Here are a few interesting questions: What is the relation between graph types and methods? Consolidated benchmarking like OGB We're throwing random models at random benchmarks without understanding why or when they do better More fundamental research. Heree's one I'm curious about: can other representation types like [Poincarre Embeddings][51] effectively encode directed relationships? On the other hand, we should stop focusing on adding spicy new layers to test on the same tiny datasets. No one cares. [1]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.00982.pdf [2]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.11867.pdf [3]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1812.08434.pdf [4]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.00687.pdf [5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjacency_matrix [6]: https://thegradient.pub/transformers-are-graph-neural-networks/ [7]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word2vec [8]: https://nlp.stanford.edu/pubs/glove.pdf [9]: https://papers.nips.cc/paper/2014/file/feab05aa91085b7a8012516bc3533958-Paper.pdf [10]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bag-of-words_model [11]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-occurrence [12]: https://www.singlelunch.com/2020/02/16/embeddings-from-the-ground-up/ [13]: https://www.singlelunch.com/2019/01/27/word-embeddings-from-the-ground-up/ [14]: https://nlpprogress.com/ [15]: http://socsci.uci.edu/~rfutrell/papers/hahn2019estimating.pdf [16]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity [17]: https://bair.berkeley.edu/blog/2020/12/20/lmmem/ [18]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplacian_matrix [19]: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=1F03130B02DC485C78BF364266B6F0CA?doi=10.1.1.19.8100&rep=rep1&type=pdf [20]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principalcomponentanalysis [21]: https://www.ijcai.org/Proceedings/2019/0594.pdf [22]: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2806416.2806512 [23]: https://openreview.net/pdf?id=SyK00v5xx [24]: https://github.com/VHRanger/nodevectors/blob/master/examples/link%20prediction.ipynb [25]: https://github.com/VHRanger/nodevectors [26]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1310.2636.pdf [27]: http://byowen.com/ [28]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.03341.pdf [29]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kee4ch3miVA [30]: https://cs.stanford.edu/~jure/pubs/node2vec-kdd16.pdf [31]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1403.6652.pdf [32]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1911.11726.pdf [33]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlexNet [34]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Googledatacenters#Original_hardware [35]: https://openai.com/blog/ai-and-efficiency/ [36]: https://www.singlelunch.com/2019/08/01/700x-faster-node2vec-models-fastest-random-walks-on-a-graph/ [37]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1706.02216.pdf [38]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2001.08361.pdf [39]: http://incompleteideas.net/IncIdeas/BitterLesson.html [40]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.11929 [41]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrdevFK_am4 [42]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1710.10903.pdf [43]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNmRkzxHWs [44]: https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.sparse.csr_matrix.html [45]: https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/sparse.csgraph.html [46]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sparsematrix#Compressedsparserow(CSR,CRSorYaleformat) [47]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mmap [48]: https://github.com/dmlc/dgl [49]: https://ai.facebook.com/blog/powered-by-ai-instagrams-explore-recommender-system/ [50]: https://medium.com/pinterest-engineering/pinsage-a-new-graph-convolutional-neural-network-for-web-scale-recommender-systems-88795a107f48 [51]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.08039.pdf

[P] Can you distinguish AI-generated content from real art or literature? I made a little test!

Hi everyone, I am no programmer, and I have a very basic knowledge of machine learning, but I am fascinated by the possibilities offered by all the new models we have seen so far. Some people around me say they are not that impressed by what AIs can do, so I built a small test (with a little help by chatGPT to code the whole thing): can you always 100% distinguish between AI art or text and old works of art or literature? Here is the site: http://aiorart.com/ I find that AI-generated text is still generally easy to spot, but of course it is very challenging to go against great literary works. AI images can sometimes be truly deceptive. I wonder what you will all think of it... and how all that will evolve in the coming months! PS: The site is very crude (again, I am no programmer!). It works though.

[D] Misuse of Deep Learning in Nature Journal’s Earthquake Aftershock Paper

Recently, I saw a post by Rajiv Shah, Chicago-based data-scientist, regarding an article published in Nature last year called Deep learning of aftershock patterns following large earthquakes, written by scientists at Harvard in collaboration with Google. Below is the article: Stand Up for Best Practices: Misuse of Deep Learning in Nature’s Earthquake Aftershock Paper The Dangers of Machine Learning Hype Practitioners of AI, machine learning, predictive modeling, and data science have grown enormously over the last few years. What was once a niche field defined by its blend of knowledge is becoming a rapidly growing profession. As the excitement around AI continues to grow, the new wave of ML augmentation, automation, and GUI tools will lead to even more growth in the number of people trying to build predictive models. But here’s the rub: While it becomes easier to use the tools of predictive modeling, predictive modeling knowledge is not yet a widespread commodity. Errors can be counterintuitive and subtle, and they can easily lead you to the wrong conclusions if you’re not careful. I’m a data scientist who works with dozens of expert data science teams for a living. In my day job, I see these teams striving to build high-quality models. The best teams work together to review their models to detect problems. There are many hard-to-detect-ways that lead to problematic models (say, by allowing target leakage into their training data). Identifying issues is not fun. This requires admitting that exciting results are “too good to be true” or that their methods were not the right approach. In other words, it’s less about the sexy data science hype that gets headlines and more about a rigorous scientific discipline. Bad Methods Create Bad Results Almost a year ago, I read an article in Nature that claimed unprecedented accuracy in predicting earthquake aftershocks by using deep learning. Reading the article, my internal radar became deeply suspicious of their results. Their methods simply didn’t carry many of the hallmarks of careful predicting modeling. I started to dig deeper. In the meantime, this article blew up and became widely recognized! It was even included in the release notes for Tensorflow as an example of what deep learning could do. However, in my digging, I found major flaws in the paper. Namely, data leakage which leads to unrealistic accuracy scores and a lack of attention to model selection (you don’t build a 6 layer neural network when a simpler model provides the same level of accuracy). To my earlier point: these are subtle, but incredibly basic predictive modeling errors that can invalidate the entire results of an experiment. Data scientists are trained to recognize and avoid these issues in their work. I assumed that this was simply overlooked by the author, so I contacted her and let her know so that she could improve her analysis. Although we had previously communicated, she did not respond to my email over concerns with the paper. Falling On Deaf Ears So, what was I to do? My coworkers told me to just tweet it and let it go, but I wanted to stand up for good modeling practices. I thought reason and best practices would prevail, so I started a 6-month process of writing up my results and shared them with Nature. Upon sharing my results, I received a note from Nature in January 2019 that despite serious concerns about data leakage and model selection that invalidate their experiment, they saw no need to correct the errors, because “Devries et al. are concerned primarily with using machine learning as [a] tool to extract insight into the natural world, and not with details of the algorithm design.” The authors provided a much harsher response. You can read the entire exchange on my github. It’s not enough to say that I was disappointed. This was a major paper (it’s Nature!) that bought into AI hype and published a paper despite it using flawed methods. Then, just this week, I ran across articles by Arnaud Mignan and Marco Broccardo on shortcomings that they found in the aftershocks article. Here are two more data scientists with expertise in earthquake analysis who also noticed flaws in the paper. I also have placed my analysis and reproducible code on github. Standing Up For Predictive Modeling Methods I want to make it clear: my goal is not to villainize the authors of the aftershocks paper. I don’t believe that they were malicious, and I think that they would argue their goal was to just show how machine learning could be applied to aftershocks. Devries is an accomplished earthquake scientist who wanted to use the latest methods for her field of study and found exciting results from it. But here’s the problem: their insights and results were based on fundamentally flawed methods. It’s not enough to say, “This isn’t a machine learning paper, it’s an earthquake paper.” If you use predictive modeling, then the quality of your results are determined by the quality of your modeling. Your work becomes data science work, and you are on the hook for your scientific rigor. There is a huge appetite for papers that use the latest technologies and approaches. It becomes very difficult to push back on these papers. But if we allow papers or projects with fundamental issues to advance, it hurts all of us. It undermines the field of predictive modeling. Please push back on bad data science. Report bad findings to papers. And if they don’t take action, go to twitter, post about it, share your results and make noise. This type of collective action worked to raise awareness of p-values and combat the epidemic of p-hacking. We need good machine learning practices if we want our field to continue to grow and maintain credibility. Link to Rajiv's Article Original Nature Publication (note: paywalled) GitHub repo contains an attempt to reproduce Nature's paper Confrontational correspondence with authors

[N] Udacity had an interventional meeting with Siraj Raval on content theft for his AI course

&#x200B; According to Udacity insiders Mat Leonard @MatDrinksTea and Michael Wales @walesmd: &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/yr5yg453tjo31.png?width=978&format=png&auto=webp&s=358a16c6f4493eb0d15b57ed29e28ac69721e3e2 https://twitter.com/MatDrinksTea/status/1175481042448211968 Siraj has a habit of stealing content and other people’s work. That he is allegedly scamming these students does not surprise me one bit. I hope people in the ML community stop working with him. https://twitter.com/walesmd/status/1176268937098596352 Oh no, not when working with us. We literally had an intervention meeting, involving multiple Directors, including myself, to explain to you how non-attribution was bad. Even the Director of Video Production was involved, it was so blatant that non-tech pointed it out. If I remember correctly, in the same meeting we also had to explain why Pepe memes were not appropriate in an educational context. This was right around the time we told you there was absolutely no way your editing was happening and we required our own team to approve. And then we also decided, internally, as soon as the contract ended; @MatDrinksTea would be redoing everything.

[Discussion] When ML and Data Science are the death of a good company: A cautionary tale.

TD;LR: At Company A, Team X does advanced analytics using on-prem ERP tools and older programming languages. Their tools work very well and are designed based on very deep business and domain expertise. Team Y is a new and ambitious Data Science team that thinks they can replace Team X's tools with a bunch of R scripts and a custom built ML platform. Their models are simplistic, but more "fashionable" compared to the econometric models used by Team X, and team Y benefits from the ML/DS moniker so leadership is allowing Team Y to start a large scale overhaul of the analytics platform in question. Team Y doesn't have the experience for such a larger scale transformation, and is refusing to collaborate with team X. This project is very likely going to fail, and cause serious harm to the company as a whole financially and from a people perspective. I argue that this is not just because of bad leadership, but also because of various trends and mindsets in the DS community at large. Update (Jump to below the line for the original story): Several people in the comments are pointing out that this just a management failure, not something due to ML/DS, and that you can replace DS with any buzz tech and the story will still be relevant. My response: Of course, any failure at an organization level is ultimately a management failure one way or the other. Moreover, it is also the case that ML/DS when done correctly, will always improve a company's bottom line. There is no scenario where the proper ML solution, delivered at a reasonable cost and in a timely fashion, will somehow hurt the company's bottom line. My point is that in this case management is failing because of certain trends and practices that are specific to the ML/DS community, namely: The idea that DS teams should operate independently of tech and business orgs -- too much autonomy for DS teams The disregard for domain knowledge that seems prevalent nowadays thanks to the ML hype, that DS can be generalists and someone with good enough ML chops can solve any business problem. That wasn't the case when I first left academia for the industry in 2009 (back then nobody would even bother with a phone screen if you didn't have the right domain knowledge). Over reliance on resources who check all the ML hype related boxes (knows Python, R, Tensorflow, Shiny, etc..., has the right Coursera certifications, has blogged on the topic, etc...), but are lacking in depth of experience. DS interviews nowadays all seem to be: Can you tell me what a p-value is? What is elastic net regression? Show me how to fit a model in sklearn? How do you impute NAs in an R dataframe? Any smart person can look those up on Stackoverflow or Cross-Validated,.....Instead teams should be asking stuff like: why does portfolio optimization use QP not LP? How does a forecast influence a customer service level? When should a recommendation engine be content based and when should it use collaborative filtering? etc... (This is a true story, happening to the company I currently work for. Names, domains, algorithms, and roles have been shuffled around to protect my anonymity)  Company A has been around for several decades. It is not the biggest name in its domain, but it is a well respected one. Risk analysis and portfolio optimization have been a core of Company A's business since the 90s. They have a large team of 30 or so analysts who perform those tasks on a daily basis. These analysts use ERP solutions implemented for them by one the big ERP companies (SAP, Teradata, Oracle, JD Edwards,...) or one of the major tech consulting companies (Deloitte, Accenture, PWC, Capgemini, etc...) in collaboration with their own in house engineering team. The tools used are embarrassingly old school: Classic RDBMS running on on-prem servers or maybe even on mainframes, code written in COBOL, Fortran, weird proprietary stuff like ABAP or SPSS.....you get the picture. But the models and analytic functions were pretty sophisticated, and surprisingly cutting edge compared to the published academic literature. Most of all, they fit well with the company's enterprise ecosystem, and were honed based on years of deep domain knowledge.  They have a tech team of several engineers (poached from the aforementioned software and consulting companies) and product managers (who came from the experienced pools of analysts and managers who use the software, or poached from business rivals) maintaining and running this software. Their technology might be old school, but collectively, they know the domain and the company's overall architecture very, very well. They've guided the company through several large scale upgrades and migrations and they have a track record of delivering on time, without too much overhead. The few times they've stumbled, they knew how to pick themselves up very quickly. In fact within their industry niche, they have a reputation for their expertise, and have very good relations with the various vendors they've had to deal with. They were the launching pad of several successful ERP consulting careers.  Interestingly, despite dealing on a daily basis with statistical modeling and optimization algorithms, none of the analysts, engineers, or product managers involved describe themselves as data scientists or machine learning experts. It is mostly a cultural thing: Their expertise predates the Data Science/ML hype that started circa 2010, and they got most of their chops using proprietary enterprise tools instead of the open source tools popular nowadays. A few of them have formal statistical training, but most of them came from engineering or domain backgrounds and learned stats on the fly while doing their job. Call this team "Team X".  Sometime around the mid 2010s, Company A started having some serious anxiety issues: Although still doing very well for a company its size, overall economic and demographic trends were shrinking its customer base, and a couple of so called disruptors came up with a new app and business model that started seriously eating into their revenue. A suitable reaction to appease shareholders and Wall Street was necessary. The company already had a decent website and a pretty snazzy app, what more could be done? Leadership decided that it was high time that AI and ML become a core part of the company's business. An ambitious Manager, with no science or engineering background, but who had very briefly toyed with a recommender system a couple of years back, was chosen to build a data science team, call it team "Y" (he had a bachelor's in history from the local state college and worked for several years in the company's marketing org). Team "Y" consists mostly of internal hires who decided they wanted to be data scientists and completed a Coursera certification or a Galvanize boot camp, before being brought on to the team, along with a few of fresh Ph.D or M.Sc holders who didn't like academia and wanted to try their hand at an industry role. All of them were very bright people, they could write great Medium blog posts and give inspiring TED talks, but collectively they had very little real world industry experience. As is the fashion nowadays, this group was made part of a data science org that reported directly to the CEO and Board, bypassing the CIO and any tech or business VPs, since Company A wanted to claim the monikers "data driven" and "AI powered" in their upcoming shareholder meetings. In 3 or 4 years of existence, team Y produced a few Python and R scripts. Their architectural experience  consisted almost entirely in connecting Flask to S3 buckets or Redshift tables, with a couple of the more resourceful ones learning how to plug their models into Tableau or how to spin up a Kuberneties pod.  But they needn't worry: The aforementioned manager, who was now a director (and was also doing an online Masters to make up for his qualifications gap and bolster his chances of becoming VP soon - at least he now understands what L1 regularization is), was a master at playing corporate politics and self-promotion. No matter how few actionable insights team Y produced or how little code they deployed to production, he always had their back and made sure they had ample funding. In fact he now had grandiose plans for setting up an all-purpose machine learning platform that can be used to solve all of the company's data problems.  A couple of sharp minded members of team Y, upon googling their industry name along with the word "data science", realized that risk analysis was a prime candidate for being solved with Bayesian models, and there was already a nifty R package for doing just that, whose tutorial they went through on R-Bloggers.com. One of them had even submitted a Bayesian classifier Kernel for a competition on Kaggle (he was 203rd on the leaderboard), and was eager to put his new-found expertise to use on a real world problem. They pitched the idea to their director, who saw a perfect use case for his upcoming ML platform. They started work on it immediately, without bothering to check whether anybody at Company A was already doing risk analysis. Since their org was independent, they didn't really need to check with anybody else before they got funding for their initiative. Although it was basically a Naive Bayes classifier, the term ML was added to the project tile, to impress the board.  As they progressed with their work however, tensions started to build. They had asked the data warehousing and CA analytics teams to build pipelines for them, and word eventually got out to team X about their project. Team X was initially thrilled: They offered to collaborate whole heartedly, and would have loved to add an ML based feather to their already impressive cap. The product owners and analysts were totally onboard as well: They saw a chance to get in on the whole Data Science hype that they kept hearing about. But through some weird mix of arrogance and insecurity, team Y refused to collaborate with them or share any of their long term goals with them, even as they went to other parts of the company giving brown bag presentations and tutorials on the new model they created.  Team X got resentful: from what they saw of team Y's model, their approach was hopelessly naive and had little chances of scaling or being sustainable in production, and they knew exactly how to help with that. Deploying the model to production would have taken them a few days, given how comfortable they were with DevOps and continuous delivery (team Y had taken several months to figure out how to deploy a simple R script to production). And despite how old school their own tech was, team X were crafty enough to be able to plug it in to their existing architecture. Moreover, the output of the model was such that it didn't take into account how the business will consume it or how it was going to be fed to downstream systems, and the product owners could have gone a long way in making the model more amenable to adoption by the business stakeholders. But team Y wouldn't listen, and their leads brushed off any attempts at communication, let alone collaboration. The vibe that team Y was giving off was "We are the cutting edge ML team, you guys are the legacy server grunts. We don't need your opinion.", and they seemed to have a complete disregard for domain knowledge, or worse, they thought that all that domain knowledge consisted of was being able to grasp the definitions of a few business metrics.  Team X got frustrated and tried to express their concerns to leadership. But despite owning a vital link in Company A's business process, they were only \~50 people in a large 1000 strong technology and operations org, and they were several layers removed from the C-suite, so it was impossible for them to get their voices heard.  Meanwhile, the unstoppable director was doing what he did best: Playing corporate politics. Despite how little his team had actually delivered, he had convinced the board that all analysis and optimization tasks should now be migrated to his yet to be delivered ML platform. Since most leaders now knew that there was overlap between team Y and team X's objectives, his pitch was no longer that team Y was going to create a new insight, but that they were going to replace (or modernize) the legacy statistics based on-prem tools with more accurate cloud based ML tools. Never mind that there was no support in the academic literature for the idea that Naive Bayes works better than the Econometric approaches used by team X, let alone the additional wacky idea that Bayesian Optimization would definitely outperform the QP solvers that were running in production.  Unbeknownst to team X, the original Bayesian risk analysis project has now grown into a multimillion dollar major overhaul initiative, which included the eventual replacement of all of the tools and functions supported by team X along with the necessary migration to the cloud. The CIO and a couple of business VPs are on now board, and tech leadership is treating it as a done deal. An outside vendor, a startup who nobody had heard of, was contracted to help build the platform, since team Y has no engineering skills. The choice was deliberate, as calling on any of the established consulting or software companies would have eventually led leadership to the conclusion that team X was better suited for a transformation on this scale than team Y.  Team Y has no experience with any major ERP deployments, and no domain knowledge, yet they are being tasked with fundamentally changing the business process that is at the core of Company A's business. Their models actually perform worse than those deployed by team X, and their architecture is hopelessly simplistic, compared to what is necessary for running such a solution in production.  Ironically, using Bayesian thinking and based on all the evidence, the likelihood that team Y succeeds is close to 0%. At best, the project is going to end up being a write off of 50 million dollars or more. Once the !@#$!@hits the fan, a couple of executive heads are going to role, and dozens of people will get laid off. At worst, given how vital risk analysis and portfolio optimization is to Company A's revenue stream, the failure will eventually sink the whole company. It probably won't go bankrupt, but it will lose a significant portion of its business and work force. Failed ERP implementations can and do sink large companies: Just see what happened to National Grid US, SuperValu or Target Canada.  One might argue that this is more about corporate disfunction and bad leadership than about data science and AI. But I disagree. I think the core driver of this debacle is indeed the blind faith in Data Scientists, ML models and the promise of AI, and the overall culture of hype and self promotion that is very common among the ML crowd.  We haven't seen the end of this story: I sincerely hope that this ends well for the sake of my colleagues and all involved. Company A is a good company, and both its customers and its employees deserver better. But the chances of that happening are negligible given all the information available, and this failure will hit my company hard.

[D] The Rants of an experienced engineer who glimpsed into AI Academia (Briefly)

Background I recently graduated with a master's degree and was fortunate/unfortunate to glimpse the whole "Academic" side of ML. I took a thesis track in my degree because as an immigrant it's harder to get into a good research lab without having authorship in a couple of good papers (Or so I delude myself ). I worked as a Full-stack SWE for a startup for 4+ years before coming to the US for a master’s degree focused on ML and AI. I did everything in those years. From project management to building fully polished S/W products to DevOps to even dabbled in ML. I did my Batchelor’s degree from a university whose name is not even worth mentioning. The university for my master’s degree is in the top 20 in the AI space. I didn't know much about ML and the curiosity drove me to university. Come to uni and I focused on learning ML and AI for one 1-1.5 years after which I found advisors for a thesis topic. This is when the fun starts. I had the most amazing advisors but the entire peer review system and the way we assess ML/Science is what ticked me off. This is where the rant begins. Rant 1:Acadmia follows a Gated Institutional Narrative Let's say you are a Ph.D. at the world's top AI institution working under the best prof. You have a way higher likelihood of you getting a good Postdoc at a huge research lab vs someone's from my poor country doing a Ph.D. with a not-so-well-known advisor having published not-so-well-known papers. I come from a developing nation and I see this many times here. In my country academics don't get funding as they do at colleges in the US. One of the reasons for this is that colleges don't have such huge endowments and many academics don't have wealthy research sponsors. Brand names and prestige carry massive weight to help get funding in US academic circles. This prestige/money percolates down to the students and the researchers who work there. Students in top colleges get a huge advantage and the circles of top researchers keep being from the same sets of institutions. I have nothing against top researchers from top institutions but due to the nature of citations and the way the money flows based on them, a vicious cycle is created where the best institutions keep getting better and the rest don't get as much of a notice. Rant 2: Peer Review without Code Review in ML/AI is shady I am a computer scientist and I was appalled when I heard that you don't need to do code reviews for research papers. As a computer scientist and someone who actually did shit tons of actual ML in the past year, I find it absolutely garbage that code reviews are not a part of this system. I am not saying every scientist who reads a paper should review code but at least one person should for any paper's code submission. At least in ML and AI space. This is basic. I don't get why people call themselves computer scientists if they don't want to read the fucking code. If you can't then make a grad student do it. But for the collective of science, we need this. The core problem lies in the fact that peer review is free. : There should be better solutions for this. We ended up creating Git and that changed so many lives. Academic Research needs something similar. Rant 3: My Idea is Novel Until I see Someone Else's Paper The volume of scientific research is growing exponentially. Information is being created faster than we can digest. We can't expect people to know everything and the amount of overlap in the AI/ML fields requires way better search engines than Google Scholar. The side effect of large volumes of research is that every paper is doing something "novel" making it harder to filter what the fuck was novel. I have had so many experiences where I coded up something and came to realize that someone else has done something symbolically similar and my work just seems like a small variant of that. That's what fucks with my head. Is what I did in Novel? What the fuck is Novel? Is stitching up a transformer to any problem with fancy embeddings and tidying it up as a research paper Novel? Is just making a transformer bigger Novel? Is some new RL algorithm tested with 5 seeds and some fancy fucking prior and some esoteric reasoning for its success Novel? Is using an over parameterized model to get 95% accuracy on 200 sample test set Novel? Is apply Self-supervised learning for some new dataset Novel? If I keep on listing questions on novelty, I can probably write a novel asking about what the fuck is "Novel". Rant 4: Citation Based Optimization Promotes Self Growth Over Collective Growth Whatever people may say about collaboration, Academia intrinsically doesn't promote the right incentive structures to harbor collaboration. Let me explain, When you write a paper, the position of your name matters. If you are just a Ph.D. student and a first author to a paper, it's great. If you are an nth author Not so great. Apparently, this is a very touchy thing for academics. And lots of egos can clash around numbering and ordering of names. I distinctly remember once attending some seminar in a lab and approaching a few students on research project ideas. The first thing that came out of the PhD student's mouth was the position in authorship. As an engineer who worked with teams in the past, this was never something I had thought about. Especially because I worked in industry, where it's always the group over the person. Academia is the reverse. Academia applauds the celebration of the individual's achievements. All of this is understandable but it's something I don't like. This makes PhDs stick to their lane. The way citations/research-focus calibrate the "hire-ability" and "completion of Ph.D. thesis" metrics, people are incentivized to think about themselves instead of thinking about collaborations for making something better. Conclusion A Ph.D. in its most idealistic sense for me is the pursuit of hard ideas(I am poetic that way). In a situation like now when you have to publish or perish and words on paper get passed off as science without even seeing the code that runs it, I am extremely discouraged to go down that route. All these rants are not to diss on scientists. I did them because "we" as a community need better ways to addressing some of these problems. P.S. Never expected so many people to express their opinions about this rant. U shouldn’t take this seriously. As many people have stated I am an outsider with tiny experience to give a full picture. I realize that my post as coming out as something which tries to dichotomize academia and industry. I am not trying to do that. I wanted to highlight some problems I saw for which there is no one person to blame. These issues are in my opinion a byproduct of the economics which created this system. Thank you for gold stranger.

[N] Netflix and European Space Agency no longer working with Siraj Raval

According to article in The Register: A Netflix spokesperson confirmed to The Register it wasn’t working with Raval, and the ESA has cancelled the whole workshop altogether. “The situation is as it is. The workshop is cancelled, and that’s all,” Guillaume Belanger, an astrophysicist and the INTEGRAL Science Operations Coordinator at the ESA, told The Register on Monday. Raval isn’t about to quit his work any time soon, however. He promised students who graduated from his course that they would be referred to recruiters at Nvidia, Intel, Google and Amazon for engineering positions, or matched with a startup co-founder or a consulting client. In an unlisted YouTube video recorded live for his students discussing week eight of his course, and seen by El Reg, he read out a question posed to him: “Will your referrals hold any value now?” “Um, yeah they’re going to hold value. I don’t see why they wouldn’t. I mean, yes, some people on Twitter were angry but that has nothing to do with… I mean… I’ve also had tons of support, you know. I’ve had tons of support from people, who, uh, you know, support me, who work at these companies. He continues to justify his actions: “Public figures called me in private to remind me that this happens. You know, people make mistakes. You just have to keep going. They’re basically just telling me to not to stop. Of course, you make mistakes but you just keep going,” he claimed. When The Register asked Raval for comment, he responded: I've hardly taken any time off to relax since I first started my YouTube channel almost four years ago. And despite the enormous amount of work it takes to release two high quality videos a week for my audience, I progressively started to take on multiple other projects simultaneously by myself – a book, a docu-series, podcasts, YouTube videos, the course, the school of AI. Basically, these past few weeks, I've been experiencing a burnout unlike anything I've felt before. As a result, all of my output has been subpar. I made the [neural qubits] video and paper in one week. I remember wishing I had three to six months to really dive into quantum machine-learning and make something awesome, but telling myself I couldn't take that long as it would hinder my other projects. I plagiarized large chunks of the paper to meet my self-imposed one-week deadline. The associated video with animations took a lot more work to make. I didn't expect the paper to be cited as serious research, I considered it an additional reading resource for people who enjoyed the associated video to learn more about quantum machine learning. If I had a second chance, I'd definitely take way more time to write the paper, and in my own words. I've given refunds to every student who's asked so far, and the majority of students are still enrolled in the course. There are many happy students, they're just not as vocal on social media. We're on week 8 of 10 of my course, fully committed to student success. “And, no, I haven't plagiarized research for any other paper,” he added. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/10/14/ravelaiyoutube/

[D] Discussion about no-code AI development platform

What do you think of no-code AI model development service like Darwin AI and Crowd AI? Those services make the users build the AI models only in GUI. Some people would say they prefer to write codes on their own, so they can know how the models are built, but some people would like the no-code service, valuing its convenience more than code customizability. What is your opinion on those services?

[D] Overwhelmed by fast advances in recent weeks

I was watching the GTC keynote and became entirely overwhelmed by the amount of progress achieved from last year. I'm wondering how everyone else feels. &#x200B; Firstly, the entire ChatGPT, GPT-3/GPT-4 chaos has been going on for a few weeks, with everyone scrambling left and right to integrate chatbots into their apps, products, websites. Twitter is flooded with new product ideas, how to speed up the process from idea to product, countless promp engineering blogs, tips, tricks, paid courses. &#x200B; Not only was ChatGPT disruptive, but a few days later, Microsoft and Google also released their models and integrated them into their search engines. Microsoft also integrated its LLM into its Office suite. It all happenned overnight. I understand that they've started integrating them along the way, but still, it seems like it hapenned way too fast. This tweet encompases the past few weeks perfectly https://twitter.com/AlphaSignalAI/status/1638235815137386508 , on a random Tuesday countless products are released that seem revolutionary. &#x200B; In addition to the language models, there are also the generative art models that have been slowly rising in mainstream recognition. Now Midjourney AI is known by a lot of people who are not even remotely connected to the AI space. &#x200B; For the past few weeks, reading Twitter, I've felt completely overwhelmed, as if the entire AI space is moving beyond at lightning speed, whilst around me we're just slowly training models, adding some data, and not seeing much improvement, being stuck on coming up with "new ideas, that set us apart". &#x200B; Watching the GTC keynote from NVIDIA I was again, completely overwhelmed by how much is being developed throughout all the different domains. The ASML EUV (microchip making system) was incredible, I have no idea how it does lithography and to me it still seems like magic. The Grace CPU with 2 dies (although I think Apple was the first to do it?) and 100 GB RAM, all in a small form factor. There were a lot more different hardware servers that I just blanked out at some point. The omniverse sim engine looks incredible, almost real life (I wonder how much of a domain shift there is between real and sim considering how real the sim looks). Beyond it being cool and usable to train on synthetic data, the car manufacturers use it to optimize their pipelines. This change in perspective, of using these tools for other goals than those they were designed for I find the most interesting. &#x200B; The hardware part may be old news, as I don't really follow it, however the software part is just as incredible. NVIDIA AI foundations (language, image, biology models), just packaging everything together like a sandwich. Getty, Shutterstock and Adobe will use the generative models to create images. Again, already these huge juggernauts are already integrated. &#x200B; I can't believe the point where we're at. We can use AI to write code, create art, create audiobooks using Britney Spear's voice, create an interactive chatbot to converse with books, create 3D real-time avatars, generate new proteins (?i'm lost on this one), create an anime and countless other scenarios. Sure, they're not perfect, but the fact that we can do all that in the first place is amazing. &#x200B; As Huang said in his keynote, companies want to develop "disruptive products and business models". I feel like this is what I've seen lately. Everyone wants to be the one that does something first, just throwing anything and everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. &#x200B; In conclusion, I'm feeling like the world is moving so fast around me whilst I'm standing still. I want to not read anything anymore and just wait until everything dies down abit, just so I can get my bearings. However, I think this is unfeasible. I fear we'll keep going in a frenzy until we just burn ourselves at some point. &#x200B; How are you all fairing? How do you feel about this frenzy in the AI space? What are you the most excited about?

I am Jürgen Schmidhuber, AMA!

Hello /r/machinelearning, I am Jürgen Schmidhuber (pronounce: You_again Shmidhoobuh) and I will be here to answer your questions on 4th March 2015, 10 AM EST. You can post questions in this thread in the meantime. Below you can find a short introduction about me from my website (you can read more about my lab’s work at people.idsia.ch/~juergen/). Edits since 9th March: Still working on the long tail of more recent questions hidden further down in this thread ... Edit of 6th March: I'll keep answering questions today and in the next few days - please bear with my sluggish responses. Edit of 5th March 4pm (= 10pm Swiss time): Enough for today - I'll be back tomorrow. Edit of 5th March 4am: Thank you for great questions - I am online again, to answer more of them! Since age 15 or so, Jürgen Schmidhuber's main scientific ambition has been to build an optimal scientist through self-improving Artificial Intelligence (AI), then retire. He has pioneered self-improving general problem solvers since 1987, and Deep Learning Neural Networks (NNs) since 1991. The recurrent NNs (RNNs) developed by his research groups at the Swiss AI Lab IDSIA (USI & SUPSI) & TU Munich were the first RNNs to win official international contests. They recently helped to improve connected handwriting recognition, speech recognition, machine translation, optical character recognition, image caption generation, and are now in use at Google, Microsoft, IBM, Baidu, and many other companies. IDSIA's Deep Learners were also the first to win object detection and image segmentation contests, and achieved the world's first superhuman visual classification results, winning nine international competitions in machine learning & pattern recognition (more than any other team). They also were the first to learn control policies directly from high-dimensional sensory input using reinforcement learning. His research group also established the field of mathematically rigorous universal AI and optimal universal problem solvers. His formal theory of creativity & curiosity & fun explains art, science, music, and humor. He also generalized algorithmic information theory and the many-worlds theory of physics, and introduced the concept of Low-Complexity Art, the information age's extreme form of minimal art. Since 2009 he has been member of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts. He has published 333 peer-reviewed papers, earned seven best paper/best video awards, and is recipient of the 2013 Helmholtz Award of the International Neural Networks Society.

[D] Advanced courses update

EDIT Jan 2021 : I am still updating the list as of Jan, 2021 and will most probably continue to do so for foreseeable future. So, please feel free to message me any courses you find interesting that fit here. - - We have a PhD level or Advanced courses thread in the sidebar but it's three year old now. There were two other 7-8 month old threads (1, 2) but they don't have many quality responses either. So, can we have a new one here? To reiterate - CS231n, CS229, ones from Udemy etc are not advanced. Advanced ML/DL/RL, attempts at building theory of DL, optimization theory, advanced applications etc are some examples of what I believe should belong here, much like the original sidebar post. You can also suggest (new) categories for the courses you share. :) - - Here are some courses we've found so far. ML >> Learning Discrete Latent Structure - sta4273/csc2547 Spring'18 Learning to Search - csc2547 Fall'19 Scalable and Flexible Models of Uncertainty - csc2541 Fundamentals of Machine Learning Over Networks - ep3260 Machine Learning on Graphs - cs224w, videos Mining Massive Data Sets - cs246 Interactive Learning - cse599 Machine Learning for Sequential Decision Making Under Uncertainty - ee290s/cs194 Probabilistic Graphical Methods - 10-708 Introduction to Causal Inference ML >> Theory Statistical Machine Learning - 10-702/36-702 with videos, 2016 videos Statistical Learning Theory - cs229T/stats231 Stanford Autumn'18-19 Statistical Learning Theory - cs281b /stat241b UC Berkeley, Spring'14 Statistical Learning Theory - csc2532 Uni of Toronto, Spring'20 ML >> Bayesian Bayesian Data Analysis Bayesian Methods Research Group, Moscow, Bayesian Methods in ML - spring2020, fall2020 Deep Learning and Bayesian Methods - summer school, videos available for 2019 version ML >> Systems and Operations Stanford MLSys Seminar Series Visual Computing Systems- cs348v - Another systems course that discusses hardware from a persepective of visual computing but is relevant to ML as well Advanced Machine Learning Systems - cs6787 - lecture 9 and onwards discuss hardware side of things Machine Learning Systems Design - cs329S Topics in Deployable ML - 6.S979 Machine Learning in Production / AI Engineering (17-445/17-645/17-745/11-695) AutoML - Automated Machine Learning DL >> Deep Unsupervised Learning - cs294 Deep Multi-task and Meta learning - cs330 Topics in Deep Learning - stat991 UPenn/Wharton most chapters start with introductory topics and dig into advanced ones towards the end. Deep Generative Models - cs236 Deep Geometric Learning of Big Data and Applications Deep Implicit Layers - NeurIPS 2020 tutorial DL >> Theory Topics course on Mathematics of Deep Learning - CSCI-GA 3033 Topics Course on Deep Learning - stat212b Analyses of Deep Learning - stats385, videos from 2017 version Mathematics of Deep Learning Geometry of Deep Learning RL >> Meta-Learning - ICML 2019 Tutorial , Metalearning: Applications to Data Mining - google books link Deep Multi-Task and Meta Learning - cs330, videos Deep Reinforcement Learning - cs285 Advanced robotics - cs287 Reinforcement Learning - cs234, videos for 2019 run Reinforcement Learning Summer School 2019: Bandits, RL & Deep RL Optimization >> Convex Optimization I - ee364a, has quite recent videos too. Convex Optimization II - ee364b, 2008 videos Convex Optimization and Approximation - ee227c Convex Optimization - ee227bt Variational Methods for Computer Vision Advanced Optimization and Randomized Algorithms - 10-801, videos Optimization Methods for Machine Learning and Engineering - Karlsruhe Institute of Technology Applications >> Computer Vision Computational Video Manipulation - cs448v Advanced Topics in ML: Modeling and Segmentation of Multivariate Mixed Data TUM AI Guest lecture series - many influential researchers in DL, vision, graphics talk about latest advances and their latest works. Advanced Deep Learning for Computer Vision - TUM ADL4CV Detection, Segmentation and Tracking - TUM CV3DST Guest lectures at TUM Dynamic Vision and Learning group Vision Seminar at MIT Autonomous Vision Group, Talk@Tübingen Seminar Applications >> Natural Language Processing Natural Language Processing with Deep Learning - cs224n ( not sure if it belongs here, people working in NLP can help me out) Neural networks for NLP - cs11-747 Natural Language Understanding - cs224u, video Applications >> 3D Graphics Non-Euclidean Methods in Machine Learning - cs468, 2020 Machine Learning for 3D Data - cs468, spring 2017 Data-Driven Shape Analysis - cs468, 2014 Geometric Deep Learning - Not a course but the website links a few tutorials on Geometric DL Deep Learning for Computer Graphics - SIGGRAPH 2019 Machine Learning for Machine Vision as Inverse Graphics - csc2547 Winter'20 Machine Learning Meets Geometry, winter 2020; Machine Learning for 3D Data, winter 2018 Edit: Upon suggestion, categorized the courses. There might be some misclassifications as I'm not trained on this task ;). Added some good ones from older (linked above) discussions.

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup

forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/03/29/how-stability-ais-founder-tanked-his-billion-dollar-startup/ archive no paywall: https://archive.is/snbeV How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup Mar 29, 2024 Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque took the stage last week at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California to roaring applause and an introduction from an AI-generated Aristotle who announced him as “a modern Prometheus” with “the astuteness of Athena and the vision of Daedalus.” “Under his stewardship, AI becomes the Herculean force poised to vanquish the twin serpents of illness and ailment and extend the olive branch of longevity,” the faux Aristotle proclaimed. “I think that’s the best intro I’ve ever had,” Mostaque said. But behind Mostaque's hagiographic introduction lay a grim and fast metastasizing truth. Stability, once one of AI’s buzziest startups, was floundering. It had been running out of money for months and Mostaque had been unable to secure enough additional funding. It had defaulted on payments to Amazon whose cloud service undergirded Stability’s core offerings. The star research team behind its flagship text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion had tendered their resignations just three days before — as Forbes would first report — and other senior leaders had issued him an ultimatum: resign, or we walk too. Still, onstage before a massive audience of peers and acolytes, Mostaque talked a big game. “AI is jet planes for the mind,” he opined. “AI is our collective intelligence. It's the human Colossus.” He claimed a new, faster version of the Stable Diffusion image generator released earlier this month could generate “200 cats with hats per second.” But later, when he was asked about Stability’s financial model, Mostaque fumbled. “I can’t say that publicly,” he replied. “But it’s going well. We’re ahead of forecast.” Four days later, Mostaque stepped down as CEO of Stability, as Forbes first reported. In a post to X, the service formerly known as Twitter, he claimed he’d voluntarily abdicated his role to decentralize “the concentration of power in AI.” But sources told Forbes that was hardly the case. Behind the scenes, Mostaque had fought to maintain his position and control despite mounting pressure externally and internally to step down. Company documents and interviews with 32 current and former employees, investors, collaborators and industry observers suggest his abrupt exit was the result of poor business judgment and wild overspending that undermined confidence in his vision and leadership, and ultimately kneecapped the company. Mostaque, through his attorneys, declined to comment on record on a detailed list of questions about the reporting in this story. But in an email to Forbes earlier this week he broadly disputed the allegations. “Nobody tells you how hard it is to be a CEO and there are better CEOs than me to scale a business,” he said in a statement. “I am not sure anyone else would have been able to build and grow the research team to build the best and most widely used models out there and I’m very proud of the team there. I look forward to moving onto the next problem to handle and hopefully move the needle.” In an emailed statement, Christian Laforte and Shan Shan Wong, the interim co-CEOs who replaced Mostaque, said, "the company remains focused on commercializing its world leading technology” and providing it “to partners across the creative industries." After starting Stability in 2019, Mostaque built the company into an early AI juggernaut by seizing upon a promising research project that would become Stable Diffusion and funding it into a business reality. The ease with which the software generated detailed images from the simplest text prompts immediately captivated the public: 10 million people used it on any given day, the company told Forbes in early 2023. For some true believers, Mostaque was a crucial advocate for open-source AI development in a space dominated by the closed systems of OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. But his startup’s rise to one of the buzziest in generative AI was in part built on a series of exaggerations and misleading claims, as Forbes first reported last year (Mostaque disputed some points at the time). And they continued after he raised $100 million at a $1 billion valuation just days after launching Stable Diffusion in 2022. His failure to deliver on an array of grand promises, like building bespoke AI models for nation states, and his decision to pour tens of millions into research without a sustainable business plan, eroded Stability’s foundations and jeopardized its future. "He was just giving shit away,” one former employee told Forbes. “That man legitimately wanted to transform the world. He actually wanted to train AI models for kids in Malawi. Was it practical? Absolutely not." By October 2023, Stability would have less than $4 million left in the bank, according to an internal memo prepared for a board meeting and reviewed by Forbes. And mounting debt, including months of overdue Amazon Web Services payments, had already left it in the red. To avoid legal penalties for skipping Americans staff’s payroll, the document explained, the London-based startup was considering delaying tax payments to the U.K. government. It was Stability’s armada of GPUs, the wildly powerful and equally expensive chips undergirding AI, that were so taxing the company’s finances. Hosted by AWS, they had long been one of Mostaque’s bragging points; he often touted them as one of the world’s 10 largest supercomputers. They were responsible for helping Stability’s researchers build and maintain one of the top AI image generators, as well as break important new ground on generative audio, video and 3D models. “Undeniably, Stability has continued to ship a lot of models,” said one former employee. “They may not have profited off of it, but the broader ecosystem benefitted in a huge, huge way.” But the costs associated with so much compute were now threatening to sink the company. According to an internal October financial forecast seen by Forbes, Stability was on track to spend $99 million on compute in 2023. It noted as well that Stability was “underpaying AWS bills for July (by $1M)” and “not planning to pay AWS at the end of October for August usage ($7M).” Then there were the September and October bills, plus $1 million owed to Google Cloud and $600,000 to GPU cloud data center CoreWeave. (Amazon, Google and CoreWeave declined to comment.) With an additional $54 million allocated to wages and operating expenses, Stability’s total projected costs for 2023 were $153 million. But according to its October financial report, its projected revenue for the calendar year was just $11 million. Stability was on track to lose more money per month than it made in an entire year. The company’s dire financial position had thoroughly soured Stability’s current investors, including Coatue, which had invested tens of millions in the company during its $101 million funding round in 2022. In the middle of 2023, Mostaque agreed to an independent audit after Coatue raised a series of concerns, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The outcome of the investigation is unclear. Coatue declined to comment. Within a week of an early October board meeting where Mostaque shared that financial forecast, Lightspeed Venture Partners, another major investor, sent a letter to the board urging them to sell the company. The distressing numbers had “severely undermined” the firm’s confidence in Mostaque’s ability to lead the company. “In particular, we are surprised and deeply concerned by a cash position just now disclosed to us that is inconsistent with prior discussions on this topic,” Lightspeed’s general counsel Brett Nissenberg wrote in the letter, a copy of which was viewed by Forbes. “Lightspeed believes that the company is not likely financeable on terms that would assure the company’s long term sound financial position.” (Lightspeed declined a request for comment.) The calls for a sale led Stability to quietly begin looking for a buyer. Bloomberg reported in November that Stability approached AI startups Cohere and Jasper to gauge their interest. Stability denied this, and Jasper CEO Timothy Young did the same when reached for comment by Forbes. A Cohere representative declined to comment. But one prominent AI company confirmed that Mostaque’s representatives had reached out to them to test the waters. Those talks did not advance because “the numbers didn’t add up,” this person, who declined to be named due to the confidential nature of the talks, told Forbes. Stability also tried to court Samsung as a buyer, going so far as to redecorate its office in advance of a planned meeting with the Korean electronics giant. (Samsung said that it invested in Stability in 2023 and that it does not comment on M&A discussions.) Coatue had been calling for Mostaque’s resignation for months, according to a source with direct knowledge. But it and other investors were unable to oust him because he was the company’s majority shareholder. When they tried a different tact by rallying other investors to offer him a juicy equity package to resign, Mostaque refused, said two sources. By October, Coatue and Lightspeed had had enough. Coatue left the board and Lightspeed resigned its observer seat. “Emad infuriated our initial investors so much it’s just making it impossible for us to raise more money under acceptable terms,” one current Stability executive told Forbes. The early months of 2024 saw Stability’s already precarious position eroding further still. Employees were quietly laid off. Three people in a position to know estimated that at least 10% of staff were cut. And cash reserves continued to dwindle. Mostaque mentioned a lifeline at the October board meeting: $95 million in tentative funding from new investors, pending due diligence. But in the end, only a fraction of it was wired, two sources say, much of it from Intel, which Forbes has learned invested $20 million, a fraction of what was reported. (Intel did not return a request for comment by publication time.) Two hours after Forbes broke the news of Mostaque’s plans to step down as CEO, Stability issued a press release confirming his resignation. Chief operating officer Wong and chief technology officer Laforte have taken over in the interim. Mostaque, who said on X that he still owns a majority of the company, also stepped down from the board, which has now initiated a search for a permanent CEO. There is a lot of work to be done to turn things around, and very little time in which to do it. Said the current Stability executive, “There’s still a possibility of a turnaround story, but the odds drop by the day.” In July of 2023, Mostaque still thought he could pull it off. Halfway through the month, he shared a fundraising plan with his lieutenants. It was wildly optimistic, detailing the raise of $500 million in cash and another $750 million in computing facilities from marquee investors like Nvidia, Google, Intel and the World Bank (Nvidia and Google declined comment. Intel did not respond. The World Bank said it did not invest in Stability). In a Slack message reviewed by Forbes, Mostaque said Google was “willing to move fast” and the round was “likely to be oversubscribed.” It wasn’t. Three people with direct knowledge of these fundraising efforts told Forbes that while there was some interest in Stability, talks often stalled when it came time to disclose financials. Two of them noted that earlier in the year, Mostaque had simply stopped engaging with VCs who asked for numbers. Only one firm invested around that time: actor Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, which invested $35 million in the form of a convertible SAFE note during the second quarter, according to an internal document. (Sound Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.) And though he’d managed to score a meeting with Nvidia and its CEO Jensen Huang, it ended in disaster, according to two sources. “Under Jensen's microscopic questions, Emad just fell apart,” a source in position to know told Forbes. Huang quickly concluded Stability wasn’t ready for an investment from Nvidia, the sources said. Mostaque told Forbes in an email that he had not met with Huang since 2022, except to say “hello and what’s up a few times after.” His July 2023 message references a plan to raise $150 million from Nvidia. (Nvidia declined to comment.) After a June Forbes investigation citing more than 30 sources revealed Mostaque’s history of misleading claims, Mostaque struggled to raise funding, a Stability investor told Forbes. (Mostaque disputed the story at the time and called it "coordinated lies" in his email this week to Forbes). Increasingly, investors scrutinized his assertions and pressed for data. And Young, now the CEO of Jasper, turned down a verbal offer to be Stability’s president after reading the article, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The collapse of the talks aggravated the board and other executives, who had hoped Young would compensate for the sales and business management skills that Mostaque lacked, according to four people in a position to know. (Young declined to comment.) When Stability’s senior leadership convened in London for the CogX conference in September, the financing had still not closed. There, a group of executives confronted Mostaque asking questions about the company’s cash position and runway, according to three people with direct knowledge of the incident. They did not get the clarity they’d hoped for. By October, Mostaque had reduced his fundraising target by more than 80%. The months that followed saw a steady drumbeat of departures — general counsel Adam Avrunin, vice presidents Mike Melnicki, Ed Newton-Rex and Joe Penna, chief people officer Ozden Onder — culminating in the demoralizing March exit of Stable Diffusion’s primary developers Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz. Rombach, who led the team, had been angling to leave for months, two sources said, first threatening to resign last summer because of the fundraising failures. Others left over concerns about cash flow, as well as liabilities — including what four people described as Mostaque’s lax approach to ensuring that Stability products could not be used to produce child sexual abuse imagery. “Stability AI is committed to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibits the use of our image models and services for unlawful activity, including attempts to edit or create CSAM,” Ella Irwin, senior vice president of integrity, said in a statement. Newton-Rex told Forbes he resigned because he disagreed with Stability’s position that training AI on copyrighted work without consent is fair use. Melnicki and Penna declined to comment. Avrunin and Onder could not be reached for comment. None of the researchers responded to requests for comment. The Stable Diffusion researchers’ departure as a cohort says a lot about the state of Stability AI. The company’s researchers were widely viewed as its crown jewels, their work subsidized with a firehose of pricey compute power that was even extended to people outside the company. Martino Russi, an artificial intelligence researcher, told Forbes that though he was never formally employed by Stability, the company provided him a “staggering” amount of compute between January and April 2023 to play around with developing an AI video generator that Stability might someday use. “It was Candy Land or Coney Island,” said Russi, who estimates that his experiment, which was ultimately shelved, cost the company $2.5 million. Stable Diffusion was simultaneously Stability’s marquee product and its existential cash crisis. One current employee described it to Forbes as “a giant vacuum that absorbed everything: money, compute, people.” While the software was widely used, with Mostaque claiming downloads reaching into the hundreds of millions, Stability struggled to translate that wild success into revenue. Mostaque knew it could be done — peers at Databricks, Elastic and MongoDB had all turned a free product into a lucrative business — he just couldn’t figure out how. His first attempt was Stability’s API, which allowed paying customers to integrate Stable Diffusion into their own products. In early 2023, a handful of small companies, like art generator app NightCafe and presentation software startup Tome, signed on, according to four people with knowledge of the deals. But Stability’s poor account management services soured many, and in a matter of months NightCafe and Tome canceled their contracts, three people said. NightCafe founder Angus Russell told Forbes that his company switched to a competitor which “offered much cheaper inference costs and a broader service.” Tome did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, Mostaque’s efforts to court larger companies like Samsung and Snapchat were failing, according to five people familiar with the effort. Canva, which was already one of the heaviest users of open-sourced Stable Diffusion, had multiple discussions with Stability, which was angling for a contract it hoped would generate several millions in annual revenue. But the deal never materialized, four sources said. “These three companies wanted and needed us,” one former employee told Forbes. “They would have been the perfect customers.” (Samsung, Snap and Canva declined to comment.) “It’s not that there was not an appetite to pay Stability — there were tons of companies that would have that wanted to,” the former employee said. “There was a huge opportunity and demand, but just a resistance to execution.” Mostaque’s other big idea was to provide governments with bespoke national AI models that would invigorate their economies and citizenry. “Emad envisions a world where AI through 100 national models serves not as a tool of the few, but as a benefactor to all promising to confront great adversaries, cancer, autism, and the sands of time itself,” the AI avatar of Aristotle said in his intro at the conference. Mostaque told several prospective customers that he could deliver such models within 60 days — an untenable timeline, according to two people in position to know. Stability attempted to develop a model for the Singaporean government over the protestation of employees who questioned its technical feasibility, three sources familiar with the effort told Forbes. But it couldn’t pull it off and Singapore never became a customer. (The government of Singapore confirmed it did not enter into a deal with Stability, but declined to answer additional questions.) As Stability careened from one new business idea to another, resources were abruptly reallocated and researchers reassigned. The whiplash shifts in a largely siloed organization demoralized and infuriated employees. “There were ‘urgent’ things, ‘urgent urgent’ things and ‘most urgent,’” one former employee complained. “None of these things seem important if everything is important.” Another former Stability executive was far more pointed in their assessment. “Emad is the most disorganized leader I have ever worked with in my career,” this person told Forbes. “He has no vision, and changes directions every week, often based on what he sees on Twitter.” In a video interview posted shortly before this story was published, Mostaque explained his leadership style: “I'm particularly great at taking creatives, developers, researchers, others, and achieving their full potential in designing systems. But I should not be dealing with, you know, HR and operations and business development and other elements. There are far better people than me to do that.” By December 2023, Stability had partially abandoned its open-source roots and announced that any commercial use of Stable Diffusion would cost customers at least $20 per month (non-commercial and research use of Stable Diffusion would remain free). But privately, Stability was considering a potentially more lucrative source of revenue: reselling the compute it was leasing from providers like AWS, according to six people familiar with the effort. Though it was essentially GPU arbitrage, Stability framed the strategy to investors as a “managed services” offering. Its damning October financial report projected optimistically that such an offering would bring in $139 million in 2024 — 98% of its revenue. Multiple employees at the time told Forbes they feared reselling compute, even if the company called it “managed services,” would violate the terms of Stability’s contract with AWS. Amazon declined to comment. “The line internally was that we are not reselling compute,” one former employee said. “This was some of the dirtiest feeling stuff.” Stability also discussed reselling a cluster of Nvidia A100 chips, leased via CoreWeave, to the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, three sources said. “It was under the guise of managed services, but there wasn’t any management happening,” one of these people told Forbes. Andreessen Horowitz and CoreWeave declined to comment. Stability did not respond to questions about if it plans to continue this strategy now that Mostaque is out of the picture. Regardless, interim co-CEOs Wong and Laforte are on a tight timeline to clean up his mess. Board chairman Jim O’Shaughnessy said in a statement that he was confident the pair “will adeptly steer the company forward in developing and commercializing industry-leading generative AI products.” But burn continues to far outpace revenue. The Financial Times reported Friday that the company made $5.4 million of revenue in February, against $8 million in costs. Several sources said there are ongoing concerns about making payroll for the roughly 150 remaining employees. Leadership roles have gone vacant for months amid the disarray, leaving the company increasingly directionless. Meanwhile, a potentially catastrophic legal threat looms over the company: A trio of copyright infringement lawsuits brought by Getty Images and a group of artists in the U.S. and U.K., who claim Stability illegally used their art and photography to train the AI models powering Stable Diffusion. A London-based court has already rejected the company’s bid to throw out one of the lawsuits on the basis that none of its researchers were based in the U.K. And Stability’s claim that Getty’s Delaware lawsuit should be blocked because it's a U.K.-based company was rejected. (Stability did not respond to questions about the litigation.) AI-related copyright litigation “could go on for years,” according to Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. He told Forbes that though plaintiffs suing AI firms face an uphill battle overcoming the existing legal precedent on copyright infringement, the quantity of arguments available to make are virtually inexhaustible. “Like in military theory, if there’s a gap in your lines, that’s where the enemy pours through — if any one of those arguments succeeds, it could completely change the generative AI environment,” he said. “In some sense, generative AI as an industry has to win everything.” Stability, which had more than $100 million in the bank just a year and a half ago, is in a deep hole. Not only does it need more funding, it needs a viable business model — or a buyer with the vision and chops to make it successful in a fast-moving and highly competitive sector. At an all hands meeting this past Monday, Stability’s new leaders detailed a path forward. One point of emphasis: a plan to better manage resources and expenses, according to one person in attendance. It’s a start, but Mostaque’s meddling has left them with little runway to execute. His resignation, though, has given some employees hope. “A few people are 100% going to reconsider leaving after today,” said one current employee. “And the weird gloomy aura of hearing Emad talking nonsense for an hour is gone.” Shortly before Mostaque resigned, one current Stability executive told Forbes that they were optimistic his departure could make Stability appealing enough to receive a small investment or sale to a friendly party. “There are companies that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars that have much less intrinsic value than Stability,” the person said. “A white knight may still appear.”

[P] MIT Introduction to Data-Centric AI

Announcing the first-ever course on Data-Centric AI. Learn how to train better ML models by improving the data. Course homepage | Lecture videos on YouTube | Lab Assignments The course covers: Data-Centric AI vs. Model-Centric AI Label Errors Dataset Creation and Curation Data-centric Evaluation of ML Models Class Imbalance, Outliers, and Distribution Shift Growing or Compressing Datasets Interpretability in Data-Centric ML Encoding Human Priors: Data Augmentation and Prompt Engineering Data Privacy and Security MIT, like most universities, has many courses on machine learning (6.036, 6.867, and many others). Those classes teach techniques to produce effective models for a given dataset, and the classes focus heavily on the mathematical details of models rather than practical applications. However, in real-world applications of ML, the dataset is not fixed, and focusing on improving the data often gives better results than improving the model. We’ve personally seen this time and time again in our applied ML work as well as our research. Data-Centric AI (DCAI) is an emerging science that studies techniques to improve datasets in a systematic/algorithmic way — given that this topic wasn’t covered in the standard curriculum, we (a group of PhD candidates and grads) thought that we should put together a new class! We taught this intensive 2-week course in January over MIT’s IAP term, and we’ve just published all the course material, including lecture videos, lecture notes, hands-on lab assignments, and lab solutions, in hopes that people outside the MIT community would find these resources useful. We’d be happy to answer any questions related to the class or DCAI in general, and we’d love to hear any feedback on how we can improve the course material. Introduction to Data-Centric AI is open-source opencourseware, so feel free to make improvements directly: https://github.com/dcai-course/dcai-course.

[D] Advice for spotting "fake" ML roles?

I recently got hired for what turned out to be a fake ML role even by the loosest definition of an ML role (Bloomberg AI group). It seems like currently there are many companies/teams/people who pretend to do ML work and when it comes to hiring they lie to candidates about the work they actually do. Does anyone have any strategies to spot these kinds of roles so they can be avoided? It seems like asking questions during the interview is not very effective because you could easily just be lied to.

[N] OpenAI's new language model gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct can defeat chess engine Fairy-Stockfish 14 at level 5

This Twitter thread (Nitter alternative for those who aren't logged into Twitter and want to see the full thread) claims that OpenAI's new language model gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct can "readily" beat Lichess Stockfish level 4 (Lichess Stockfish level and its rating) and has a chess rating of "around 1800 Elo." This tweet shows the style of prompts that are being used to get these results with the new language model. I used website parrotchess\[dot\]com (discovered here) (EDIT: parrotchess doesn't exist anymore, as of March 7, 2024) to play multiple games of chess purportedly pitting this new language model vs. various levels at website Lichess, which supposedly uses Fairy-Stockfish 14 according to the Lichess user interface. My current results for all completed games: The language model is 5-0 vs. Fairy-Stockfish 14 level 5 (game 1, game 2, game 3, game 4, game 5), and 2-5 vs. Fairy-Stockfish 14 level 6 (game 1, game 2, game 3, game 4, game 5, game 6, game 7). Not included in the tally are games that I had to abort because the parrotchess user interface stalled (5 instances), because I accidentally copied a move incorrectly in the parrotchess user interface (numerous instances), or because the parrotchess user interface doesn't allow the promotion of a pawn to anything other than queen (1 instance). Update: There could have been up to 5 additional losses - the number of times the parrotchess user interface stalled - that would have been recorded in this tally if this language model resignation bug hadn't been present. Also, the quality of play of some online chess bots can perhaps vary depending on the speed of the user's hardware. The following is a screenshot from parrotchess showing the end state of the first game vs. Fairy-Stockfish 14 level 5: https://preview.redd.it/4ahi32xgjmpb1.jpg?width=432&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7fbb68371ca4257bed15ab2828fab58047f194a4 The game results in this paragraph are from using parrotchess after the forementioned resignation bug was fixed. The language model is 0-1 vs. Fairy-Stockfish level 7 (game 1), and 0-1 vs. Fairy-Stockfish 14 level 8 (game 1). There is one known scenario (Nitter alternative) in which the new language model purportedly generated an illegal move using language model sampling temperature of 0. Previous purported illegal moves that the parrotchess developer examined turned out (Nitter alternative) to be due to parrotchess bugs. There are several other ways to play chess against the new language model if you have access to the OpenAI API. The first way is to use the OpenAI Playground as shown in this video. The second way is chess web app gptchess\[dot\]vercel\[dot\]app (discovered in this Twitter thread / Nitter thread). Third, another person modified that chess web app to additionally allow various levels of the Stockfish chess engine to autoplay, resulting in chess web app chessgpt-stockfish\[dot\]vercel\[dot\]app (discovered in this tweet). Results from other people: a) Results from hundreds of games in blog post Debunking the Chessboard: Confronting GPTs Against Chess Engines to Estimate Elo Ratings and Assess Legal Move Abilities. b) Results from 150 games: GPT-3.5-instruct beats GPT-4 at chess and is a \~1800 ELO chess player. Results of 150 games of GPT-3.5 vs stockfish and 30 of GPT-3.5 vs GPT-4. Post #2. The developer later noted that due to bugs the legal move rate was actually above 99.9%. It should also be noted that these results didn't use a language model sampling temperature of 0, which I believe could have induced illegal moves. c) Chess bot gpt35-turbo-instruct at website Lichess. d) Chess bot konaz at website Lichess. From blog post Playing chess with large language models: Computers have been better than humans at chess for at least the last 25 years. And for the past five years, deep learning models have been better than the best humans. But until this week, in order to be good at chess, a machine learning model had to be explicitly designed to play games: it had to be told explicitly that there was an 8x8 board, that there were different pieces, how each of them moved, and what the goal of the game was. Then it had to be trained with reinforcement learning agaist itself. And then it would win. This all changed on Monday, when OpenAI released GPT-3.5-turbo-instruct, an instruction-tuned language model that was designed to just write English text, but that people on the internet quickly discovered can play chess at, roughly, the level of skilled human players. Post Chess as a case study in hidden capabilities in ChatGPT from last month covers a different prompting style used for the older chat-based GPT 3.5 Turbo language model. If I recall correctly from my tests with ChatGPT-3.5, using that prompt style with the older language model can defeat Stockfish level 2 at Lichess, but I haven't been successful in using it to beat Stockfish level 3. In my tests, both the quality of play and frequency of illegal attempted moves seems to be better with the new prompt style with the new language model compared to the older prompt style with the older language model. Related article: Large Language Model: world models or surface statistics? P.S. Since some people claim that language model gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct is always playing moves memorized from the training dataset, I searched for data on the uniqueness of chess positions. From this video, we see that for a certain game dataset there were 763,331,945 chess positions encountered in an unknown number of games without removing duplicate chess positions, 597,725,848 different chess positions reached, and 582,337,984 different chess positions that were reached only once. Therefore, for that game dataset the probability that a chess position in a game was reached only once is 582337984 / 763331945 = 76.3%. For the larger dataset cited in that video, there are approximately (506,000,000 - 200,000) games in the dataset (per this paper), and 21,553,382,902 different game positions encountered. Each game in the larger dataset added a mean of approximately 21,553,382,902 / (506,000,000 - 200,000) = 42.6 different chess positions to the dataset. For this different dataset of \~12 million games, \~390 million different chess positions were encountered. Each game in this different dataset added a mean of approximately (390 million / 12 million) = 32.5 different chess positions to the dataset. From the aforementioned numbers, we can conclude that a strategy of playing only moves memorized from a game dataset would fare poorly because there are not rarely new chess games that have chess positions that are not present in the game dataset.

[D] We're the Meta AI research team behind CICERO, the first AI agent to achieve human-level performance in the game Diplomacy. We’ll be answering your questions on December 8th starting at 10am PT. Ask us anything!

EDIT 11:58am PT: Thanks for all the great questions, we stayed an almost an hour longer than originally planned to try to get through as many as possible — but we’re signing off now! We had a great time and thanks for all thoughtful questions! PROOF: https://i.redd.it/8skvttie6j4a1.png We’re part of the research team behind CICERO, Meta AI’s latest research in cooperative AI. CICERO is the first AI agent to achieve human-level performance in the game Diplomacy. Diplomacy is a complex strategy game involving both cooperation and competition that emphasizes natural language negotiation between seven players.   Over the course of 40 two-hour games with 82 human players, CICERO achieved more than double the average score of other players, ranked in the top 10% of players who played more than one game, and placed 2nd out of 19 participants who played at least 5 games.   Here are some highlights from our recent announcement: NLP x RL/Planning: CICERO combines techniques in NLP and RL/planning, by coupling a controllable dialogue module with a strategic reasoning engine.  Controlling dialogue via plans: In addition to being grounded in the game state and dialogue history, CICERO’s dialogue model was trained to be controllable via a set of intents or plans in the game. This allows CICERO to use language intentionally and to move beyond imitation learning by conditioning on plans selected by the strategic reasoning engine. Selecting plans: CICERO uses a strategic reasoning module to make plans (and select intents) in the game. This module runs a planning algorithm which takes into account the game state, the dialogue, and the strength/likelihood of various actions. Plans are recomputed every time CICERO sends/receives a message. Filtering messages: We built an ensemble of classifiers to detect low quality messages, like messages contradicting the game state/dialogue history or messages which have low strategic value. We used this ensemble to aggressively filter CICERO’s messages.  Human-like play: Over the course of 72 hours of play – which involved sending 5,277 messages – CICERO was not detected as an AI agent. You can check out some of our materials and open-sourced artifacts here:  Research paper Project overview Diplomacy gameplay page Github repo Our latest blog post Joining us today for the AMA are: Andrew Goff (AG), 3x Diplomacy World Champion Alexander Miller (AM), Research Engineering Manager Noam Brown (NB), Research Scientist (u/NoamBrown) Mike Lewis (ML), Research Scientist (u/mikelewis0) David Wu (DW), Research Engineer (u/icosaplex) Emily Dinan (ED), Research Engineer Anton Bakhtin (AB), Research Engineer Adam Lerer (AL), Research Engineer Jonathan Gray (JG), Research Engineer Colin Flaherty (CF), Research Engineer (u/c-flaherty) We’ll be here on December 8, 2022 @ 10:00AM PT - 11:00AM PT.

[D] What is your honest experience with reinforcement learning?

In my personal experience, SOTA RL algorithms simply don't work. I've tried working with reinforcement learning for over 5 years. I remember when Alpha Go defeated the world famous Go player, Lee Sedol, and everybody thought RL would take the ML community by storm. Yet, outside of toy problems, I've personally never found a practical use-case of RL. What is your experience with it? Aside from Ad recommendation systems and RLHF, are there legitimate use-cases of RL? Or, was it all hype? Edit: I know a lot about AI. I built NexusTrade, an AI-Powered automated investing tool that lets non-technical users create, update, and deploy their trading strategies. I’m not an idiot nor a noob; RL is just ridiculously hard. Edit 2: Since my comments are being downvoted, here is a link to my article that better describes my position. It's not that I don't understand RL. I released my open-source code and wrote a paper on it. It's the fact that it's EXTREMELY difficult to understand. Other deep learning algorithms like CNNs (including ResNets), RNNs (including GRUs and LSTMs), Transformers, and GANs are not hard to understand. These algorithms work and have practical use-cases outside of the lab. Traditional SOTA RL algorithms like PPO, DDPG, and TD3 are just very hard. You need to do a bunch of research to even implement a toy problem. In contrast, the decision transformer is something anybody can implement, and it seems to match or surpass the SOTA. You don't need two networks battling each other. You don't have to go through hell to debug your network. It just naturally learns the best set of actions in an auto-regressive manner. I also didn't mean to come off as arrogant or imply that RL is not worth learning. I just haven't seen any real-world, practical use-cases of it. I simply wanted to start a discussion, not claim that I know everything. Edit 3: There's a shockingly number of people calling me an idiot for not fully understanding RL. You guys are wayyy too comfortable calling people you disagree with names. News-flash, not everybody has a PhD in ML. My undergraduate degree is in biology. I self-taught myself the high-level maths to understand ML. I'm very passionate about the field; I just have VERY disappointing experiences with RL. Funny enough, there are very few people refuting my actual points. To summarize: Lack of real-world applications Extremely complex and inaccessible to 99% of the population Much harder than traditional DL algorithms like CNNs, RNNs, and GANs Sample inefficiency and instability Difficult to debug Better alternatives, such as the Decision Transformer Are these not legitimate criticisms? Is the purpose of this sub not to have discussions related to Machine Learning? To the few commenters that aren't calling me an idiot...thank you! Remember, it costs you nothing to be nice! Edit 4: Lots of people seem to agree that RL is over-hyped. Unfortunately those comments are downvoted. To clear up some things: We've invested HEAVILY into reinforcement learning. All we got from this investment is a robot that can be super-human at (some) video games. AlphaFold did not use any reinforcement learning. SpaceX doesn't either. I concede that it can be useful for robotics, but still argue that it's use-cases outside the lab are extremely limited. If you're stumbling on this thread and curious about an RL alternative, check out the Decision Transformer. It can be used in any situation that a traditional RL algorithm can be used. Final Edit: To those who contributed more recently, thank you for the thoughtful discussion! From what I learned, model-based models like Dreamer and IRIS MIGHT have a future. But everybody who has actually used model-free models like DDPG unanimously agree that they suck and don’t work.

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup

forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/03/29/how-stability-ais-founder-tanked-his-billion-dollar-startup/ archive no paywall: https://archive.is/snbeV How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup Mar 29, 2024 Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque took the stage last week at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California to roaring applause and an introduction from an AI-generated Aristotle who announced him as “a modern Prometheus” with “the astuteness of Athena and the vision of Daedalus.” “Under his stewardship, AI becomes the Herculean force poised to vanquish the twin serpents of illness and ailment and extend the olive branch of longevity,” the faux Aristotle proclaimed. “I think that’s the best intro I’ve ever had,” Mostaque said. But behind Mostaque's hagiographic introduction lay a grim and fast metastasizing truth. Stability, once one of AI’s buzziest startups, was floundering. It had been running out of money for months and Mostaque had been unable to secure enough additional funding. It had defaulted on payments to Amazon whose cloud service undergirded Stability’s core offerings. The star research team behind its flagship text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion had tendered their resignations just three days before — as Forbes would first report — and other senior leaders had issued him an ultimatum: resign, or we walk too. Still, onstage before a massive audience of peers and acolytes, Mostaque talked a big game. “AI is jet planes for the mind,” he opined. “AI is our collective intelligence. It's the human Colossus.” He claimed a new, faster version of the Stable Diffusion image generator released earlier this month could generate “200 cats with hats per second.” But later, when he was asked about Stability’s financial model, Mostaque fumbled. “I can’t say that publicly,” he replied. “But it’s going well. We’re ahead of forecast.” Four days later, Mostaque stepped down as CEO of Stability, as Forbes first reported. In a post to X, the service formerly known as Twitter, he claimed he’d voluntarily abdicated his role to decentralize “the concentration of power in AI.” But sources told Forbes that was hardly the case. Behind the scenes, Mostaque had fought to maintain his position and control despite mounting pressure externally and internally to step down. Company documents and interviews with 32 current and former employees, investors, collaborators and industry observers suggest his abrupt exit was the result of poor business judgment and wild overspending that undermined confidence in his vision and leadership, and ultimately kneecapped the company. Mostaque, through his attorneys, declined to comment on record on a detailed list of questions about the reporting in this story. But in an email to Forbes earlier this week he broadly disputed the allegations. “Nobody tells you how hard it is to be a CEO and there are better CEOs than me to scale a business,” he said in a statement. “I am not sure anyone else would have been able to build and grow the research team to build the best and most widely used models out there and I’m very proud of the team there. I look forward to moving onto the next problem to handle and hopefully move the needle.” In an emailed statement, Christian Laforte and Shan Shan Wong, the interim co-CEOs who replaced Mostaque, said, "the company remains focused on commercializing its world leading technology” and providing it “to partners across the creative industries." After starting Stability in 2019, Mostaque built the company into an early AI juggernaut by seizing upon a promising research project that would become Stable Diffusion and funding it into a business reality. The ease with which the software generated detailed images from the simplest text prompts immediately captivated the public: 10 million people used it on any given day, the company told Forbes in early 2023. For some true believers, Mostaque was a crucial advocate for open-source AI development in a space dominated by the closed systems of OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. But his startup’s rise to one of the buzziest in generative AI was in part built on a series of exaggerations and misleading claims, as Forbes first reported last year (Mostaque disputed some points at the time). And they continued after he raised $100 million at a $1 billion valuation just days after launching Stable Diffusion in 2022. His failure to deliver on an array of grand promises, like building bespoke AI models for nation states, and his decision to pour tens of millions into research without a sustainable business plan, eroded Stability’s foundations and jeopardized its future. "He was just giving shit away,” one former employee told Forbes. “That man legitimately wanted to transform the world. He actually wanted to train AI models for kids in Malawi. Was it practical? Absolutely not." By October 2023, Stability would have less than $4 million left in the bank, according to an internal memo prepared for a board meeting and reviewed by Forbes. And mounting debt, including months of overdue Amazon Web Services payments, had already left it in the red. To avoid legal penalties for skipping Americans staff’s payroll, the document explained, the London-based startup was considering delaying tax payments to the U.K. government. It was Stability’s armada of GPUs, the wildly powerful and equally expensive chips undergirding AI, that were so taxing the company’s finances. Hosted by AWS, they had long been one of Mostaque’s bragging points; he often touted them as one of the world’s 10 largest supercomputers. They were responsible for helping Stability’s researchers build and maintain one of the top AI image generators, as well as break important new ground on generative audio, video and 3D models. “Undeniably, Stability has continued to ship a lot of models,” said one former employee. “They may not have profited off of it, but the broader ecosystem benefitted in a huge, huge way.” But the costs associated with so much compute were now threatening to sink the company. According to an internal October financial forecast seen by Forbes, Stability was on track to spend $99 million on compute in 2023. It noted as well that Stability was “underpaying AWS bills for July (by $1M)” and “not planning to pay AWS at the end of October for August usage ($7M).” Then there were the September and October bills, plus $1 million owed to Google Cloud and $600,000 to GPU cloud data center CoreWeave. (Amazon, Google and CoreWeave declined to comment.) With an additional $54 million allocated to wages and operating expenses, Stability’s total projected costs for 2023 were $153 million. But according to its October financial report, its projected revenue for the calendar year was just $11 million. Stability was on track to lose more money per month than it made in an entire year. The company’s dire financial position had thoroughly soured Stability’s current investors, including Coatue, which had invested tens of millions in the company during its $101 million funding round in 2022. In the middle of 2023, Mostaque agreed to an independent audit after Coatue raised a series of concerns, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The outcome of the investigation is unclear. Coatue declined to comment. Within a week of an early October board meeting where Mostaque shared that financial forecast, Lightspeed Venture Partners, another major investor, sent a letter to the board urging them to sell the company. The distressing numbers had “severely undermined” the firm’s confidence in Mostaque’s ability to lead the company. “In particular, we are surprised and deeply concerned by a cash position just now disclosed to us that is inconsistent with prior discussions on this topic,” Lightspeed’s general counsel Brett Nissenberg wrote in the letter, a copy of which was viewed by Forbes. “Lightspeed believes that the company is not likely financeable on terms that would assure the company’s long term sound financial position.” (Lightspeed declined a request for comment.) The calls for a sale led Stability to quietly begin looking for a buyer. Bloomberg reported in November that Stability approached AI startups Cohere and Jasper to gauge their interest. Stability denied this, and Jasper CEO Timothy Young did the same when reached for comment by Forbes. A Cohere representative declined to comment. But one prominent AI company confirmed that Mostaque’s representatives had reached out to them to test the waters. Those talks did not advance because “the numbers didn’t add up,” this person, who declined to be named due to the confidential nature of the talks, told Forbes. Stability also tried to court Samsung as a buyer, going so far as to redecorate its office in advance of a planned meeting with the Korean electronics giant. (Samsung said that it invested in Stability in 2023 and that it does not comment on M&A discussions.) Coatue had been calling for Mostaque’s resignation for months, according to a source with direct knowledge. But it and other investors were unable to oust him because he was the company’s majority shareholder. When they tried a different tact by rallying other investors to offer him a juicy equity package to resign, Mostaque refused, said two sources. By October, Coatue and Lightspeed had had enough. Coatue left the board and Lightspeed resigned its observer seat. “Emad infuriated our initial investors so much it’s just making it impossible for us to raise more money under acceptable terms,” one current Stability executive told Forbes. The early months of 2024 saw Stability’s already precarious position eroding further still. Employees were quietly laid off. Three people in a position to know estimated that at least 10% of staff were cut. And cash reserves continued to dwindle. Mostaque mentioned a lifeline at the October board meeting: $95 million in tentative funding from new investors, pending due diligence. But in the end, only a fraction of it was wired, two sources say, much of it from Intel, which Forbes has learned invested $20 million, a fraction of what was reported. (Intel did not return a request for comment by publication time.) Two hours after Forbes broke the news of Mostaque’s plans to step down as CEO, Stability issued a press release confirming his resignation. Chief operating officer Wong and chief technology officer Laforte have taken over in the interim. Mostaque, who said on X that he still owns a majority of the company, also stepped down from the board, which has now initiated a search for a permanent CEO. There is a lot of work to be done to turn things around, and very little time in which to do it. Said the current Stability executive, “There’s still a possibility of a turnaround story, but the odds drop by the day.” In July of 2023, Mostaque still thought he could pull it off. Halfway through the month, he shared a fundraising plan with his lieutenants. It was wildly optimistic, detailing the raise of $500 million in cash and another $750 million in computing facilities from marquee investors like Nvidia, Google, Intel and the World Bank (Nvidia and Google declined comment. Intel did not respond. The World Bank said it did not invest in Stability). In a Slack message reviewed by Forbes, Mostaque said Google was “willing to move fast” and the round was “likely to be oversubscribed.” It wasn’t. Three people with direct knowledge of these fundraising efforts told Forbes that while there was some interest in Stability, talks often stalled when it came time to disclose financials. Two of them noted that earlier in the year, Mostaque had simply stopped engaging with VCs who asked for numbers. Only one firm invested around that time: actor Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, which invested $35 million in the form of a convertible SAFE note during the second quarter, according to an internal document. (Sound Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.) And though he’d managed to score a meeting with Nvidia and its CEO Jensen Huang, it ended in disaster, according to two sources. “Under Jensen's microscopic questions, Emad just fell apart,” a source in position to know told Forbes. Huang quickly concluded Stability wasn’t ready for an investment from Nvidia, the sources said. Mostaque told Forbes in an email that he had not met with Huang since 2022, except to say “hello and what’s up a few times after.” His July 2023 message references a plan to raise $150 million from Nvidia. (Nvidia declined to comment.) After a June Forbes investigation citing more than 30 sources revealed Mostaque’s history of misleading claims, Mostaque struggled to raise funding, a Stability investor told Forbes. (Mostaque disputed the story at the time and called it "coordinated lies" in his email this week to Forbes). Increasingly, investors scrutinized his assertions and pressed for data. And Young, now the CEO of Jasper, turned down a verbal offer to be Stability’s president after reading the article, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The collapse of the talks aggravated the board and other executives, who had hoped Young would compensate for the sales and business management skills that Mostaque lacked, according to four people in a position to know. (Young declined to comment.) When Stability’s senior leadership convened in London for the CogX conference in September, the financing had still not closed. There, a group of executives confronted Mostaque asking questions about the company’s cash position and runway, according to three people with direct knowledge of the incident. They did not get the clarity they’d hoped for. By October, Mostaque had reduced his fundraising target by more than 80%. The months that followed saw a steady drumbeat of departures — general counsel Adam Avrunin, vice presidents Mike Melnicki, Ed Newton-Rex and Joe Penna, chief people officer Ozden Onder — culminating in the demoralizing March exit of Stable Diffusion’s primary developers Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz. Rombach, who led the team, had been angling to leave for months, two sources said, first threatening to resign last summer because of the fundraising failures. Others left over concerns about cash flow, as well as liabilities — including what four people described as Mostaque’s lax approach to ensuring that Stability products could not be used to produce child sexual abuse imagery. “Stability AI is committed to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibits the use of our image models and services for unlawful activity, including attempts to edit or create CSAM,” Ella Irwin, senior vice president of integrity, said in a statement. Newton-Rex told Forbes he resigned because he disagreed with Stability’s position that training AI on copyrighted work without consent is fair use. Melnicki and Penna declined to comment. Avrunin and Onder could not be reached for comment. None of the researchers responded to requests for comment. The Stable Diffusion researchers’ departure as a cohort says a lot about the state of Stability AI. The company’s researchers were widely viewed as its crown jewels, their work subsidized with a firehose of pricey compute power that was even extended to people outside the company. Martino Russi, an artificial intelligence researcher, told Forbes that though he was never formally employed by Stability, the company provided him a “staggering” amount of compute between January and April 2023 to play around with developing an AI video generator that Stability might someday use. “It was Candy Land or Coney Island,” said Russi, who estimates that his experiment, which was ultimately shelved, cost the company $2.5 million. Stable Diffusion was simultaneously Stability’s marquee product and its existential cash crisis. One current employee described it to Forbes as “a giant vacuum that absorbed everything: money, compute, people.” While the software was widely used, with Mostaque claiming downloads reaching into the hundreds of millions, Stability struggled to translate that wild success into revenue. Mostaque knew it could be done — peers at Databricks, Elastic and MongoDB had all turned a free product into a lucrative business — he just couldn’t figure out how. His first attempt was Stability’s API, which allowed paying customers to integrate Stable Diffusion into their own products. In early 2023, a handful of small companies, like art generator app NightCafe and presentation software startup Tome, signed on, according to four people with knowledge of the deals. But Stability’s poor account management services soured many, and in a matter of months NightCafe and Tome canceled their contracts, three people said. NightCafe founder Angus Russell told Forbes that his company switched to a competitor which “offered much cheaper inference costs and a broader service.” Tome did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, Mostaque’s efforts to court larger companies like Samsung and Snapchat were failing, according to five people familiar with the effort. Canva, which was already one of the heaviest users of open-sourced Stable Diffusion, had multiple discussions with Stability, which was angling for a contract it hoped would generate several millions in annual revenue. But the deal never materialized, four sources said. “These three companies wanted and needed us,” one former employee told Forbes. “They would have been the perfect customers.” (Samsung, Snap and Canva declined to comment.) “It’s not that there was not an appetite to pay Stability — there were tons of companies that would have that wanted to,” the former employee said. “There was a huge opportunity and demand, but just a resistance to execution.” Mostaque’s other big idea was to provide governments with bespoke national AI models that would invigorate their economies and citizenry. “Emad envisions a world where AI through 100 national models serves not as a tool of the few, but as a benefactor to all promising to confront great adversaries, cancer, autism, and the sands of time itself,” the AI avatar of Aristotle said in his intro at the conference. Mostaque told several prospective customers that he could deliver such models within 60 days — an untenable timeline, according to two people in position to know. Stability attempted to develop a model for the Singaporean government over the protestation of employees who questioned its technical feasibility, three sources familiar with the effort told Forbes. But it couldn’t pull it off and Singapore never became a customer. (The government of Singapore confirmed it did not enter into a deal with Stability, but declined to answer additional questions.) As Stability careened from one new business idea to another, resources were abruptly reallocated and researchers reassigned. The whiplash shifts in a largely siloed organization demoralized and infuriated employees. “There were ‘urgent’ things, ‘urgent urgent’ things and ‘most urgent,’” one former employee complained. “None of these things seem important if everything is important.” Another former Stability executive was far more pointed in their assessment. “Emad is the most disorganized leader I have ever worked with in my career,” this person told Forbes. “He has no vision, and changes directions every week, often based on what he sees on Twitter.” In a video interview posted shortly before this story was published, Mostaque explained his leadership style: “I'm particularly great at taking creatives, developers, researchers, others, and achieving their full potential in designing systems. But I should not be dealing with, you know, HR and operations and business development and other elements. There are far better people than me to do that.” By December 2023, Stability had partially abandoned its open-source roots and announced that any commercial use of Stable Diffusion would cost customers at least $20 per month (non-commercial and research use of Stable Diffusion would remain free). But privately, Stability was considering a potentially more lucrative source of revenue: reselling the compute it was leasing from providers like AWS, according to six people familiar with the effort. Though it was essentially GPU arbitrage, Stability framed the strategy to investors as a “managed services” offering. Its damning October financial report projected optimistically that such an offering would bring in $139 million in 2024 — 98% of its revenue. Multiple employees at the time told Forbes they feared reselling compute, even if the company called it “managed services,” would violate the terms of Stability’s contract with AWS. Amazon declined to comment. “The line internally was that we are not reselling compute,” one former employee said. “This was some of the dirtiest feeling stuff.” Stability also discussed reselling a cluster of Nvidia A100 chips, leased via CoreWeave, to the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, three sources said. “It was under the guise of managed services, but there wasn’t any management happening,” one of these people told Forbes. Andreessen Horowitz and CoreWeave declined to comment. Stability did not respond to questions about if it plans to continue this strategy now that Mostaque is out of the picture. Regardless, interim co-CEOs Wong and Laforte are on a tight timeline to clean up his mess. Board chairman Jim O’Shaughnessy said in a statement that he was confident the pair “will adeptly steer the company forward in developing and commercializing industry-leading generative AI products.” But burn continues to far outpace revenue. The Financial Times reported Friday that the company made $5.4 million of revenue in February, against $8 million in costs. Several sources said there are ongoing concerns about making payroll for the roughly 150 remaining employees. Leadership roles have gone vacant for months amid the disarray, leaving the company increasingly directionless. Meanwhile, a potentially catastrophic legal threat looms over the company: A trio of copyright infringement lawsuits brought by Getty Images and a group of artists in the U.S. and U.K., who claim Stability illegally used their art and photography to train the AI models powering Stable Diffusion. A London-based court has already rejected the company’s bid to throw out one of the lawsuits on the basis that none of its researchers were based in the U.K. And Stability’s claim that Getty’s Delaware lawsuit should be blocked because it's a U.K.-based company was rejected. (Stability did not respond to questions about the litigation.) AI-related copyright litigation “could go on for years,” according to Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. He told Forbes that though plaintiffs suing AI firms face an uphill battle overcoming the existing legal precedent on copyright infringement, the quantity of arguments available to make are virtually inexhaustible. “Like in military theory, if there’s a gap in your lines, that’s where the enemy pours through — if any one of those arguments succeeds, it could completely change the generative AI environment,” he said. “In some sense, generative AI as an industry has to win everything.” Stability, which had more than $100 million in the bank just a year and a half ago, is in a deep hole. Not only does it need more funding, it needs a viable business model — or a buyer with the vision and chops to make it successful in a fast-moving and highly competitive sector. At an all hands meeting this past Monday, Stability’s new leaders detailed a path forward. One point of emphasis: a plan to better manage resources and expenses, according to one person in attendance. It’s a start, but Mostaque’s meddling has left them with little runway to execute. His resignation, though, has given some employees hope. “A few people are 100% going to reconsider leaving after today,” said one current employee. “And the weird gloomy aura of hearing Emad talking nonsense for an hour is gone.” Shortly before Mostaque resigned, one current Stability executive told Forbes that they were optimistic his departure could make Stability appealing enough to receive a small investment or sale to a friendly party. “There are companies that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars that have much less intrinsic value than Stability,” the person said. “A white knight may still appear.”

[Discussion]: Mark Zuckerberg on Meta's Strategy on Open Source and AI during the earnings call

During the recent earnings call, Mark Zuckerberg answered a question from Eric Sheridan of Goldman Sachs on Meta's AI strategy, opportunities to integrate into products, and why they open source models and how it would benefit their business. I found the reasoning to be very sound and promising for the OSS and AI community. The biggest risk from AI, in my opinion, is not the doomsday scenarios that intuitively come to mind but rather that the most powerful AI systems will only be accessible to the most powerful and resourceful corporations. Quote copied from Ben Thompson's write up on Meta's earning in his Stratechery blog post which goes beyond AI. It's behind a paywall but I highly recommend it personally. Some noteworthy quotes that signal the thought process at Meta FAIR and more broadly We’re just playing a different game on the infrastructure than companies like Google or Microsoft or Amazon We would aspire to and hope to make even more open than that. So, we’ll need to figure out a way to do that. ...lead us to do more work in terms of open sourcing, some of the lower level models and tools Open sourcing low level tools make the way we run all this infrastructure more efficient over time. On PyTorch: It’s generally been very valuable for us to provide that because now all of the best developers across the industry are using tools that we’re also using internally. I would expect us to be pushing and helping to build out an open ecosystem. For all the negative that comes out of the popular discourse on Meta, I think their work to open source key tech tools over the last 10 years has been exceptional, here's hoping it continues into this decade of AI and pushes other tech giants to also realize the benefits of Open Source. Full Transcript: Right now most of the companies that are training large language models have business models that lead them to a closed approach to development. I think there’s an important opportunity to help create an open ecosystem. If we can help be a part of this, then much of the industry will standardize on using these open tools and help improve them further. So this will make it easier for other companies to integrate with our products and platforms as we enable more integrations, and that will help our products stay at the leading edge as well. Our approach to AI and our infrastructure has always been fairly open. We open source many of our state of the art models so people can experiment and build with them. This quarter we released our LLaMa LLM to researchers. It has 65 billion parameters but outperforms larger models and has proven quite popular. We’ve also open-sourced three other groundbreaking visual models along with their training data and model weights — Segment Anything, DinoV2, and our Animated Drawings tool — and we’ve gotten positive feedback on all of those as well. I think that there’s an important distinction between the products we offer and a lot of the technical infrastructure, especially the software that we write to support that. And historically, whether it’s the Open Compute project that we’ve done or just open sourcing a lot of the infrastructure that we’ve built, we’ve historically open sourced a lot of that infrastructure, even though we haven’t open sourced the code for our core products or anything like that. And the reason why I think why we do this is that unlike some of the other companies in the space, we’re not selling a cloud computing service where we try to keep the different software infrastructure that we’re building proprietary. For us, it’s way better if the industry standardizes on the basic tools that we’re using and therefore we can benefit from the improvements that others make and others’ use of those tools can, in some cases like Open Compute, drive down the costs of those things which make our business more efficient too. So I think to some degree we’re just playing a different game on the infrastructure than companies like Google or Microsoft or Amazon, and that creates different incentives for us. So overall, I think that that’s going to lead us to do more work in terms of open sourcing, some of the lower level models and tools. But of course, a lot of the product work itself is going to be specific and integrated with the things that we do. So it’s not that everything we do is going to be open. Obviously, a bunch of this needs to be developed in a way that creates unique value for our products, but I think in terms of the basic models, I would expect us to be pushing and helping to build out an open ecosystem here, which I think is something that’s going to be important. On the AI tools, and we have a bunch of history here, right? So if you if you look at what we’ve done with PyTorch, for example, which has generally become the standard in the industry as a tool that a lot of folks who are building AI models and different things in that space use, it’s generally been very valuable for us to provide that because now all of the best developers across the industry are using tools that we’re also using internally. So the tool chain is the same. So when they create some innovation, we can easily integrate it into the things that we’re doing. When we improve something, it improves other products too. Because it’s integrated with our technology stack, when there are opportunities to make integrations with products, it’s much easier to make sure that developers and other folks are compatible with the things that we need in the way that our systems work. So there are a lot of advantages, but I view this more as a kind of back end infrastructure advantage with potential integrations on the product side, but one that should hopefully enable us to stay at the leading edge and integrate more broadly with the community and also make the way we run all this infrastructure more efficient over time. There are a number of models. I just gave PyTorch as an example. Open Compute is another model that has worked really well for us in this way, both to incorporate both innovation and scale efficiency into our own infrastructure. So I think that there’s, our incentives I think are basically aligned towards moving in this direction. Now that said, there’s a lot to figure out, right? So when you asked if there are going to be other opportunities, I hope so. I can’t speak to what all those things might be now. This is all quite early in getting developed. The better we do at the foundational work, the more opportunities I think that will come and present themselves. So I think that that’s all stuff that we need to figure out. But at least at the base level, I think we’re generally incentivized to move in this direction. And we also need to figure out how to go in that direction over time. I mean, I mentioned LLaMA before and I also want to be clear that while I’m talking about helping contribute to an open ecosystem, LLaMA is a model that we only really made available to researchers and there’s a lot of really good stuff that’s happening there. But a lot of the work that we’re doing, I think, we would aspire to and hope to make even more open than that. So, we’ll need to figure out a way to do that.

[P] Need advise on creating a conversational Chatbot for my University

Hey everyone! I need some advise on creating a conversational chatbot for my University as my Final Year Project (FYP). 2024 will be last year for my BSCS degree and we have to build an application or something in the last year. So, I thought of creating a chatbot (just like GPT) to help students (who have admission queries). Most of the time, students or parents will have to call University for various questions and then they have to wait to ACTUALLY talk to the admins office people. Now, talking in terms of coding/programming, I have created a basic PDFbot by using LLama2, Huggingface and Pinecone. Its very very easy and yes its fairly inaccurate too. The PDF that I am using rn will be replaced by the dataset that I gather in order to create the bot for my Uni, but it will also be inaccurate as this one. Also, the chatbot that I have made is just based on this one function called "similarity\_search()" and I am literally passing query of the user to this function which then tries to find the most relevant answer by the embeddings from knowledge base. How do I make this accurate? I know using the OpenAI model will make it accurate, but its paid as well, idk how will I manage to do that. Plus, i reckon there will be a simple function there too which doesn't make me a good programmer I think. I really want to do something good and unique for once. I have dreamt about leaving back something in my Uni that has my name over it. Can I do something where I get to make a mini-language model or something like that? Will it be too complex for me to handle? (I consider myself a beginner to this programming world) 1- I am planning to create a dynamic dataset which will also include any event that's going to happen in our University. 2- I am also planning to make the chatbot intelligent enough to consult confused students. 3- Chatbot will also include information about each and every faculty member. Their qualifications, research papers and other info in general. It would be a relief if any of the experts give me a roadmap on this, it will be genuinely a stress relief for me. I am trying to get done with at least 70% of the work before the start of the next year so that I don't have to work much in the next year.

[D] Playing big league at home on a budget?

I am a hobbyist and my Nvidia 660 is 10 years old and only has 2GB. Obviously that isn't going to cut it nowadays anymore. I am thinking about options here. I don't have thousands and thousands of dollars. And I highly doubt that spending close to a thousand dollars on a brand new card is still viable in 2020-2022. I wanted to use Wavenet today and then found out about Melnet. I mean, maybe I could run Wavenet but nobody in their right mind wants to after hearing Melnet results. On Github this one guy complained he couldn't get his implementation to work due to OOM with 2x 2080 RTX, which he bought solely for this purpose. Then on the other repo the guy casually mentioned that tier XY doesn't fit with some 10 year old lowfi dataset, even with batch size 1, on a 16GB Tesla P100. The wisdom for OOM has always been "decrease batch size". But as far as I can tell, for most of any of the interesting stuff in the last 8 years or so you simply can't decrease batch size. Either because batch sizes are already so tiny, or because the code is written in a way that would require you to somehow turn it inside out, probably involving extreme knowledge of higher mathematics. I am a hobbyist, not a researcher. I am happy if I crudely can grasp what is going on. Most of anything in the field suffers from exactly the same issue: It simply won't run without utterly absurd amounts of VRAM. So what about buying shitty cheapo AMD GPUs with lots of VRAM? This seems to be the sensible choice if you want to be able to run anything noteworthy at all that comes up in the next 2 years and maybe beyond. People say, don't but AMD its slow and it sucks, but those are apparently the same people that buy a 16GB Titan GPU for $1500 three times on Ebay without hesitation, when there are also 16GB AMD GPUs for $300. How much slower are AMD GPUs really? Let's say they are 5 times cheaper so they could be just 5 times slower. So I have to train my model over night instead of seeing the result in the afternoon. That would be totally awesome!; given that the alternative is to buy a $300 Nvidia GPU, which has maybe 4 or 6GB and simply can't run the code without running out of memory. And say $300 is not enough, let's buy a $700 RTX 3080. It still only has 10GB of VRAM not even 16GB. Then its just as useless! What's the point of buying a fast GPU if it can't even run the code? I don't know how much slower AMD GPUs really are. Maybe they are not 5x but 50x slower. Then of course training a model that was developed on some 64GB Tesla might take month and years. But maybe speed is not the issue, only memory. I have seen some stuff even being optimized for CPU, apparently because there weren't any big enough GPUs around. I don't really know how viable that can be (it seems rarely if ever it is), I have no experience. And what about renting AWS? Let's say, I am a beginner and I want to toy around for a week and probably max out 4 Teslas like 80% of the time without really getting anywhere. How expensive is that? $25, $50, $100, $500? (Found the answer: fucking $2000 https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/p3/ ) Ok, so AWS is bullshit, here its 6x cheaper: https://vast.ai/console/create/ . They don't really have 4x 16GB V100 though, just one V100. $0.5 per hour 24 7 = $84 per month (there are more hidden cost like bandwidth, it doesn't seem to be huge but I never used this so don't take it at face value). On AWS the same is over $3 per hour. So a day is $12, this could be viable! (look at calculation below). There really isn't much info on the net about hardware requirements and performance for machine learning stuff. What bothers me the most is that people seem to be very ignorant of the VRAM issue. Either because they aren't looking ahead of what might come in 1-2 years. Or because they are simply so rich they have no issue spending thousands and thousands of dollars every year instead of just 500 every couple of years. Or maybe they are both. So, yeah, what are your thoughts? Here is what I found out just today: Until 2 years ago, tensorflow and pytorch wouldn't work with AMD cards, but this has changed. https://rocmdocs.amd.com/en/latest/Deep_learning/Deep-learning.html For older cards though, ROCm only works with certain CPUs: it needs PCIe 3.0 with atomics (see: https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm ). So you can't simply buy any 16GB card for $300 on Ebay like I suggested, even if it supports ROCm, because it will only work for "newer" PCs. The newer GFX9 AMD cards (like Radeon VII and Vega) don't suffer from this problem and work with PCIe 2.0 again... Although I have seen 16GB Vega cards for like $350 on Ebay, I think that is a pretty rare catch. However looking 1-2 years in the future, this is great because Radeon VII prices will be hugely inflated by Nvidia 3000 series hype (maybe down to $180 even) and maybe the next gen cards from AMD even have 24 or 32GB for $500-$1000 and can still run on old machines. According to this https://arxiv.org/pdf/1909.06842.pdf Radeon VII 16GB performs only half as good as Tesla V100 16GB, whereas V100 should be roughly along the lines of 11GB RTX 2080 Ti. So you could say that you get half the RAM, double the speed, double the price. I am not sure though if that holds. I think they were putting 16GB in those cards trying to push it for ML with ROCm, clearly addressing the problem of the time, but no one really jumped on the train and now Resnet shrinks RAM but needs more processing power. So they released 8GB cards again with slightly better performance, and I guess we are lucky if the next generation even has 16GB because games probably don't need it at all. Still though with Revnets and everything said in the comments, I think on a budget you are better on the safe side buying the card with the most amount of VRAM, rather than the most performance. Tomorrow some paper might come out that uses another method, then you can't trick-shrink your network anymore and then everyone needs to buy big ass cards again like it used to be and can do nothing but throw their fancy faster cards in the dumpster. Also the huge bulk of ML currently focuses on image processing, while sound has only been gaining real momentum recently and this will be followed by video processing and eventually human-alike thought processes that sit atop of all that and have not even been tackled yet. Its a rapidly evolving field, hard to predict what will come and stay. Running out of VRAM means total hardware failure, running slower just means waiting longer. If you just buy the newest card every year, its probably save to buy the fast card because things won't change that fast after all. If you buy a new card every 4 years or longer then just try to get as much VRAM as possible. Check this out: https://www.techspot.com/news/86811-gigabyte-accidentally-reveals-rtx-3070-16gb-rtx-3080.html There will be a 3070 16GB version! Let's compare renting one V100 at $12/day vs. buying a 3070 Ti 16GB: The 2080 Ti was 1.42x the price of the regular 2080 and released the next summer. So let's assume the same will be true to the 3070 Ti so it will cost $700. That is $30/month & $1.88/day for two years - $15/month & $0.94/day in four years (by which time you can probably rent some 32GB Tesla card for the same price and nothing recent runs on less anymore). If you max out your setup 24/7 all year, then power cost obviously becomes a huge factor to that figure. In my country running at 500W cost $4.21/day, or $1.60 / 9hrs overnight. If you live elsewhere it might be as much as a quarter of that price. Of course your PC may run 10h a day anyway, so its maybe just 300W plus, and an older graphics card is inefficient for games it eats more Watts to do the same things so you save some there as well. There is a lot to take into account if comparing. Anyway, factoring in power cost, to break even with buying the card vs. renting within two years, you would have to use it for at least 4 days a month, or almost 2 weeks every 3 month. If you use it less than that, you maybe have a nice new graphics card and less hassle with pushing stuff back and forth onto servers all the time. But it would have been more economic to rent. So renting isn't that bad after all. Overall if you are thinking about having this as your hobby, you could say that it will cost you at least $30 per month, if not $50 or more (when keeping up to date with cards every 2 instead of 4 years + using it more cost more power). I think that is quite hefty. Personally I am not even invested enough into this even if it wasn't over my finances. I want a new card of course and also play some new games, but I don't really need to. There are a lot of other (more) important things I am interested in, that are totally free.

[P] Open-source Neural Search framework to implement semantic search & multimedia search. Just released 2.0, seeking your feedback.

I heard your feedback on 1.0 release post on my project Jina, many people were keen to use Jina for multimedia search because that's where use of Neural Networks makes significant difference. So I focused on that part and I was able to transform it from 1.0 to 2.0 within 3 months. Last post on 1.0 release to give you some idea what this project is about Actually, I should say - "'we' made this", because there were more than 155 contributors who did it, not just me. The primary changes we made We saw MachineLearning beginners struggle in using Jina 1.0, so we separated the codebase where Machine Learning expertise is required(jina-hub) and the one which MachineLearning beginners can use(the jina core). Now ML beginners don't need to worry about jina-hub and can use jina hub packages directly to implement ML specific tasks without the need to understand advanced ML concepts. While advanced ML users can create their own jina-hub packages. We cut down a lots of abstractions to make it easy to use for beginners Made python APIs more intuitive to use Improved performance(3.6x faster on startup) Here's Jina 2.0 and here's Jina 1.0. I seek feedback from people who are looking at this project for the first time, as well as people who have tried their hands before but had some challenges in using it. Few questions, I'm seeking answers to Do you feel that we have reduced complexity by a lot of margin? How easy it is to use for a beginner now? What questions are still unanswered?

[D] Here are 17 ways of making PyTorch training faster – what did I miss?

I've been collecting methods to accelerate training in PyTorch – here's what I've found so far. What did I miss? What did I get wrong? The methods – roughly sorted from largest to smallest expected speed-up – are: Consider using a different learning rate schedule. Use multiple workers and pinned memory in DataLoader. Max out the batch size. Use Automatic Mixed Precision (AMP). Consider using a different optimizer. Turn on cudNN benchmarking. Beware of frequently transferring data between CPUs and GPUs. Use gradient/activation checkpointing. Use gradient accumulation. Use DistributedDataParallel for multi-GPU training. Set gradients to None rather than 0. Use .as\_tensor rather than .tensor() Turn off debugging APIs if not needed. Use gradient clipping. Turn off bias before BatchNorm. Turn off gradient computation during validation. Use input and batch normalization. Consider using another learning rate schedule The learning rate (schedule) you choose has a large impact on the speed of convergence as well as the generalization performance of your model. Cyclical Learning Rates and the 1Cycle learning rate schedule are both methods introduced by Leslie N. Smith (here and here), and then popularised by fast.ai's Jeremy Howard and Sylvain Gugger (here and here). Essentially, the 1Cycle learning rate schedule looks something like this: &#x200B; https://preview.redd.it/sc37u5knmxa61.png?width=476&format=png&auto=webp&s=09b309b4dbd67eedb4ab5f86e03e0e83d7b072d1 Sylvain writes: \[1cycle consists of\]  two steps of equal lengths, one going from a lower learning rate to a higher one than go back to the minimum. The maximum should be the value picked with the Learning Rate Finder, and the lower one can be ten times lower. Then, the length of this cycle should be slightly less than the total number of epochs, and, in the last part of training, we should allow the learning rate to decrease more than the minimum, by several orders of magnitude. In the best case this schedule achieves a massive speed-up – what Smith calls Superconvergence – as compared to conventional learning rate schedules. Using the 1Cycle policy he needs \~10x fewer training iterations of a ResNet-56 on ImageNet to match the performance of the original paper, for instance). The schedule seems to perform robustly well across common architectures and optimizers. PyTorch implements both of these methods torch.optim.lrscheduler.CyclicLR and torch.optim.lrscheduler.OneCycleLR, see the documentation. One drawback of these schedulers is that they introduce a number of additional hyperparameters. This post and this repo, offer a nice overview and implementation of how good hyper-parameters can be found including the Learning Rate Finder mentioned above. Why does this work? It doesn't seem entirely clear but one possible explanation might be that regularly increasing the learning rate helps to traverse saddle points in the loss landscape more quickly. Use multiple workers and pinned memory in DataLoader When using torch.utils.data.DataLoader, set numworkers > 0, rather than the default value of 0, and pinmemory=True, rather than the default value of False. Details of this are explained here. Szymon Micacz achieves a 2x speed-up for a single training epoch by using four workers and pinned memory. A rule of thumb that people are using to choose the number of workers is to set it to four times the number of available GPUs with both a larger and smaller number of workers leading to a slow down. Note that increasing num\_workerswill increase your CPU memory consumption. Max out the batch size This is a somewhat contentious point. Generally, however, it seems like using the largest batch size your GPU memory permits will accelerate your training (see NVIDIA's Szymon Migacz, for instance). Note that you will also have to adjust other hyperparameters, such as the learning rate, if you modify the batch size. A rule of thumb here is to double the learning rate as you double the batch size. OpenAI has a nice empirical paper on the number of convergence steps needed for different batch sizes. Daniel Huynh runs some experiments with different batch sizes (also using the 1Cycle policy discussed above) where he achieves a 4x speed-up by going from batch size 64 to 512. One of the downsides of using large batch sizes, however, is that they might lead to solutions that generalize worse than those trained with smaller batches. Use Automatic Mixed Precision (AMP) The release of PyTorch 1.6 included a native implementation of Automatic Mixed Precision training to PyTorch. The main idea here is that certain operations can be run faster and without a loss of accuracy at semi-precision (FP16) rather than in the single-precision (FP32) used elsewhere. AMP, then, automatically decide which operation should be executed in which format. This allows both for faster training and a smaller memory footprint. In the best case, the usage of AMP would look something like this: import torch Creates once at the beginning of training scaler = torch.cuda.amp.GradScaler() for data, label in data_iter: optimizer.zero_grad() Casts operations to mixed precision with torch.cuda.amp.autocast(): loss = model(data) Scales the loss, and calls backward() to create scaled gradients scaler.scale(loss).backward() Unscales gradients and calls or skips optimizer.step() scaler.step(optimizer) Updates the scale for next iteration scaler.update() Benchmarking a number of common language and vision models on NVIDIA V100 GPUs, Huang and colleagues find that using AMP over regular FP32 training yields roughly 2x – but upto 5.5x – training speed-ups. Currently, only CUDA ops can be autocast in this way. See the documentation here for more details on this and other limitations. u/SVPERBlA points out that you can squeeze out some additional performance (\~ 20%) from AMP on NVIDIA Tensor Core GPUs if you convert your tensors to the Channels Last memory format. Refer to this section in the NVIDIA docs for an explanation of the speedup and more about NCHW versus NHWC tensor formats. Consider using another optimizer AdamW is Adam with weight decay (rather than L2-regularization) which was popularized by fast.ai and is now available natively in PyTorch as torch.optim.AdamW. AdamW seems to consistently outperform Adam in terms of both the error achieved and the training time. See this excellent blog post on why using weight decay instead of L2-regularization makes a difference for Adam. Both Adam and AdamW work well with the 1Cycle policy described above. There are also a few not-yet-native optimizers that have received a lot of attention recently, most notably LARS (pip installable implementation) and LAMB. NVIDA's APEX implements fused versions of a number of common optimizers such as Adam. This implementation avoid a number of passes to and from GPU memory as compared to the PyTorch implementation of Adam, yielding speed-ups in the range of 5%. Turn on cudNN benchmarking If your model architecture remains fixed and your input size stays constant, setting torch.backends.cudnn.benchmark = True might be beneficial (docs). This enables the cudNN autotuner which will benchmark a number of different ways of computing convolutions in cudNN and then use the fastest method from then on. For a rough reference on the type of speed-up you can expect from this, Szymon Migacz achieves a speed-up of 70% on a forward pass for a convolution and a 27% speed-up for a forward + backward pass of the same convolution. One caveat here is that this autotuning might become very slow if you max out the batch size as mentioned above. Beware of frequently transferring data between CPUs and GPUs Beware of frequently transferring tensors from a GPU to a CPU using tensor.cpu() and vice versa using tensor.cuda() as these are relatively expensive. The same applies for .item() and .numpy() – use .detach() instead. If you are creating a new tensor, you can also directly assign it to your GPU using the keyword argument device=torch.device('cuda:0'). If you do need to transfer data, using .to(non_blocking=True), might be useful as long as you don't have any synchronization points after the transfer. If you really have to, you might want to give Santosh Gupta's SpeedTorch a try, although it doesn't seem entirely clear when this actually does/doesn't provide speed-ups. Use gradient/activation checkpointing Quoting directly from the documentation: Checkpointing works by trading compute for memory. Rather than storing all intermediate activations of the entire computation graph for computing backward, the checkpointed part does not save intermediate activations, and instead recomputes them in backward pass. It can be applied on any part of a model. Specifically, in the forward pass, function will run in torch.no\grad() manner, i.e., not storing the intermediate activations. Instead, the forward pass saves the inputs tuple and the functionparameter. In the backwards pass, the saved inputs and function is retrieved, and the forward pass is computed on function again, now tracking the intermediate activations, and then the gradients are calculated using these activation values. So while this will might slightly increase your run time for a given batch size, you'll significantly reduce your memory footprint. This in turn will allow you to further increase the batch size you're using allowing for better GPU utilization. While checkpointing is implemented natively as torch.utils.checkpoint(docs), it does seem to take some thought and effort to implement properly. Priya Goyal has a good tutorial demonstrating some of the key aspects of checkpointing. Use gradient accumulation Another approach to increasing the batch size is to accumulate gradients across multiple .backward() passes before calling optimizer.step(). Following a post by Hugging Face's Thomas Wolf, gradient accumulation can be implemented as follows: model.zero_grad() Reset gradients tensors for i, (inputs, labels) in enumerate(training_set): predictions = model(inputs) Forward pass loss = loss_function(predictions, labels) Compute loss function loss = loss / accumulation_steps Normalize our loss (if averaged) loss.backward() Backward pass if (i+1) % accumulation_steps == 0: Wait for several backward steps optimizer.step() Now we can do an optimizer step model.zero_grad() Reset gradients tensors if (i+1) % evaluation_steps == 0: Evaluate the model when we... evaluate_model() ...have no gradients accumulate This method was developed mainly to circumvent GPU memory limitations and I'm not entirely clear on the trade-off between having additional .backward() loops. This discussion on the fastai forum seems to suggest that it can in fact accelerate training, so it's probably worth a try. Use Distributed Data Parallel for multi-GPU training Methods to accelerate distributed training probably warrant their own post but one simple one is to use torch.nn.DistributedDataParallel rather than torch.nn.DataParallel. By doing so, each GPU will be driven by a dedicated CPU core avoiding the GIL issues of DataParallel. In general, I can strongly recommend reading the documentation on distributed training. Set gradients to None rather than 0 Use .zerograd(settonone=True) rather than .zerograd(). Doing so will let the memory allocator handle the gradients rather than actively setting them to 0. This will lead to yield a modest speed-up as they say in the documentation, so don't expect any miracles. Watch out, doing this is not side-effect free! Check the docs for the details on this. Use .as_tensor() rather than .tensor() torch.tensor() always copies data. If you have a numpy array that you want to convert, use torch.astensor() or torch.fromnumpy() to avoid copying the data. Turn on debugging tools only when actually needed PyTorch offers a number of useful debugging tools like the autograd.profiler, autograd.grad\check, and autograd.anomaly\detection. Make sure to use them to better understand when needed but to also turn them off when you don't need them as they will slow down your training. Use gradient clipping Originally used to avoid exploding gradients in RNNs, there is both some empirical evidence as well as some theoretical support that clipping gradients (roughly speaking: gradient = min(gradient, threshold)) accelerates convergence. Hugging Face's Transformer implementation is a really clean example of how to use gradient clipping as well as some of the other methods such as AMP mentioned in this post. In PyTorch this can be done using torch.nn.utils.clipgradnorm(documentation). It's not entirely clear to me which models benefit how much from gradient clipping but it seems to be robustly useful for RNNs, Transformer-based and ResNets architectures and a range of different optimizers. Turn off bias before BatchNorm This is a very simple one: turn off the bias of layers before BatchNormalization layers. For a 2-D convolutional layer, this can be done by setting the bias keyword to False: torch.nn.Conv2d(..., bias=False, ...).  (Here's a reminder why this makes sense.) You will save some parameters, I would however expect the speed-up of this to be relatively small as compared to some of the other methods mentioned here. Turn off gradient computation during validation This one is straightforward: set torch.no_grad() during validation. Use input and batch normalization You're probably already doing this but you might want to double-check: Are you normalizing your input? Are you using batch-normalization? And here's a reminder of why you probably should. Bonus tip from the comments: Use JIT to fuse point-wise operations. If you have adjacent point-wise operations you can use PyTorch JIT to combine them into one FusionGroup which can then be launched on a single kernel rather than multiple kernels as would have been done per default. You'll also save some memory reads and writes. Szymon Migacz shows how you can use the @torch.jit.script decorator to fuse the operations in a GELU, for instance: @torch.jit.script def fused_gelu(x): return x 0.5 (1.0 + torch.erf(x / 1.41421)) In this case, fusing the operations leads to a 5x speed-up for the execution of fused_gelu as compared to the unfused version. See also this post for an example of how Torchscript can be used to accelerate an RNN. Hat tip to u/Patient_Atmosphere45 for the suggestion. Sources and additional resources Many of the tips listed above come from Szymon Migacz' talk and post in the PyTorch docs. PyTorch Lightning's William Falcon has two interesting posts with tips to speed-up training. PyTorch Lightning does already take care of some of the points above per-default. Thomas Wolf at Hugging Face has a number of interesting articles on accelerating deep learning – with a particular focus on language models. The same goes for Sylvain Gugger and Jeremy Howard: they have many interesting posts in particular on learning rates and AdamW. Thanks to Ben Hahn, Kevin Klein and Robin Vaaler for their feedback on a draft of this post! I've also put all of the above into this blog post.

[D] What is your honest experience with reinforcement learning?

In my personal experience, SOTA RL algorithms simply don't work. I've tried working with reinforcement learning for over 5 years. I remember when Alpha Go defeated the world famous Go player, Lee Sedol, and everybody thought RL would take the ML community by storm. Yet, outside of toy problems, I've personally never found a practical use-case of RL. What is your experience with it? Aside from Ad recommendation systems and RLHF, are there legitimate use-cases of RL? Or, was it all hype? Edit: I know a lot about AI. I built NexusTrade, an AI-Powered automated investing tool that lets non-technical users create, update, and deploy their trading strategies. I’m not an idiot nor a noob; RL is just ridiculously hard. Edit 2: Since my comments are being downvoted, here is a link to my article that better describes my position. It's not that I don't understand RL. I released my open-source code and wrote a paper on it. It's the fact that it's EXTREMELY difficult to understand. Other deep learning algorithms like CNNs (including ResNets), RNNs (including GRUs and LSTMs), Transformers, and GANs are not hard to understand. These algorithms work and have practical use-cases outside of the lab. Traditional SOTA RL algorithms like PPO, DDPG, and TD3 are just very hard. You need to do a bunch of research to even implement a toy problem. In contrast, the decision transformer is something anybody can implement, and it seems to match or surpass the SOTA. You don't need two networks battling each other. You don't have to go through hell to debug your network. It just naturally learns the best set of actions in an auto-regressive manner. I also didn't mean to come off as arrogant or imply that RL is not worth learning. I just haven't seen any real-world, practical use-cases of it. I simply wanted to start a discussion, not claim that I know everything. Edit 3: There's a shockingly number of people calling me an idiot for not fully understanding RL. You guys are wayyy too comfortable calling people you disagree with names. News-flash, not everybody has a PhD in ML. My undergraduate degree is in biology. I self-taught myself the high-level maths to understand ML. I'm very passionate about the field; I just have VERY disappointing experiences with RL. Funny enough, there are very few people refuting my actual points. To summarize: Lack of real-world applications Extremely complex and inaccessible to 99% of the population Much harder than traditional DL algorithms like CNNs, RNNs, and GANs Sample inefficiency and instability Difficult to debug Better alternatives, such as the Decision Transformer Are these not legitimate criticisms? Is the purpose of this sub not to have discussions related to Machine Learning? To the few commenters that aren't calling me an idiot...thank you! Remember, it costs you nothing to be nice! Edit 4: Lots of people seem to agree that RL is over-hyped. Unfortunately those comments are downvoted. To clear up some things: We've invested HEAVILY into reinforcement learning. All we got from this investment is a robot that can be super-human at (some) video games. AlphaFold did not use any reinforcement learning. SpaceX doesn't either. I concede that it can be useful for robotics, but still argue that it's use-cases outside the lab are extremely limited. If you're stumbling on this thread and curious about an RL alternative, check out the Decision Transformer. It can be used in any situation that a traditional RL algorithm can be used. Final Edit: To those who contributed more recently, thank you for the thoughtful discussion! From what I learned, model-based models like Dreamer and IRIS MIGHT have a future. But everybody who has actually used model-free models like DDPG unanimously agree that they suck and don’t work.

[D] The current and future state of AI/ML is shockingly demoralizing with little hope of redemption

I recently encountered the PaLM (Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways) paper from Google Research and it opened up a can of worms of ideas I’ve felt I’ve intuitively had for a while, but have been unable to express – and I know I can’t be the only one. Sometimes I wonder what the original pioneers of AI – Turing, Neumann, McCarthy, etc. – would think if they could see the state of AI that we’ve gotten ourselves into. 67 authors, 83 pages, 540B parameters in a model, the internals of which no one can say they comprehend with a straight face, 6144 TPUs in a commercial lab that no one has access to, on a rig that no one can afford, trained on a volume of data that a human couldn’t process in a lifetime, 1 page on ethics with the same ideas that have been rehashed over and over elsewhere with no attempt at a solution – bias, racism, malicious use, etc. – for purposes that who asked for? When I started my career as an AI/ML research engineer 2016, I was most interested in two types of tasks – 1.) those that most humans could do but that would universally be considered tedious and non-scalable. I’m talking image classification, sentiment analysis, even document summarization, etc. 2.) tasks that humans lack the capacity to perform as well as computers for various reasons – forecasting, risk analysis, game playing, and so forth. I still love my career, and I try to only work on projects in these areas, but it’s getting harder and harder. This is because, somewhere along the way, it became popular and unquestionably acceptable to push AI into domains that were originally uniquely human, those areas that sit at the top of Maslows’s hierarchy of needs in terms of self-actualization – art, music, writing, singing, programming, and so forth. These areas of endeavor have negative logarithmic ability curves – the vast majority of people cannot do them well at all, about 10% can do them decently, and 1% or less can do them extraordinarily. The little discussed problem with AI-generation is that, without extreme deterrence, we will sacrifice human achievement at the top percentile in the name of lowering the bar for a larger volume of people, until the AI ability range is the norm. This is because relative to humans, AI is cheap, fast, and infinite, to the extent that investments in human achievement will be watered down at the societal, educational, and individual level with each passing year. And unlike AI gameplay which superseded humans decades ago, we won’t be able to just disqualify the machines and continue to play as if they didn’t exist. Almost everywhere I go, even this forum, I encounter almost universal deference given to current SOTA AI generation systems like GPT-3, CODEX, DALL-E, etc., with almost no one extending their implications to its logical conclusion, which is long-term convergence to the mean, to mediocrity, in the fields they claim to address or even enhance. If you’re an artist or writer and you’re using DALL-E or GPT-3 to “enhance” your work, or if you’re a programmer saying, “GitHub Co-Pilot makes me a better programmer?”, then how could you possibly know? You’ve disrupted and bypassed your own creative process, which is thoughts -> (optionally words) -> actions -> feedback -> repeat, and instead seeded your canvas with ideas from a machine, the provenance of which you can’t understand, nor can the machine reliably explain. And the more you do this, the more you make your creative processes dependent on said machine, until you must question whether or not you could work at the same level without it. When I was a college student, I often dabbled with weed, LSD, and mushrooms, and for a while, I thought the ideas I was having while under the influence were revolutionary and groundbreaking – that is until took it upon myself to actually start writing down those ideas and then reviewing them while sober, when I realized they weren’t that special at all. What I eventually determined is that, under the influence, it was impossible for me to accurately evaluate the drug-induced ideas I was having because the influencing agent the generates the ideas themselves was disrupting the same frame of reference that is responsible evaluating said ideas. This is the same principle of – if you took a pill and it made you stupider, would even know it? I believe that, especially over the long-term timeframe that crosses generations, there’s significant risk that current AI-generation developments produces a similar effect on humanity, and we mostly won’t even realize it has happened, much like a frog in boiling water. If you have children like I do, how can you be aware of the the current SOTA in these areas, project that 20 to 30 years, and then and tell them with a straight face that it is worth them pursuing their talent in art, writing, or music? How can you be honest and still say that widespread implementation of auto-correction hasn’t made you and others worse and worse at spelling over the years (a task that even I believe most would agree is tedious and worth automating). Furthermore, I’ve yet to set anyone discuss the train – generate – train - generate feedback loop that long-term application of AI-generation systems imply. The first generations of these models were trained on wide swaths of web data generated by humans, but if these systems are permitted to continually spit out content without restriction or verification, especially to the extent that it reduces or eliminates development and investment in human talent over the long term, then what happens to the 4th or 5th generation of models? Eventually we encounter this situation where the AI is being trained almost exclusively on AI-generated content, and therefore with each generation, it settles more and more into the mean and mediocrity with no way out using current methods. By the time that happens, what will we have lost in terms of the creative capacity of people, and will we be able to get it back? By relentlessly pursuing this direction so enthusiastically, I’m convinced that we as AI/ML developers, companies, and nations are past the point of no return, and it mostly comes down the investments in time and money that we’ve made, as well as a prisoner’s dilemma with our competitors. As a society though, this direction we’ve chosen for short-term gains will almost certainly make humanity worse off, mostly for those who are powerless to do anything about it – our children, our grandchildren, and generations to come. If you’re an AI researcher or a data scientist like myself, how do you turn things back for yourself when you’ve spent years on years building your career in this direction? You’re likely making near or north of $200k annually TC and have a family to support, and so it’s too late, no matter how you feel about the direction the field has gone. If you’re a company, how do you standby and let your competitors aggressively push their AutoML solutions into more and more markets without putting out your own? Moreover, if you’re a manager or thought leader in this field like Jeff Dean how do you justify to your own boss and your shareholders your team’s billions of dollars in AI investment while simultaneously balancing ethical concerns? You can’t – the only answer is bigger and bigger models, more and more applications, more and more data, and more and more automation, and then automating that even further. If you’re a country like the US, how do responsibly develop AI while your competitors like China single-mindedly push full steam ahead without an iota of ethical concern to replace you in numerous areas in global power dynamics? Once again, failing to compete would be pre-emptively admitting defeat. Even assuming that none of what I’ve described here happens to such an extent, how are so few people not taking this seriously and discounting this possibility? If everything I’m saying is fear-mongering and non-sense, then I’d be interested in hearing what you think human-AI co-existence looks like in 20 to 30 years and why it isn’t as demoralizing as I’ve made it out to be. &#x200B; EDIT: Day after posting this -- this post took off way more than I expected. Even if I received 20 - 25 comments, I would have considered that a success, but this went much further. Thank you to each one of you that has read this post, even more so if you left a comment, and triply so for those who gave awards! I've read almost every comment that has come in (even the troll ones), and am truly grateful for each one, including those in sharp disagreement. I've learned much more from this discussion with the sub than I could have imagined on this topic, from so many perspectives. While I will try to reply as many comments as I can, the sheer comment volume combined with limited free time between work and family unfortunately means that there are many that I likely won't be able to get to. That will invariably include some that I would love respond to under the assumption of infinite time, but I will do my best, even if the latency stretches into days. Thank you all once again!

[D] The machine learning community has a toxicity problem

It is omnipresent! First of all, the peer-review process is broken. Every fourth NeurIPS submission is put on arXiv. There are DeepMind researchers publicly going after reviewers who are criticizing their ICLR submission. On top of that, papers by well-known institutes that were put on arXiv are accepted at top conferences, despite the reviewers agreeing on rejection. In contrast, vice versa, some papers with a majority of accepts are overruled by the AC. (I don't want to call any names, just have a look the openreview page of this year's ICRL). Secondly, there is a reproducibility crisis. Tuning hyperparameters on the test set seem to be the standard practice nowadays. Papers that do not beat the current state-of-the-art method have a zero chance of getting accepted at a good conference. As a result, hyperparameters get tuned and subtle tricks implemented to observe a gain in performance where there isn't any. Thirdly, there is a worshiping problem. Every paper with a Stanford or DeepMind affiliation gets praised like a breakthrough. For instance, BERT has seven times more citations than ULMfit. The Google affiliation gives so much credibility and visibility to a paper. At every ICML conference, there is a crowd of people in front of every DeepMind poster, regardless of the content of the work. The same story happened with the Zoom meetings at the virtual ICLR 2020. Moreover, NeurIPS 2020 had twice as many submissions as ICML, even though both are top-tier ML conferences. Why? Why is the name "neural" praised so much? Next, Bengio, Hinton, and LeCun are truly deep learning pioneers but calling them the "godfathers" of AI is insane. It has reached the level of a cult. Fourthly, the way Yann LeCun talked about biases and fairness topics was insensitive. However, the toxicity and backlash that he received are beyond any reasonable quantity. Getting rid of LeCun and silencing people won't solve any issue. Fifthly, machine learning, and computer science in general, have a huge diversity problem. At our CS faculty, only 30% of undergrads and 15% of the professors are women. Going on parental leave during a PhD or post-doc usually means the end of an academic career. However, this lack of diversity is often abused as an excuse to shield certain people from any form of criticism. Reducing every negative comment in a scientific discussion to race and gender creates a toxic environment. People are becoming afraid to engage in fear of being called a racist or sexist, which in turn reinforces the diversity problem. Sixthly, moral and ethics are set arbitrarily. The U.S. domestic politics dominate every discussion. At this very moment, thousands of Uyghurs are put into concentration camps based on computer vision algorithms invented by this community, and nobody seems even remotely to care. Adding a "broader impact" section at the end of every people will not make this stop. There are huge shitstorms because a researcher wasn't mentioned in an article. Meanwhile, the 1-billion+ people continent of Africa is virtually excluded from any meaningful ML discussion (besides a few Indaba workshops). Seventhly, there is a cut-throat publish-or-perish mentality. If you don't publish 5+ NeurIPS/ICML papers per year, you are a looser. Research groups have become so large that the PI does not even know the name of every PhD student anymore. Certain people submit 50+ papers per year to NeurIPS. The sole purpose of writing a paper has become to having one more NeurIPS paper in your CV. Quality is secondary; passing the peer-preview stage has become the primary objective. Finally, discussions have become disrespectful. Schmidhuber calls Hinton a thief, Gebru calls LeCun a white supremacist, Anandkumar calls Marcus a sexist, everybody is under attack, but nothing is improved. Albert Einstein was opposing the theory of quantum mechanics. Can we please stop demonizing those who do not share our exact views. We are allowed to disagree without going for the jugular. The moment we start silencing people because of their opinion is the moment scientific and societal progress dies. Best intentions, Yusuf

[D]Stuck in AI Hell: What to do in post LLM world

Hey Reddit, I’ve been in an AI/ML role for a few years now, and I’m starting to feel disconnected from the work. When I started, deep learning models were getting good, and I quickly fell in love with designing architectures, training models, and fine-tuning them for specific use cases. Seeing a loss curve finally converge, experimenting with layers, and debugging training runs—it all felt like a craft, a blend of science and creativity. I enjoyed implementing research papers to see how things worked under the hood. Backprop, gradients, optimization—it was a mental workout I loved. But these days, it feels like everything has shifted. LLMs dominate the scene, and instead of building and training models, the focus is on using pre-trained APIs, crafting prompt chains, and setting up integrations. Sure, there’s engineering involved, but it feels less like creating and more like assembling. I miss the hands-on nature of experimenting with architectures and solving math-heavy problems. It’s not just the creativity I miss. The economics of this new era also feel strange to me. Back when I started, compute was a luxury. We had limited GPUs, and a lot of the work was about being resourceful—quantizing models, distilling them, removing layers, and squeezing every bit of performance out of constrained setups. Now, it feels like no one cares about cost. We’re paying by tokens. Tokens! Who would’ve thought we’d get to a point where we’re not designing efficient models but feeding pre-trained giants like they’re vending machines? I get it—abstraction has always been part of the field. TensorFlow and PyTorch abstracted tensor operations, Python abstracts C. But deep learning still left room for creation. We weren’t just abstracting away math; we were solving it. We could experiment, fail, and tweak. Working with LLMs doesn’t feel the same. It’s like fitting pieces into a pre-defined puzzle instead of building the puzzle itself. I understand that LLMs are here to stay. They’re incredible tools, and I respect their potential to revolutionize industries. Building real-world products with them is still challenging, requiring a deep understanding of engineering, prompt design, and integrating them effectively into workflows. By no means is it an “easy” task. But the work doesn’t give me the same thrill. It’s not about solving math or optimization problems—it’s about gluing together APIs, tweaking outputs, and wrestling with opaque systems. It’s like we’ve traded craftsmanship for convenience. Which brings me to my questions: Is there still room for those of us who enjoy the deep work of model design and training? Or is this the inevitable evolution of the field, where everything converges on pre-trained systems? What use cases still need traditional ML expertise? Are there industries or problems that will always require specialized models instead of general-purpose LLMs? Am I missing the bigger picture here? LLMs feel like the “kernel” of a new computing paradigm, and we don’t fully understand their second- and third-order effects. Could this shift lead to new, exciting opportunities I’m just not seeing yet? How do you stay inspired when the focus shifts? I still love AI, but I miss the feeling of building something from scratch. Is this just a matter of adapting my mindset, or should I seek out niches where traditional ML still thrives? I’m not asking this to rant (though clearly, I needed to get some of this off my chest). I want to figure out where to go next from here. If you’ve been in AI/ML long enough to see major shifts—like the move from feature engineering to deep learning—how did you navigate them? What advice would you give someone in my position? And yeah, before anyone roasts me for using an LLM to structure this post (guilty!), I just wanted to get my thoughts out in a coherent way. Guess that’s a sign of where we’re headed, huh? Thanks for reading, and I’d love to hear your thoughts! TL;DR: I entered AI during the deep learning boom, fell in love with designing and training models, and thrived on creativity, math, and optimization. Now it feels like the field is all about tweaking prompts and orchestrating APIs for pre-trained LLMs. I miss the thrill of crafting something unique. Is there still room for people who enjoy traditional ML, or is this just the inevitable evolution of the field? How do you stay inspired amidst such shifts? Update: Wow, this blew up. Thanks everyone for your comments and suggestions. I really like some of those. This thing was on my mind for a long time, glad that I put it here. Thanks again!

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup

forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/03/29/how-stability-ais-founder-tanked-his-billion-dollar-startup/ archive no paywall: https://archive.is/snbeV How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup Mar 29, 2024 Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque took the stage last week at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California to roaring applause and an introduction from an AI-generated Aristotle who announced him as “a modern Prometheus” with “the astuteness of Athena and the vision of Daedalus.” “Under his stewardship, AI becomes the Herculean force poised to vanquish the twin serpents of illness and ailment and extend the olive branch of longevity,” the faux Aristotle proclaimed. “I think that’s the best intro I’ve ever had,” Mostaque said. But behind Mostaque's hagiographic introduction lay a grim and fast metastasizing truth. Stability, once one of AI’s buzziest startups, was floundering. It had been running out of money for months and Mostaque had been unable to secure enough additional funding. It had defaulted on payments to Amazon whose cloud service undergirded Stability’s core offerings. The star research team behind its flagship text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion had tendered their resignations just three days before — as Forbes would first report — and other senior leaders had issued him an ultimatum: resign, or we walk too. Still, onstage before a massive audience of peers and acolytes, Mostaque talked a big game. “AI is jet planes for the mind,” he opined. “AI is our collective intelligence. It's the human Colossus.” He claimed a new, faster version of the Stable Diffusion image generator released earlier this month could generate “200 cats with hats per second.” But later, when he was asked about Stability’s financial model, Mostaque fumbled. “I can’t say that publicly,” he replied. “But it’s going well. We’re ahead of forecast.” Four days later, Mostaque stepped down as CEO of Stability, as Forbes first reported. In a post to X, the service formerly known as Twitter, he claimed he’d voluntarily abdicated his role to decentralize “the concentration of power in AI.” But sources told Forbes that was hardly the case. Behind the scenes, Mostaque had fought to maintain his position and control despite mounting pressure externally and internally to step down. Company documents and interviews with 32 current and former employees, investors, collaborators and industry observers suggest his abrupt exit was the result of poor business judgment and wild overspending that undermined confidence in his vision and leadership, and ultimately kneecapped the company. Mostaque, through his attorneys, declined to comment on record on a detailed list of questions about the reporting in this story. But in an email to Forbes earlier this week he broadly disputed the allegations. “Nobody tells you how hard it is to be a CEO and there are better CEOs than me to scale a business,” he said in a statement. “I am not sure anyone else would have been able to build and grow the research team to build the best and most widely used models out there and I’m very proud of the team there. I look forward to moving onto the next problem to handle and hopefully move the needle.” In an emailed statement, Christian Laforte and Shan Shan Wong, the interim co-CEOs who replaced Mostaque, said, "the company remains focused on commercializing its world leading technology” and providing it “to partners across the creative industries." After starting Stability in 2019, Mostaque built the company into an early AI juggernaut by seizing upon a promising research project that would become Stable Diffusion and funding it into a business reality. The ease with which the software generated detailed images from the simplest text prompts immediately captivated the public: 10 million people used it on any given day, the company told Forbes in early 2023. For some true believers, Mostaque was a crucial advocate for open-source AI development in a space dominated by the closed systems of OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. But his startup’s rise to one of the buzziest in generative AI was in part built on a series of exaggerations and misleading claims, as Forbes first reported last year (Mostaque disputed some points at the time). And they continued after he raised $100 million at a $1 billion valuation just days after launching Stable Diffusion in 2022. His failure to deliver on an array of grand promises, like building bespoke AI models for nation states, and his decision to pour tens of millions into research without a sustainable business plan, eroded Stability’s foundations and jeopardized its future. "He was just giving shit away,” one former employee told Forbes. “That man legitimately wanted to transform the world. He actually wanted to train AI models for kids in Malawi. Was it practical? Absolutely not." By October 2023, Stability would have less than $4 million left in the bank, according to an internal memo prepared for a board meeting and reviewed by Forbes. And mounting debt, including months of overdue Amazon Web Services payments, had already left it in the red. To avoid legal penalties for skipping Americans staff’s payroll, the document explained, the London-based startup was considering delaying tax payments to the U.K. government. It was Stability’s armada of GPUs, the wildly powerful and equally expensive chips undergirding AI, that were so taxing the company’s finances. Hosted by AWS, they had long been one of Mostaque’s bragging points; he often touted them as one of the world’s 10 largest supercomputers. They were responsible for helping Stability’s researchers build and maintain one of the top AI image generators, as well as break important new ground on generative audio, video and 3D models. “Undeniably, Stability has continued to ship a lot of models,” said one former employee. “They may not have profited off of it, but the broader ecosystem benefitted in a huge, huge way.” But the costs associated with so much compute were now threatening to sink the company. According to an internal October financial forecast seen by Forbes, Stability was on track to spend $99 million on compute in 2023. It noted as well that Stability was “underpaying AWS bills for July (by $1M)” and “not planning to pay AWS at the end of October for August usage ($7M).” Then there were the September and October bills, plus $1 million owed to Google Cloud and $600,000 to GPU cloud data center CoreWeave. (Amazon, Google and CoreWeave declined to comment.) With an additional $54 million allocated to wages and operating expenses, Stability’s total projected costs for 2023 were $153 million. But according to its October financial report, its projected revenue for the calendar year was just $11 million. Stability was on track to lose more money per month than it made in an entire year. The company’s dire financial position had thoroughly soured Stability’s current investors, including Coatue, which had invested tens of millions in the company during its $101 million funding round in 2022. In the middle of 2023, Mostaque agreed to an independent audit after Coatue raised a series of concerns, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The outcome of the investigation is unclear. Coatue declined to comment. Within a week of an early October board meeting where Mostaque shared that financial forecast, Lightspeed Venture Partners, another major investor, sent a letter to the board urging them to sell the company. The distressing numbers had “severely undermined” the firm’s confidence in Mostaque’s ability to lead the company. “In particular, we are surprised and deeply concerned by a cash position just now disclosed to us that is inconsistent with prior discussions on this topic,” Lightspeed’s general counsel Brett Nissenberg wrote in the letter, a copy of which was viewed by Forbes. “Lightspeed believes that the company is not likely financeable on terms that would assure the company’s long term sound financial position.” (Lightspeed declined a request for comment.) The calls for a sale led Stability to quietly begin looking for a buyer. Bloomberg reported in November that Stability approached AI startups Cohere and Jasper to gauge their interest. Stability denied this, and Jasper CEO Timothy Young did the same when reached for comment by Forbes. A Cohere representative declined to comment. But one prominent AI company confirmed that Mostaque’s representatives had reached out to them to test the waters. Those talks did not advance because “the numbers didn’t add up,” this person, who declined to be named due to the confidential nature of the talks, told Forbes. Stability also tried to court Samsung as a buyer, going so far as to redecorate its office in advance of a planned meeting with the Korean electronics giant. (Samsung said that it invested in Stability in 2023 and that it does not comment on M&A discussions.) Coatue had been calling for Mostaque’s resignation for months, according to a source with direct knowledge. But it and other investors were unable to oust him because he was the company’s majority shareholder. When they tried a different tact by rallying other investors to offer him a juicy equity package to resign, Mostaque refused, said two sources. By October, Coatue and Lightspeed had had enough. Coatue left the board and Lightspeed resigned its observer seat. “Emad infuriated our initial investors so much it’s just making it impossible for us to raise more money under acceptable terms,” one current Stability executive told Forbes. The early months of 2024 saw Stability’s already precarious position eroding further still. Employees were quietly laid off. Three people in a position to know estimated that at least 10% of staff were cut. And cash reserves continued to dwindle. Mostaque mentioned a lifeline at the October board meeting: $95 million in tentative funding from new investors, pending due diligence. But in the end, only a fraction of it was wired, two sources say, much of it from Intel, which Forbes has learned invested $20 million, a fraction of what was reported. (Intel did not return a request for comment by publication time.) Two hours after Forbes broke the news of Mostaque’s plans to step down as CEO, Stability issued a press release confirming his resignation. Chief operating officer Wong and chief technology officer Laforte have taken over in the interim. Mostaque, who said on X that he still owns a majority of the company, also stepped down from the board, which has now initiated a search for a permanent CEO. There is a lot of work to be done to turn things around, and very little time in which to do it. Said the current Stability executive, “There’s still a possibility of a turnaround story, but the odds drop by the day.” In July of 2023, Mostaque still thought he could pull it off. Halfway through the month, he shared a fundraising plan with his lieutenants. It was wildly optimistic, detailing the raise of $500 million in cash and another $750 million in computing facilities from marquee investors like Nvidia, Google, Intel and the World Bank (Nvidia and Google declined comment. Intel did not respond. The World Bank said it did not invest in Stability). In a Slack message reviewed by Forbes, Mostaque said Google was “willing to move fast” and the round was “likely to be oversubscribed.” It wasn’t. Three people with direct knowledge of these fundraising efforts told Forbes that while there was some interest in Stability, talks often stalled when it came time to disclose financials. Two of them noted that earlier in the year, Mostaque had simply stopped engaging with VCs who asked for numbers. Only one firm invested around that time: actor Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, which invested $35 million in the form of a convertible SAFE note during the second quarter, according to an internal document. (Sound Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.) And though he’d managed to score a meeting with Nvidia and its CEO Jensen Huang, it ended in disaster, according to two sources. “Under Jensen's microscopic questions, Emad just fell apart,” a source in position to know told Forbes. Huang quickly concluded Stability wasn’t ready for an investment from Nvidia, the sources said. Mostaque told Forbes in an email that he had not met with Huang since 2022, except to say “hello and what’s up a few times after.” His July 2023 message references a plan to raise $150 million from Nvidia. (Nvidia declined to comment.) After a June Forbes investigation citing more than 30 sources revealed Mostaque’s history of misleading claims, Mostaque struggled to raise funding, a Stability investor told Forbes. (Mostaque disputed the story at the time and called it "coordinated lies" in his email this week to Forbes). Increasingly, investors scrutinized his assertions and pressed for data. And Young, now the CEO of Jasper, turned down a verbal offer to be Stability’s president after reading the article, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The collapse of the talks aggravated the board and other executives, who had hoped Young would compensate for the sales and business management skills that Mostaque lacked, according to four people in a position to know. (Young declined to comment.) When Stability’s senior leadership convened in London for the CogX conference in September, the financing had still not closed. There, a group of executives confronted Mostaque asking questions about the company’s cash position and runway, according to three people with direct knowledge of the incident. They did not get the clarity they’d hoped for. By October, Mostaque had reduced his fundraising target by more than 80%. The months that followed saw a steady drumbeat of departures — general counsel Adam Avrunin, vice presidents Mike Melnicki, Ed Newton-Rex and Joe Penna, chief people officer Ozden Onder — culminating in the demoralizing March exit of Stable Diffusion’s primary developers Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz. Rombach, who led the team, had been angling to leave for months, two sources said, first threatening to resign last summer because of the fundraising failures. Others left over concerns about cash flow, as well as liabilities — including what four people described as Mostaque’s lax approach to ensuring that Stability products could not be used to produce child sexual abuse imagery. “Stability AI is committed to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibits the use of our image models and services for unlawful activity, including attempts to edit or create CSAM,” Ella Irwin, senior vice president of integrity, said in a statement. Newton-Rex told Forbes he resigned because he disagreed with Stability’s position that training AI on copyrighted work without consent is fair use. Melnicki and Penna declined to comment. Avrunin and Onder could not be reached for comment. None of the researchers responded to requests for comment. The Stable Diffusion researchers’ departure as a cohort says a lot about the state of Stability AI. The company’s researchers were widely viewed as its crown jewels, their work subsidized with a firehose of pricey compute power that was even extended to people outside the company. Martino Russi, an artificial intelligence researcher, told Forbes that though he was never formally employed by Stability, the company provided him a “staggering” amount of compute between January and April 2023 to play around with developing an AI video generator that Stability might someday use. “It was Candy Land or Coney Island,” said Russi, who estimates that his experiment, which was ultimately shelved, cost the company $2.5 million. Stable Diffusion was simultaneously Stability’s marquee product and its existential cash crisis. One current employee described it to Forbes as “a giant vacuum that absorbed everything: money, compute, people.” While the software was widely used, with Mostaque claiming downloads reaching into the hundreds of millions, Stability struggled to translate that wild success into revenue. Mostaque knew it could be done — peers at Databricks, Elastic and MongoDB had all turned a free product into a lucrative business — he just couldn’t figure out how. His first attempt was Stability’s API, which allowed paying customers to integrate Stable Diffusion into their own products. In early 2023, a handful of small companies, like art generator app NightCafe and presentation software startup Tome, signed on, according to four people with knowledge of the deals. But Stability’s poor account management services soured many, and in a matter of months NightCafe and Tome canceled their contracts, three people said. NightCafe founder Angus Russell told Forbes that his company switched to a competitor which “offered much cheaper inference costs and a broader service.” Tome did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, Mostaque’s efforts to court larger companies like Samsung and Snapchat were failing, according to five people familiar with the effort. Canva, which was already one of the heaviest users of open-sourced Stable Diffusion, had multiple discussions with Stability, which was angling for a contract it hoped would generate several millions in annual revenue. But the deal never materialized, four sources said. “These three companies wanted and needed us,” one former employee told Forbes. “They would have been the perfect customers.” (Samsung, Snap and Canva declined to comment.) “It’s not that there was not an appetite to pay Stability — there were tons of companies that would have that wanted to,” the former employee said. “There was a huge opportunity and demand, but just a resistance to execution.” Mostaque’s other big idea was to provide governments with bespoke national AI models that would invigorate their economies and citizenry. “Emad envisions a world where AI through 100 national models serves not as a tool of the few, but as a benefactor to all promising to confront great adversaries, cancer, autism, and the sands of time itself,” the AI avatar of Aristotle said in his intro at the conference. Mostaque told several prospective customers that he could deliver such models within 60 days — an untenable timeline, according to two people in position to know. Stability attempted to develop a model for the Singaporean government over the protestation of employees who questioned its technical feasibility, three sources familiar with the effort told Forbes. But it couldn’t pull it off and Singapore never became a customer. (The government of Singapore confirmed it did not enter into a deal with Stability, but declined to answer additional questions.) As Stability careened from one new business idea to another, resources were abruptly reallocated and researchers reassigned. The whiplash shifts in a largely siloed organization demoralized and infuriated employees. “There were ‘urgent’ things, ‘urgent urgent’ things and ‘most urgent,’” one former employee complained. “None of these things seem important if everything is important.” Another former Stability executive was far more pointed in their assessment. “Emad is the most disorganized leader I have ever worked with in my career,” this person told Forbes. “He has no vision, and changes directions every week, often based on what he sees on Twitter.” In a video interview posted shortly before this story was published, Mostaque explained his leadership style: “I'm particularly great at taking creatives, developers, researchers, others, and achieving their full potential in designing systems. But I should not be dealing with, you know, HR and operations and business development and other elements. There are far better people than me to do that.” By December 2023, Stability had partially abandoned its open-source roots and announced that any commercial use of Stable Diffusion would cost customers at least $20 per month (non-commercial and research use of Stable Diffusion would remain free). But privately, Stability was considering a potentially more lucrative source of revenue: reselling the compute it was leasing from providers like AWS, according to six people familiar with the effort. Though it was essentially GPU arbitrage, Stability framed the strategy to investors as a “managed services” offering. Its damning October financial report projected optimistically that such an offering would bring in $139 million in 2024 — 98% of its revenue. Multiple employees at the time told Forbes they feared reselling compute, even if the company called it “managed services,” would violate the terms of Stability’s contract with AWS. Amazon declined to comment. “The line internally was that we are not reselling compute,” one former employee said. “This was some of the dirtiest feeling stuff.” Stability also discussed reselling a cluster of Nvidia A100 chips, leased via CoreWeave, to the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, three sources said. “It was under the guise of managed services, but there wasn’t any management happening,” one of these people told Forbes. Andreessen Horowitz and CoreWeave declined to comment. Stability did not respond to questions about if it plans to continue this strategy now that Mostaque is out of the picture. Regardless, interim co-CEOs Wong and Laforte are on a tight timeline to clean up his mess. Board chairman Jim O’Shaughnessy said in a statement that he was confident the pair “will adeptly steer the company forward in developing and commercializing industry-leading generative AI products.” But burn continues to far outpace revenue. The Financial Times reported Friday that the company made $5.4 million of revenue in February, against $8 million in costs. Several sources said there are ongoing concerns about making payroll for the roughly 150 remaining employees. Leadership roles have gone vacant for months amid the disarray, leaving the company increasingly directionless. Meanwhile, a potentially catastrophic legal threat looms over the company: A trio of copyright infringement lawsuits brought by Getty Images and a group of artists in the U.S. and U.K., who claim Stability illegally used their art and photography to train the AI models powering Stable Diffusion. A London-based court has already rejected the company’s bid to throw out one of the lawsuits on the basis that none of its researchers were based in the U.K. And Stability’s claim that Getty’s Delaware lawsuit should be blocked because it's a U.K.-based company was rejected. (Stability did not respond to questions about the litigation.) AI-related copyright litigation “could go on for years,” according to Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. He told Forbes that though plaintiffs suing AI firms face an uphill battle overcoming the existing legal precedent on copyright infringement, the quantity of arguments available to make are virtually inexhaustible. “Like in military theory, if there’s a gap in your lines, that’s where the enemy pours through — if any one of those arguments succeeds, it could completely change the generative AI environment,” he said. “In some sense, generative AI as an industry has to win everything.” Stability, which had more than $100 million in the bank just a year and a half ago, is in a deep hole. Not only does it need more funding, it needs a viable business model — or a buyer with the vision and chops to make it successful in a fast-moving and highly competitive sector. At an all hands meeting this past Monday, Stability’s new leaders detailed a path forward. One point of emphasis: a plan to better manage resources and expenses, according to one person in attendance. It’s a start, but Mostaque’s meddling has left them with little runway to execute. His resignation, though, has given some employees hope. “A few people are 100% going to reconsider leaving after today,” said one current employee. “And the weird gloomy aura of hearing Emad talking nonsense for an hour is gone.” Shortly before Mostaque resigned, one current Stability executive told Forbes that they were optimistic his departure could make Stability appealing enough to receive a small investment or sale to a friendly party. “There are companies that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars that have much less intrinsic value than Stability,” the person said. “A white knight may still appear.”

[D] Accessibility of Basic Models to Non-Technicals

Hello /r/machinelearning! I'm doing some research on easily generated models by non-technical/statistical people. It would be awesome if some of you could answer a quick questionnaire: If you're a machine learning developer/data scientist etc.: a) Has your manager/product lead etc. ever insist that you build a model on a correlation you felt wasn't there? b) Do you think if that people had a way to verify the lack of correlation through a naive model (random forest, svc, etc.) that it would have changed the situation? (Or, if you were able to show them the results) c) Would you want this technology for yourself, or wish that your company would have access to it? If you're a non-technical person (small business developer, student, non-tech entrepreneur, etc.): a) Have you ever not pursued a potential machine learning/data solution or feature because you weren't willing to invest the resources to see if it was viable? b) Would being able to verify correlations in your data (or lack thereof!) entice you to pursue possible machine learning solutions? c) Even if your previous answers were no, would you be interested in having this technology? Thanks in advance for all of the responses, I will personally read and respond to each one of you thoughtful enough to give me a response. Also, I hope this post will spark an interesting conversation about the barrier of entry to AI/machine learning.

5-Day Applied Rationality Workshop for Machine Learning Students & Researchers

The Center for Applied Rationality is a Berkeley-based nonprofit that runs immersive workshops for entrepreneurs, researchers, students, and other ambitious, analytical, practically-minded people. The practice of “applied rationality”, which the workshops aim towards, involves noticing what cognitive algorithms you seem to be running, checking whether those algorithms seem to be helping you form accurate beliefs and achieve your goals, and looking for ways to improve them. A typical 4-day CFAR workshop costs $3900 to attend, but thanks to a generous grant from the Future of Life Institute this fall we will be running a free five-day workshop for students and researchers in the fields of machine learning and artificial intelligence. All costs are covered by this grant, including room, board, and flights. The workshop will take place this Aug 30 through Sep 4 in the San Francisco Bay Area and will include: 2 days focused on learning models and skills, such as how habits develop and how to redesign your habits. 2 days focused on practicing skills and applying them to whichever areas of your life you would like to make improvements on, such as how to make faster progress on projects or how to have more productive collaborations with colleagues. 1 day (special to this workshop) focused on discussion of the long-term impact of artificial intelligence, and on what reasoning habits — if spread across the relevant research communities — may increase the probability of positive long-term AI outcomes. Go here to read more or to apply, or ask questions here.

[P] A Call to AI Devs and Entrepreneurs

Hey, I am thinking about potentially creating a global yet small community of AI devs and entrepreneurs. I know that a lot of communities already exist, but this one would be specific for AI entrepreneurs and devs to build together. I don’t want it to be big, since I want it to be active. That is the way to keep it interesting and avoid the noise. We could use slack for example, to make it a bit more work related than just for soft engagements. We could tag everyone with the skills that they have and interest, to make it easy for people to connect and start building stuff. Tags could be tech, growth, product, fundraising, business, etc. The goal would be to actually launch new products in the AI space. I am a serial entrepreneur myself with an exit with one of the biggest providers in our vertical a few years ago. I am finishing a PhD in AI and have been working in the AI field in the industry for many years now. I think this is a unique moment in time. The market will change substantially as AI brings new capabilities to the game, but my perspective is that the business models for AI are yet to be built. The bottom line is that as with any platform shift, we will see the creation of the Googles of the future during this time. I think that we have much more probability of success if we work together to try to conquer the market step by step. My feeling is that the grind will be much harder on this wave than any other for a variety of reasons, from the macroeconomic environment to the very fast pace of how things are moving. I know that communities exist already, I am in a program with an accelerator myself, but I would scope this new community in a different way. It would be the place to meet and to build together. Everyone sharing the same pains, being in the scout for the new tech that just launched, helping to push out new deals, connect with VCs, all those things. Let me know if this would interest you.

[N] Mozilla going for Forbes 30U30 vibes with AI awards

I feel like this is a notable award with values I can get behind. They're looking for people in the AI space, in 5 categories of Advocates, Builders, Artists, Entrepreneurs and Change Makers. Last time I checked, nominations are open - https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/rise25/nominate/

[D] resources for avoiding common mistakes in machine learning projects?

There are often managers or entrepreneur types that think of "AI" as a magical solution and then millions of dollars get wasted because they don't understand how fragile the solutions can be, how do much more data is needed to create solutions that generalize, susceptibility to bias, training data needed, etc. What accessible information is there that would help those people understand what is involved for practicality of project and successful and ethical outcomes?

Interview with Juergen Schmidhuber, renowned ‘Father Of Modern AI’, says his life’s work won't lead to dystopia.

Schmidhuber interview expressing his views on the future of AI and AGI. Original source. I think the interview is of interest to r/MachineLearning, and presents an alternate view, compared to other influential leaders in AI. Juergen Schmidhuber, Renowned 'Father Of Modern AI,' Says His Life’s Work Won't Lead To Dystopia May 23, 2023. Contributed by Hessie Jones. Amid the growing concern about the impact of more advanced artificial intelligence (AI) technologies on society, there are many in the technology community who fear the implications of the advancements in Generative AI if they go unchecked. Dr. Juergen Schmidhuber, a renowned scientist, artificial intelligence researcher and widely regarded as one of the pioneers in the field, is more optimistic. He declares that many of those who suddenly warn against the dangers of AI are just seeking publicity, exploiting the media’s obsession with killer robots which has attracted more attention than “good AI” for healthcare etc. The potential to revolutionize various industries and improve our lives is clear, as are the equal dangers if bad actors leverage the technology for personal gain. Are we headed towards a dystopian future, or is there reason to be optimistic? I had a chance to sit down with Dr. Juergen Schmidhuber to understand his perspective on this seemingly fast-moving AI-train that will leap us into the future. As a teenager in the 1970s, Juergen Schmidhuber became fascinated with the idea of creating intelligent machines that could learn and improve on their own, becoming smarter than himself within his lifetime. This would ultimately lead to his groundbreaking work in the field of deep learning. In the 1980s, he studied computer science at the Technical University of Munich (TUM), where he earned his diploma in 1987. His thesis was on the ultimate self-improving machines that, not only, learn through some pre-wired human-designed learning algorithm, but also learn and improve the learning algorithm itself. Decades later, this became a hot topic. He also received his Ph.D. at TUM in 1991 for work that laid some of the foundations of modern AI. Schmidhuber is best known for his contributions to the development of recurrent neural networks (RNNs), the most powerful type of artificial neural network that can process sequential data such as speech and natural language. With his students Sepp Hochreiter, Felix Gers, Alex Graves, Daan Wierstra, and others, he published architectures and training algorithms for the long short-term memory (LSTM), a type of RNN that is widely used in natural language processing, speech recognition, video games, robotics, and other applications. LSTM has become the most cited neural network of the 20th century, and Business Week called it "arguably the most commercial AI achievement." Throughout his career, Schmidhuber has received various awards and accolades for his groundbreaking work. In 2013, he was awarded the Helmholtz Prize, which recognizes significant contributions to the field of machine learning. In 2016, he was awarded the IEEE Neural Network Pioneer Award for "pioneering contributions to deep learning and neural networks." The media have often called him the “father of modern AI,” because the most cited neural networks all build on his lab’s work. He is quick to point out, however, that AI history goes back centuries. Despite his many accomplishments, at the age of 60, he feels mounting time pressure towards building an Artificial General Intelligence within his lifetime and remains committed to pushing the boundaries of AI research and development. He is currently director of the KAUST AI Initiative, scientific director of the Swiss AI Lab IDSIA, and co-founder and chief scientist of AI company NNAISENSE, whose motto is "AI∀" which is a math-inspired way of saying "AI For All." He continues to work on cutting-edge AI technologies and applications to improve human health and extend human lives and make lives easier for everyone. The following interview has been edited for clarity. Jones: Thank you Juergen for joining me. You have signed letters warning about AI weapons. But you didn't sign the recent publication, "Pause Gigantic AI Experiments: An Open Letter"? Is there a reason? Schmidhuber: Thank you Hessie. Glad to speak with you. I have realized that many of those who warn in public against the dangers of AI are just seeking publicity. I don't think the latest letter will have any significant impact because many AI researchers, companies, and governments will ignore it completely. The proposal frequently uses the word "we" and refers to "us," the humans. But as I have pointed out many times in the past, there is no "we" that everyone can identify with. Ask 10 different people, and you will hear 10 different opinions about what is "good." Some of those opinions will be completely incompatible with each other. Don't forget the enormous amount of conflict between the many people. The letter also says, "If such a pause cannot be quickly put in place, governments should intervene and impose a moratorium." The problem is that different governments have ALSO different opinions about what is good for them and for others. Great Power A will say, if we don't do it, Great Power B will, perhaps secretly, and gain an advantage over us. The same is true for Great Powers C and D. Jones: Everyone acknowledges this fear surrounding current generative AI technology. Moreover, the existential threat of this technology has been publicly acknowledged by Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI himself, calling for AI regulation. From your perspective, is there an existential threat? Schmidhuber: It is true that AI can be weaponized, and I have no doubt that there will be all kinds of AI arms races, but AI does not introduce a new quality of existential threat. The threat coming from AI weapons seems to pale in comparison to the much older threat from nuclear hydrogen bombs that don’t need AI at all. We should be much more afraid of half-century-old tech in the form of H-bomb rockets. The Tsar Bomba of 1961 had almost 15 times more destructive power than all weapons of WW-II combined. Despite the dramatic nuclear disarmament since the 1980s, there are still more than enough nuclear warheads to wipe out human civilization within two hours, without any AI I’m much more worried about that old existential threat than the rather harmless AI weapons. Jones: I realize that while you compare AI to the threat of nuclear bombs, there is a current danger that a current technology can be put in the hands of humans and enable them to “eventually” exact further harms to individuals of group in a very precise way, like targeted drone attacks. You are giving people a toolset that they've never had before, enabling bad actors, as some have pointed out, to be able to do a lot more than previously because they didn't have this technology. Schmidhuber: Now, all that sounds horrible in principle, but our existing laws are sufficient to deal with these new types of weapons enabled by AI. If you kill someone with a gun, you will go to jail. Same if you kill someone with one of these drones. Law enforcement will get better at understanding new threats and new weapons and will respond with better technology to combat these threats. Enabling drones to target persons from a distance in a way that requires some tracking and some intelligence to perform, which has traditionally been performed by skilled humans, to me, it seems is just an improved version of a traditional weapon, like a gun, which is, you know, a little bit smarter than the old guns. But, in principle, all of that is not a new development. For many centuries, we have had the evolution of better weaponry and deadlier poisons and so on, and law enforcement has evolved their policies to react to these threats over time. So, it's not that we suddenly have a new quality of existential threat and it's much more worrisome than what we have had for about six decades. A large nuclear warhead doesn’t need fancy face recognition to kill an individual. No, it simply wipes out an entire city with ten million inhabitants. Jones: The existential threat that’s implied is the extent to which humans have control over this technology. We see some early cases of opportunism which, as you say, tends to get more media attention than positive breakthroughs. But you’re implying that this will all balance out? Schmidhuber: Historically, we have a long tradition of technological breakthroughs that led to advancements in weapons for the purpose of defense but also for protection. From sticks, to rocks, to axes to gunpowder to cannons to rockets… and now to drones… this has had a drastic influence on human history but what has been consistent throughout history is that those who are using technology to achieve their own ends are themselves, facing the same technology because the opposing side is learning to use it against them. And that's what has been repeated in thousands of years of human history and it will continue. I don't see the new AI arms race as something that is remotely as existential a threat as the good old nuclear warheads. You said something important, in that some people prefer to talk about the downsides rather than the benefits of this technology, but that's misleading, because 95% of all AI research and AI development is about making people happier and advancing human life and health. Jones: Let’s touch on some of those beneficial advances in AI research that have been able to radically change present day methods and achieve breakthroughs. Schmidhuber: All right! For example, eleven years ago, our team with my postdoc Dan Ciresan was the first to win a medical imaging competition through deep learning. We analyzed female breast cells with the objective to determine harmless cells vs. those in the pre-cancer stage. Typically, a trained oncologist needs a long time to make these determinations. Our team, who knew nothing about cancer, were able to train an artificial neural network, which was totally dumb in the beginning, on lots of this kind of data. It was able to outperform all the other methods. Today, this is being used not only for breast cancer, but also for radiology and detecting plaque in arteries, and many other things. Some of the neural networks that we have developed in the last 3 decades are now prevalent across thousands of healthcare applications, detecting Diabetes and Covid-19 and what not. This will eventually permeate across all healthcare. The good consequences of this type of AI are much more important than the click-bait new ways of conducting crimes with AI. Jones: Adoption is a product of reinforced outcomes. The massive scale of adoption either leads us to believe that people have been led astray, or conversely, technology is having a positive effect on people’s lives. Schmidhuber: The latter is the likely case. There's intense commercial pressure towards good AI rather than bad AI because companies want to sell you something, and you are going to buy only stuff you think is going to be good for you. So already just through this simple, commercial pressure, you have a tremendous bias towards good AI rather than bad AI. However, doomsday scenarios like in Schwarzenegger movies grab more attention than documentaries on AI that improve people’s lives. Jones: I would argue that people are drawn to good stories – narratives that contain an adversary and struggle, but in the end, have happy endings. And this is consistent with your comment on human nature and how history, despite its tendency for violence and destruction of humanity, somehow tends to correct itself. Let’s take the example of a technology, which you are aware – GANs – General Adversarial Networks, which today has been used in applications for fake news and disinformation. In actuality, the purpose in the invention of GANs was far from what it is used for today. Schmidhuber: Yes, the name GANs was created in 2014 but we had the basic principle already in the early 1990s. More than 30 years ago, I called it artificial curiosity. It's a very simple way of injecting creativity into a little two network system. This creative AI is not just trying to slavishly imitate humans. Rather, it’s inventing its own goals. Let me explain: You have two networks. One network is producing outputs that could be anything, any action. Then the second network is looking at these actions and it’s trying to predict the consequences of these actions. An action could move a robot, then something happens, and the other network is just trying to predict what will happen. Now we can implement artificial curiosity by reducing the prediction error of the second network, which, at the same time, is the reward of the first network. The first network wants to maximize its reward and so it will invent actions that will lead to situations that will surprise the second network, which it has not yet learned to predict well. In the case where the outputs are fake images, the first network will try to generate images that are good enough to fool the second network, which will attempt to predict the reaction of the environment: fake or real image, and it will try to become better at it. The first network will continue to also improve at generating images whose type the second network will not be able to predict. So, they fight each other. The 2nd network will continue to reduce its prediction error, while the 1st network will attempt to maximize it. Through this zero-sum game the first network gets better and better at producing these convincing fake outputs which look almost realistic. So, once you have an interesting set of images by Vincent Van Gogh, you can generate new images that leverage his style, without the original artist having ever produced the artwork himself. Jones: I see how the Van Gogh example can be applied in an education setting and there are countless examples of artists mimicking styles from famous painters but image generation from this instance that can happen within seconds is quite another feat. And you know this is how GANs has been used. What’s more prevalent today is a socialized enablement of generating images or information to intentionally fool people. It also surfaces new harms that deal with the threat to intellectual property and copyright, where laws have yet to account for. And from your perspective this was not the intention when the model was conceived. What was your motivation in your early conception of what is now GANs? Schmidhuber: My old motivation for GANs was actually very important and it was not to create deepfakes or fake news but to enable AIs to be curious and invent their own goals, to make them explore their environment and make them creative. Suppose you have a robot that executes one action, then something happens, then it executes another action, and so on, because it wants to achieve certain goals in the environment. For example, when the battery is low, this will trigger “pain” through hunger sensors, so it wants to go to the charging station, without running into obstacles, which will trigger other pain sensors. It will seek to minimize pain (encoded through numbers). Now the robot has a friend, the second network, which is a world model ––it’s a prediction machine that learns to predict the consequences of the robot’s actions. Once the robot has a good model of the world, it can use it for planning. It can be used as a simulation of the real world. And then it can determine what is a good action sequence. If the robot imagines this sequence of actions, the model will predict a lot of pain, which it wants to avoid. If it plays this alternative action sequence in its mental model of the world, then it will predict a rewarding situation where it’s going to sit on the charging station and its battery is going to load again. So, it'll prefer to execute the latter action sequence. In the beginning, however, the model of the world knows nothing, so how can we motivate the first network to generate experiments that lead to data that helps the world model learn something it didn’t already know? That’s what artificial curiosity is about. The dueling two network systems effectively explore uncharted environments by creating experiments so that over time the curious AI gets a better sense of how the environment works. This can be applied to all kinds of environments, and has medical applications. Jones: Let’s talk about the future. You have said, “Traditional humans won’t play a significant role in spreading intelligence across the universe.” Schmidhuber: Let’s first conceptually separate two types of AIs. The first type of AI are tools directed by humans. They are trained to do specific things like accurately detect diabetes or heart disease and prevent attacks before they happen. In these cases, the goal is coming from the human. More interesting AIs are setting their own goals. They are inventing their own experiments and learning from them. Their horizons expand and eventually they become more and more general problem solvers in the real world. They are not controlled by their parents, but much of what they learn is through self-invented experiments. A robot, for example, is rotating a toy, and as it is doing this, the video coming in through the camera eyes, changes over time and it begins to learn how this video changes and learns how the 3D nature of the toy generates certain videos if you rotate it a certain way, and eventually, how gravity works, and how the physics of the world works. Like a little scientist! And I have predicted for decades that future scaled-up versions of such AI scientists will want to further expand their horizons, and eventually go where most of the physical resources are, to build more and bigger AIs. And of course, almost all of these resources are far away from earth out there in space, which is hostile to humans but friendly to appropriately designed AI-controlled robots and self-replicating robot factories. So here we are not talking any longer about our tiny biosphere; no, we are talking about the much bigger rest of the universe. Within a few tens of billions of years, curious self-improving AIs will colonize the visible cosmos in a way that’s infeasible for humans. Those who don’t won’t have an impact. Sounds like science fiction, but since the 1970s I have been unable to see a plausible alternative to this scenario, except for a global catastrophe such as an all-out nuclear war that stops this development before it takes off. Jones: How long have these AIs, which can set their own goals — how long have they existed? To what extent can they be independent of human interaction? Schmidhuber: Neural networks like that have existed for over 30 years. My first simple adversarial neural network system of this kind is the one from 1990 described above. You don’t need a teacher there; it's just a little agent running around in the world and trying to invent new experiments that surprise its own prediction machine. Once it has figured out certain parts of the world, the agent will become bored and will move on to more exciting experiments. The simple 1990 systems I mentioned have certain limitations, but in the past three decades, we have also built more sophisticated systems that are setting their own goals and such systems I think will be essential for achieving true intelligence. If you are only imitating humans, you will never go beyond them. So, you really must give AIs the freedom to explore previously unexplored regions of the world in a way that no human is really predefining. Jones: Where is this being done today? Schmidhuber: Variants of neural network-based artificial curiosity are used today for agents that learn to play video games in a human-competitive way. We have also started to use them for automatic design of experiments in fields such as materials science. I bet many other fields will be affected by it: chemistry, biology, drug design, you name it. However, at least for now, these artificial scientists, as I like to call them, cannot yet compete with human scientists. I don’t think it’s going to stay this way but, at the moment, it’s still the case. Sure, AI has made a lot of progress. Since 1997, there have been superhuman chess players, and since 2011, through the DanNet of my team, there have been superhuman visual pattern recognizers. But there are other things where humans, at the moment at least, are much better, in particular, science itself. In the lab we have many first examples of self-directed artificial scientists, but they are not yet convincing enough to appear on the radar screen of the public space, which is currently much more fascinated with simpler systems that just imitate humans and write texts based on previously seen human-written documents. Jones: You speak of these numerous instances dating back 30 years of these lab experiments where these self-driven agents are deciding and learning and moving on once they’ve learned. And I assume that that rate of learning becomes even faster over time. What kind of timeframe are we talking about when this eventually is taken outside of the lab and embedded into society? Schmidhuber: This could still take months or even years :-) Anyway, in the not-too-distant future, we will probably see artificial scientists who are good at devising experiments that allow them to discover new, previously unknown physical laws. As always, we are going to profit from the old trend that has held at least since 1941: every decade compute is getting 100 times cheaper. Jones: How does this trend affect modern AI such as ChatGPT? Schmidhuber: Perhaps you know that all the recent famous AI applications such as ChatGPT and similar models are largely based on principles of artificial neural networks invented in the previous millennium. The main reason why they works so well now is the incredible acceleration of compute per dollar. ChatGPT is driven by a neural network called “Transformer” described in 2017 by Google. I am happy about that because a quarter century earlier in 1991 I had a particular Transformer variant which is now called the “Transformer with linearized self-attention”. Back then, not much could be done with it, because the compute cost was a million times higher than today. But today, one can train such models on half the internet and achieve much more interesting results. Jones: And for how long will this acceleration continue? Schmidhuber: There's no reason to believe that in the next 30 years, we won't have another factor of 1 million and that's going to be really significant. In the near future, for the first time we will have many not-so expensive devices that can compute as much as a human brain. The physical limits of computation, however, are much further out so even if the trend of a factor of 100 every decade continues, the physical limits (of 1051 elementary instructions per second and kilogram of matter) won’t be hit until, say, the mid-next century. Even in our current century, however, we’ll probably have many machines that compute more than all 10 billion human brains collectively and you can imagine, everything will change then! Jones: That is the big question. Is everything going to change? If so, what do you say to the next generation of leaders, currently coming out of college and university. So much of this change is already impacting how they study, how they will work, or how the future of work and livelihood is defined. What is their purpose and how do we change our systems so they will adapt to this new version of intelligence? Schmidhuber: For decades, people have asked me questions like that, because you know what I'm saying now, I have basically said since the 1970s, it’s just that today, people are paying more attention because, back then, they thought this was science fiction. They didn't think that I would ever come close to achieving my crazy life goal of building a machine that learns to become smarter than myself such that I can retire. But now many have changed their minds and think it's conceivable. And now I have two daughters, 23 and 25. People ask me: what do I tell them? They know that Daddy always said, “It seems likely that within your lifetimes, you will have new types of intelligence that are probably going to be superior in many ways, and probably all kinds of interesting ways.” How should they prepare for that? And I kept telling them the obvious: Learn how to learn new things! It's not like in the previous millennium where within 20 years someone learned to be a useful member of society, and then took a job for 40 years and performed in this job until she received her pension. Now things are changing much faster and we must learn continuously just to keep up. I also told my girls that no matter how smart AIs are going to get, learn at least the basics of math and physics, because that’s the essence of our universe, and anybody who understands this will have an advantage, and learn all kinds of new things more easily. I also told them that social skills will remain important, because most future jobs for humans will continue to involve interactions with other humans, but I couldn’t teach them anything about that; they know much more about social skills than I do. You touched on the big philosophical question about people’s purpose. Can this be answered without answering the even grander question: What’s the purpose of the entire universe? We don’t know. But what’s happening right now might be connected to the unknown answer. Don’t think of humans as the crown of creation. Instead view human civilization as part of a much grander scheme, an important step (but not the last one) on the path of the universe from very simple initial conditions towards more and more unfathomable complexity. Now it seems ready to take its next step, a step comparable to the invention of life itself over 3.5 billion years ago. Alas, don’t worry, in the end, all will be good! Jones: Let’s get back to this transformation happening right now with OpenAI. There are many questioning the efficacy and accuracy of ChatGPT, and are concerned its release has been premature. In light of the rampant adoption, educators have banned its use over concerns of plagiarism and how it stifles individual development. Should large language models like ChatGPT be used in school? Schmidhuber: When the calculator was first introduced, instructors forbade students from using it in school. Today, the consensus is that kids should learn the basic methods of arithmetic, but they should also learn to use the “artificial multipliers” aka calculators, even in exams, because laziness and efficiency is a hallmark of intelligence. Any intelligent being wants to minimize its efforts to achieve things. And that's the reason why we have tools, and why our kids are learning to use these tools. The first stone tools were invented maybe 3.5 million years ago; tools just have become more sophisticated over time. In fact, humans have changed in response to the properties of their tools. Our anatomical evolution was shaped by tools such as spears and fire. So, it's going to continue this way. And there is no permanent way of preventing large language models from being used in school. Jones: And when our children, your children graduate, what does their future work look like? Schmidhuber: A single human trying to predict details of how 10 billion people and their machines will evolve in the future is like a single neuron in my brain trying to predict what the entire brain and its tens of billions of neurons will do next year. 40 years ago, before the WWW was created at CERN in Switzerland, who would have predicted all those young people making money as YouTube video bloggers? Nevertheless, let’s make a few limited job-related observations. For a long time, people have thought that desktop jobs may require more intelligence than skills trade or handicraft professions. But now, it turns out that it's much easier to replace certain aspects of desktop jobs than replacing a carpenter, for example. Because everything that works well in AI is happening behind the screen currently, but not so much in the physical world. There are now artificial systems that can read lots of documents and then make really nice summaries of these documents. That is a desktop job. Or you give them a description of an illustration that you want to have for your article and pretty good illustrations are being generated that may need some minimal fine-tuning. But you know, all these desktop jobs are much easier to facilitate than the real tough jobs in the physical world. And it's interesting that the things people thought required intelligence, like playing chess, or writing or summarizing documents, are much easier for machines than they thought. But for things like playing football or soccer, there is no physical robot that can remotely compete with the abilities of a little boy with these skills. So, AI in the physical world, interestingly, is much harder than AI behind the screen in virtual worlds. And it's really exciting, in my opinion, to see that jobs such as plumbers are much more challenging than playing chess or writing another tabloid story. Jones: The way data has been collected in these large language models does not guarantee personal information has not been excluded. Current consent laws already are outdated when it comes to these large language models (LLM). The concern, rightly so, is increasing surveillance and loss of privacy. What is your view on this? Schmidhuber: As I have indicated earlier: are surveillance and loss of privacy inevitable consequences of increasingly complex societies? Super-organisms such as cities and states and companies consist of numerous people, just like people consist of numerous cells. These cells enjoy little privacy. They are constantly monitored by specialized "police cells" and "border guard cells": Are you a cancer cell? Are you an external intruder, a pathogen? Individual cells sacrifice their freedom for the benefits of being part of a multicellular organism. Similarly, for super-organisms such as nations. Over 5000 years ago, writing enabled recorded history and thus became its inaugural and most important invention. Its initial purpose, however, was to facilitate surveillance, to track citizens and their tax payments. The more complex a super-organism, the more comprehensive its collection of information about its constituents. 200 years ago, at least, the parish priest in each village knew everything about all the village people, even about those who did not confess, because they appeared in the confessions of others. Also, everyone soon knew about the stranger who had entered the village, because some occasionally peered out of the window, and what they saw got around. Such control mechanisms were temporarily lost through anonymization in rapidly growing cities but are now returning with the help of new surveillance devices such as smartphones as part of digital nervous systems that tell companies and governments a lot about billions of users. Cameras and drones etc. are becoming increasingly tinier and more ubiquitous. More effective recognition of faces and other detection technology are becoming cheaper and cheaper, and many will use it to identify others anywhere on earth; the big wide world will not offer any more privacy than the local village. Is this good or bad? Some nations may find it easier than others to justify more complex kinds of super-organisms at the expense of the privacy rights of their constituents. Jones: So, there is no way to stop or change this process of collection, or how it continuously informs decisions over time? How do you see governance and rules responding to this, especially amid Italy’s ban on ChatGPT following suspected user data breach and the more recent news about the Meta’s record $1.3billion fine in the company’s handling of user information? Schmidhuber: Data collection has benefits and drawbacks, such as the loss of privacy. How to balance those? I have argued for addressing this through data ownership in data markets. If it is true that data is the new oil, then it should have a price, just like oil. At the moment, the major surveillance platforms such as Meta do not offer users any money for their data and the transitive loss of privacy. In the future, however, we will likely see attempts at creating efficient data markets to figure out the data's true financial value through the interplay between supply and demand. Even some of the sensitive medical data should not be priced by governmental regulators but by patients (and healthy persons) who own it and who may sell or license parts thereof as micro-entrepreneurs in a healthcare data market. Following a previous interview, I gave for one of the largest re-insurance companies , let's look at the different participants in such a data market: patients, hospitals, data companies. (1) Patients with a rare form of cancer can offer more valuable data than patients with a very common form of cancer. (2) Hospitals and their machines are needed to extract the data, e.g., through magnet spin tomography, radiology, evaluations through human doctors, and so on. (3) Companies such as Siemens, Google or IBM would like to buy annotated data to make better artificial neural networks that learn to predict pathologies and diseases and the consequences of therapies. Now the market’s invisible hand will decide about the data’s price through the interplay between demand and supply. On the demand side, you will have several companies offering something for the data, maybe through an app on the smartphone (a bit like a stock market app). On the supply side, each patient in this market should be able to profit from high prices for rare valuable types of data. Likewise, competing data extractors such as hospitals will profit from gaining recognition and trust for extracting data well at a reasonable price. The market will make the whole system efficient through incentives for all who are doing a good job. Soon there will be a flourishing ecosystem of commercial data market advisors and what not, just like the ecosystem surrounding the traditional stock market. The value of the data won’t be determined by governments or ethics committees, but by those who own the data and decide by themselves which parts thereof they want to license to others under certain conditions. At first glance, a market-based system seems to be detrimental to the interest of certain monopolistic companies, as they would have to pay for the data - some would prefer free data and keep their monopoly. However, since every healthy and sick person in the market would suddenly have an incentive to collect and share their data under self-chosen anonymity conditions, there will soon be many more useful data to evaluate all kinds of treatments. On average, people will live longer and healthier, and many companies and the entire healthcare system will benefit. Jones: Finally, what is your view on open source versus the private companies like Google and OpenAI? Is there a danger to supporting these private companies’ large language models versus trying to keep these models open source and transparent, very much like what LAION is doing? Schmidhuber: I signed this open letter by LAION because I strongly favor the open-source movement. And I think it's also something that is going to challenge whatever big tech dominance there might be at the moment. Sure, the best models today are run by big companies with huge budgets for computers, but the exciting fact is that open-source models are not so far behind, some people say maybe six to eight months only. Of course, the private company models are all based on stuff that was created in academia, often in little labs without so much funding, which publish without patenting their results and open source their code and others take it and improved it. Big tech has profited tremendously from academia; their main achievement being that they have scaled up everything greatly, sometimes even failing to credit the original inventors. So, it's very interesting to see that as soon as some big company comes up with a new scaled-up model, lots of students out there are competing, or collaborating, with each other, trying to come up with equal or better performance on smaller networks and smaller machines. And since they are open sourcing, the next guy can have another great idea to improve it, so now there’s tremendous competition also for the big companies. Because of that, and since AI is still getting exponentially cheaper all the time, I don't believe that big tech companies will dominate in the long run. They find it very hard to compete with the enormous open-source movement. As long as you can encourage the open-source community, I think you shouldn't worry too much. Now, of course, you might say if everything is open source, then the bad actors also will more easily have access to these AI tools. And there's truth to that. But as always since the invention of controlled fire, it was good that knowledge about how technology works quickly became public such that everybody could use it. And then, against any bad actor, there's almost immediately a counter actor trying to nullify his efforts. You see, I still believe in our old motto "AI∀" or "AI For All." Jones: Thank you, Juergen for sharing your perspective on this amazing time in history. It’s clear that with new technology, the enormous potential can be matched by disparate and troubling risks which we’ve yet to solve, and even those we have yet to identify. If we are to dispel the fear of a sentient system for which we have no control, humans, alone need to take steps for more responsible development and collaboration to ensure AI technology is used to ultimately benefit society. Humanity will be judged by what we do next.

[D] Why is the AI Hype Absolutely Bonkers

Edit 2: Both the repo and the post were deleted. Redacting identifying information as the author has appeared to make rectifications, and it’d be pretty damaging if this is what came up when googling their name / GitHub (hopefully they’ve learned a career lesson and can move on). TL;DR: A PhD candidate claimed to have achieved 97% accuracy for coronavirus from chest x-rays. Their post gathered thousands of reactions, and the candidate was quick to recruit branding, marketing, frontend, and backend developers for the project. Heaps of praise all around. He listed himself as a Director of XXXX (redacted), the new name for his project. The accuracy was based on a training dataset of ~30 images of lesion / healthy lungs, sharing of data between test / train / validation, and code to train ResNet50 from a PyTorch tutorial. Nonetheless, thousands of reactions and praise from the “AI | Data Science | Entrepreneur” community. Original Post: I saw this post circulating on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/activity-6645711949554425856-9Dhm Here, a PhD candidate claims to achieve great performance with “ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE” to predict coronavirus, asks for more help, and garners tens of thousands of views. The repo housing this ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE solution already has a backend, front end, branding, a README translated in 6 languages, and a call to spread the word for this wonderful technology. Surely, I thought, this researcher has some great and novel tech for all of this hype? I mean dear god, we have branding, and the author has listed himself as the founder of an organization based on this project. Anything with this much attention, with dozens of “AI | Data Scientist | Entrepreneur” members of LinkedIn praising it, must have some great merit, right? Lo and behold, we have ResNet50, from torchvision.models import resnet50, with its linear layer replaced. We have a training dataset of 30 images. This should’ve taken at MAX 3 hours to put together - 1 hour for following a tutorial, and 2 for obfuscating the training with unnecessary code. I genuinely don’t know what to think other than this is bonkers. I hope I’m wrong, and there’s some secret model this author is hiding? If so, I’ll delete this post, but I looked through the repo and (REPO link redacted) that’s all I could find. I’m at a loss for thoughts. Can someone explain why this stuff trends on LinkedIn, gets thousands of views and reactions, and gets loads of praise from “expert data scientists”? It’s almost offensive to people who are like ... actually working to treat coronavirus and develop real solutions. It also seriously turns me off from pursuing an MS in CV as opposed to CS. Edit: It turns out there were duplicate images between test / val / training, as if ResNet50 on 30 images wasn’t enough already. He’s also posted an update signed as “Director of XXXX (redacted)”. This seems like a straight up sleazy way to capitalize on the pandemic by advertising himself to be the head of a made up organization, pulling resources away from real biomedical researchers.

[N] Last Week in AI News Digest - Automated chemical synthesis, using heartbeats to detect deepfakes, and more!

Hi there, just sharing the latest edition of our AI news digest newsletter! We're just a couple of AI grad students doing this for fun, so hope the self promotion is not too annoying (also, welcome feedback). See it below, and feel free to subscribe. Mini Briefs Robotics, AI, and Cloud Computing Combine to Supercharge Chemical and Drug Synthesis IBM recently demoed a complex system for chemical testing and drug synthesis. The system has an AI component that predicts the results of chemical reactions, and a fully automated robotic experiment setup that runs chemical tests 24/7. Users can access the remote robotics lab online, and IBM can also install the system on-premise. With these tools working together, IBM is hoping to reduce typical drug discovery and verification time by half. AI researchers use heartbeat detection to identify deepfake videos Researchers from multiple groups are tackling the challenge of detecting deepfake videos by analyzing the apparent heartbeat of the people depicted in the video. This is possible, because a person’s blood flow changes their skin color ever so slightly, and this change is often detectable via a process called photoplethysmography (PPG). Because deepfakes are not currently optimizing to generate realisitic heartbeats, temporal or spatial anomalies in PPG signals allow resesarchers to detect deepfakes with a 97% accuracy. Advances & Business This AI Expert From Senegal Is Helping Showcase Africans In STEM \- Adji Bousso Dieng will be Princeton’s School of Engineering’s first Black female faculty. Google’s AI-powered flood alerts now cover all of India and parts of Bangladesh \- India, the world’s second most populated nation, sees more than 20% of the global flood-related fatalities each year as overrun riverbanks sweep tens of thousands of homes with them. Two years ago, Google volunteered to help. Finding magnetic eruptions in space with an AI assistant \- MMS look for explosive reconnection events as it flies through the magnetopause - the boundary region where Earth’s magnetic butts up against the solar wind that flows throughout the solar system. This know-it-all AI learns by reading the entire web nonstop \- Diffbot is building the biggest-ever knowledge graph by applying image recognition and natural-language processing to billions of web pages. Bosch and Ford will test autonomous parking in Detroit \- Ford, Bosch, and Dan Gilbert’s real estate firm Bedrock today detailed an autonomous parking pilot scheduled to launch in September at The Assembly, a mixed-used building in Detroit’s Corktown neighborhood. Create your own moody quarantine music with Google’s AI \- Lo-Fi Player, the latest project out of Google Magenta, lets you mix tunes with the help of machine learning by interacting with a virtual room. Apple launches AI/ML residency program to attract niche experts \- As Apple’s artificial language and machine learning initiatives continue to expand, its interest in attracting talent has grown - a theme that’s barely under the surface of the company’s occasionally updated Machine Learning Research blog. Dusty Robotics CEO Tessa Lau Discusses Robotics Start-Ups and Autonomous Robots for Construction \- Tessa Lau is Founder/CEO at Dusty Robotics, whose mission is to increase construction industry productivity by introducing robotic automation on the jobsite. Concerns & Hype Google Offers to Help Others With the Tricky Ethics of AI \- Companies pay cloud computing providers like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google big money to avoid operating their own digital infrastructure. The Peace Dividends Of The Autonomous Vehicle Wars \- The rapid growth of the mobile market in the late 2000s and early 2010s led to a burst of technological progress. Ethics must be part of the development process’ \- The increasing use of AI (artificial intelligence) in the development of new medical technologies demands greater attention to ethical aspects. Analysis & Policy China’s new AI trade rules could hamper a TikTok sale \- TikTok’s attempt to sell itself and avert a possible US ban may run into some complications. The Wall Street Journal reports that China has unveiled new restrictions on AI technology exports that could affect TikTok. Podcast Check out our weekly podcast covering these stories! Website | RSS | iTunes | Spotify | YouTube

[D] Is the Covid-19 crisis the rock on which the ML hype wave finally crashes?

People have been predicting the end of the ML Hype for a while, but it didn't seem to go away. Andrew Ng's "A.I. is the new electricity" statement looked like it was true, and the number of ML related stuff on resumes, job descriptions and software requirements, not to mention startups, seemed to keep increasing and increasing, and increasing.... Then came a virus, with a billion years of optimization and search efficiency baked into its RNA. Some considerations: Despite all the hype, production grade ML was still a challenge for most companies outside of the big tech shops and some talented startups. With the Covid-19 induced economic meltdown, most companies don't have the money or the resources to fund the projects required to take ML from PoC/Jupyter Notebook status to value generating production applications. Most of the startups that are building ML productionizing tools and platforms will run out of funds, clients, or both. Moreover, the current economic meltdown makes most historical data on business KPIs, Customer behavior, time series forecasting, etc...is no longer useful as training data. The only data sets that are still useful are those for "hard-core" ML problems like computer vision and NLP, for which completely automated APIs have been already developed and Auto-ML works pretty well, so no real ML talent is needed in deploying them. All of this tells me that Q2 2020 will mark the end of the ML and Deep Learning hype, and besides a likely multi-year economic depression in the U.S., we are also headed into another AI winter. I'm not happy about the ML hype dying, it has helped me a lot in my career, and I really really love Deep Learning from a purely conceptual point of view. But one needs to be realistic in such a job market, should we all start reframing our skill sets and our resumes? I'm kind of hoping somebody will prove my above reasoning wrong.

[D] AI regulation: a review of NTIA's "AI Accountability Policy" doc

How will governments respond to the rapid rise of AI? How can sensible regulation keep pace with AI technology? These questions interest many of us! One early US government response has come from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). Specifically, the NTIA published an "AI Accountability Policy Request for Comment" on April 11, 2023. I read the NTIA document carefully, and I'm sharing my observations here for others interested in AI regulation. You can, of course, read the original materials and form your own opinions. Moreover, you can share those opinions not only on this post, but also with the NTIA itself until June 12, 2023. As background, the NTIA (homepage, Wikipedia) consists of a few hundred people within the Department of Commerce. The official mission of the NTIA is "advising the President on telecommunications and information policy issues". Topics covered by NTIA include broadband internet access, spectrum management, internet health, and now artificial intelligence. I do not know whether the NTIA will ultimately drive thinking around AI regulation in the United States or they are just a spunky lot who got something on paper early. The NTIA document is not a specific policy proposal, but rather a thoughtful discussion of AI regulation, followed by a long list of questions on which the NTIA seeks input. This format seems appropriate right now, as we're all trying to make sense of a fast-changing world. The NTIA document leans heavily on two others: the Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights from the White House Office of Science and Technology and the AI Risk Management Framework from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Without going into these two in depth, even tiny snippets convey their differing audiences and flavors: White House Blueprint: "You should be protected from safe and ineffective systems." NIST Framework: "Risk refers to the composite measure of an event’s probability of occurring and the magnitude or degree of the consequences of the corresponding event." Now, turning back to the NTIA document itself, I'll comment on three aspects (1) scope, (2) problems addressed, and (3) solutions contemplated. Scope is critical to understanding the NTIA document, and is probably worth keeping in mind in all near-term discussion of AI regulation. Over the past several years, at least two different technologies have been called "AI". The document mentions both, but the emphasis is NOT on the one you're probably thinking about. In more detail: A few years ago, regulators began scrutinizing "automated decisions systems", which passed as "AI" in those ancient times. An example would be an ML model used by a bank to decide whether or not you get a loan. That model might take in all sorts of information about you, combine it in mysterious ML ways, and reject your loan request. Then you might wonder, "Did that system effectively use my address and name to deduce that I am black and then reject my loan request on the basis of race?" There is some evidence of that happening, and this seems like an injustice. So perhaps such systems should be audited and certified so people know this won't happen. This is the focus of the document. These days, AI more commonly refers to open-ended systems that can engage on a wide range of topics and approximate human intelligence. The document briefly mentions generative AI models, large language models, ChatGPT, and "foundational models" (sic), but this is not the focus. The passing mentions may obscure this, unfortunately. In my opinion, these two notions of "AI" are radically different, and many of the differences matter from a regulatory perspective. Yet NTIA lumps both under a sweeping definition of an "AI system" as "an engineered or machine-based system that can, for a given set of objectives, generate outputs such as predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments." (Hmm, this includes my Magic 8-Ball…) Keep scope in mind as we turn to the next aspect: the problems under discussion. Now, NTIA's goal is to solicit input, so considering a wide range of potential problems associated with AI makes sense. Consistent with that, the document refers to democratic values, civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy. And citing the NIST doc, NTIA vaguely notes "a wide range of potential AI risks". Also, AI systems should be "valid and reliable, safe, secure and resilient, accountable and transparent, explainable and interpretable, privacy-enhanced, and fair with their harmful bias managed". And they should call their mothers \every\ week. (Okay, I made that one up.) A few comments on this formulation of the problem. First, these concerns feel more applicable to older-style AI. This includes automated decisions systems, like for a bank loan or for a prison parole recommendation. Sure, I believe such systems should operate in ways consistent with our consensus societal values, and further regulation may be needed to achieve that. But, hello! There's also another, newer class of AI that poses additional challenges. And I don't see those discussed in the NTIA document. Such challenges might include: People losing jobs because AI takes their work. Ensuring malicious people don't use AI tools to wreak havoc on the world. Sorting out intellectual property issues around AI to ensure both rapid progress in the field and respect for creators' rights. Ensuring laws appropriately assign culpability to humans when AIs cause harm. Planning for an incident analogous to the first internet worm, where an AI goes rogue, wreaks some havoc, and everyone is shocked (before it happens 28,385 more times). Bottom line: when I cntrl-F the doc for "robotic overlords", I get zero hits. ZERO. This is why I now believe scope is so important when considering efforts to regulate AI: are we talking about old-school AI or 2023-era AI or what? Because they are pretty different. The last aspect I'll address is the solutions contemplated. Again, NTIA's goal is to stimulate discussion, not propose something specific. Nevertheless, there is a strong push in one particular direction: unlike, "robotic overlord", the word "audit" appears more than 100 times along with many instances of "assessment" and "certification". On one hand, this approach makes sense. Suppose you want to ensure that a bank loan system is fair, that a social media platform isn't spreading misinformation, that a search engine is returning accurate results, etc. Then someone, somewhere has to assess or audit that system and look for problems. That audit might be done by the creator of the system or a third-party auditing agency. Such audits could be incentivized by mandates, prizes, or shiny gold stars. The government might help by fostering development of auditing tools and data. The NTIA is open to all such possibilities and seeks input on how to proceed. On the other hand, this seems like a tactic best suited to automated decision systems operated by financial institutions, government agencies, and the like. Such formal processes seem a poor fit for the current AI wave. For example: Auditing will take time and money. That's something a bank might pay for a system that will run for years. For something fine-tuned over the weekend at a startup or by some guy living in his mother's basement, that's probably not going to happen. Auditing a straightforward decision system seems far easier than assessing an open-ended AI. Beyond basic practicality, the AI could be taught to lie when it senses an audit. Also, auditing procedures (like the NTIA doc itself) will presumably be online, which means that AIs will read them and could potentially respond. Most current ML models fix parameters after training, but I think we'll soon see some models whose parameters evolve as they engage with the world. Auditing such a system that varies continuously over time seems especially difficult. Auditing a foundation model probably tells you little about derivative models. A sweet-hearted model can surely be made into monster with moderate additional training; you don't need to teach the model new cognitive skills, just repurpose existing ones to new ends. More generally, auditing doesn't address many of my concerns about AI regulation (see list above). For example, auditing sort of assumes a basically responsible actor (bank, government agency, big tech company), but AI could be misused by malicious people who, naturally, will not seek a responsible outside assessment. In any case, for both old-school and modern AI, auditing is only one line of defense, and that's not enough. You can audit until you're blue in the face, stuff will still get through, and AI systems will still cause some harm. So what's the next line of defense? For example, is our legal system ready to sensibly assign culpability to humans for AI-related incidents? In summary, the critical problem with the NTIA document is that it creates a largely false appearance of US government engagement with the new class of AI technology. As a result, people could wrongly believe that the US government is already responding to the rise of AI, and fail to advocate for actual, effective engagement. That said, the NTIA document does address important issues around a prominent technology sometimes (formerly?) called "AI". Even there, however, the proposed approach (auditing) seems like an overly-fragile, single line of defense.

[N] Last Week in AI News Digest - Automated chemical synthesis, using heartbeats to detect deepfakes, and more!

Hi there, just sharing the latest edition of our AI news digest newsletter! We're just a couple of AI grad students doing this for fun, so hope the self promotion is not too annoying (also, welcome feedback). See it below, and feel free to subscribe. Mini Briefs Robotics, AI, and Cloud Computing Combine to Supercharge Chemical and Drug Synthesis IBM recently demoed a complex system for chemical testing and drug synthesis. The system has an AI component that predicts the results of chemical reactions, and a fully automated robotic experiment setup that runs chemical tests 24/7. Users can access the remote robotics lab online, and IBM can also install the system on-premise. With these tools working together, IBM is hoping to reduce typical drug discovery and verification time by half. AI researchers use heartbeat detection to identify deepfake videos Researchers from multiple groups are tackling the challenge of detecting deepfake videos by analyzing the apparent heartbeat of the people depicted in the video. This is possible, because a person’s blood flow changes their skin color ever so slightly, and this change is often detectable via a process called photoplethysmography (PPG). Because deepfakes are not currently optimizing to generate realisitic heartbeats, temporal or spatial anomalies in PPG signals allow resesarchers to detect deepfakes with a 97% accuracy. Advances & Business This AI Expert From Senegal Is Helping Showcase Africans In STEM \- Adji Bousso Dieng will be Princeton’s School of Engineering’s first Black female faculty. Google’s AI-powered flood alerts now cover all of India and parts of Bangladesh \- India, the world’s second most populated nation, sees more than 20% of the global flood-related fatalities each year as overrun riverbanks sweep tens of thousands of homes with them. Two years ago, Google volunteered to help. Finding magnetic eruptions in space with an AI assistant \- MMS look for explosive reconnection events as it flies through the magnetopause - the boundary region where Earth’s magnetic butts up against the solar wind that flows throughout the solar system. This know-it-all AI learns by reading the entire web nonstop \- Diffbot is building the biggest-ever knowledge graph by applying image recognition and natural-language processing to billions of web pages. Bosch and Ford will test autonomous parking in Detroit \- Ford, Bosch, and Dan Gilbert’s real estate firm Bedrock today detailed an autonomous parking pilot scheduled to launch in September at The Assembly, a mixed-used building in Detroit’s Corktown neighborhood. Create your own moody quarantine music with Google’s AI \- Lo-Fi Player, the latest project out of Google Magenta, lets you mix tunes with the help of machine learning by interacting with a virtual room. Apple launches AI/ML residency program to attract niche experts \- As Apple’s artificial language and machine learning initiatives continue to expand, its interest in attracting talent has grown - a theme that’s barely under the surface of the company’s occasionally updated Machine Learning Research blog. Dusty Robotics CEO Tessa Lau Discusses Robotics Start-Ups and Autonomous Robots for Construction \- Tessa Lau is Founder/CEO at Dusty Robotics, whose mission is to increase construction industry productivity by introducing robotic automation on the jobsite. Concerns & Hype Google Offers to Help Others With the Tricky Ethics of AI \- Companies pay cloud computing providers like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google big money to avoid operating their own digital infrastructure. The Peace Dividends Of The Autonomous Vehicle Wars \- The rapid growth of the mobile market in the late 2000s and early 2010s led to a burst of technological progress. Ethics must be part of the development process’ \- The increasing use of AI (artificial intelligence) in the development of new medical technologies demands greater attention to ethical aspects. Analysis & Policy China’s new AI trade rules could hamper a TikTok sale \- TikTok’s attempt to sell itself and avert a possible US ban may run into some complications. The Wall Street Journal reports that China has unveiled new restrictions on AI technology exports that could affect TikTok. Podcast Check out our weekly podcast covering these stories! Website | RSS | iTunes | Spotify | YouTube

Interview with Juergen Schmidhuber, renowned ‘Father Of Modern AI’, says his life’s work won't lead to dystopia.

Schmidhuber interview expressing his views on the future of AI and AGI. Original source. I think the interview is of interest to r/MachineLearning, and presents an alternate view, compared to other influential leaders in AI. Juergen Schmidhuber, Renowned 'Father Of Modern AI,' Says His Life’s Work Won't Lead To Dystopia May 23, 2023. Contributed by Hessie Jones. Amid the growing concern about the impact of more advanced artificial intelligence (AI) technologies on society, there are many in the technology community who fear the implications of the advancements in Generative AI if they go unchecked. Dr. Juergen Schmidhuber, a renowned scientist, artificial intelligence researcher and widely regarded as one of the pioneers in the field, is more optimistic. He declares that many of those who suddenly warn against the dangers of AI are just seeking publicity, exploiting the media’s obsession with killer robots which has attracted more attention than “good AI” for healthcare etc. The potential to revolutionize various industries and improve our lives is clear, as are the equal dangers if bad actors leverage the technology for personal gain. Are we headed towards a dystopian future, or is there reason to be optimistic? I had a chance to sit down with Dr. Juergen Schmidhuber to understand his perspective on this seemingly fast-moving AI-train that will leap us into the future. As a teenager in the 1970s, Juergen Schmidhuber became fascinated with the idea of creating intelligent machines that could learn and improve on their own, becoming smarter than himself within his lifetime. This would ultimately lead to his groundbreaking work in the field of deep learning. In the 1980s, he studied computer science at the Technical University of Munich (TUM), where he earned his diploma in 1987. His thesis was on the ultimate self-improving machines that, not only, learn through some pre-wired human-designed learning algorithm, but also learn and improve the learning algorithm itself. Decades later, this became a hot topic. He also received his Ph.D. at TUM in 1991 for work that laid some of the foundations of modern AI. Schmidhuber is best known for his contributions to the development of recurrent neural networks (RNNs), the most powerful type of artificial neural network that can process sequential data such as speech and natural language. With his students Sepp Hochreiter, Felix Gers, Alex Graves, Daan Wierstra, and others, he published architectures and training algorithms for the long short-term memory (LSTM), a type of RNN that is widely used in natural language processing, speech recognition, video games, robotics, and other applications. LSTM has become the most cited neural network of the 20th century, and Business Week called it "arguably the most commercial AI achievement." Throughout his career, Schmidhuber has received various awards and accolades for his groundbreaking work. In 2013, he was awarded the Helmholtz Prize, which recognizes significant contributions to the field of machine learning. In 2016, he was awarded the IEEE Neural Network Pioneer Award for "pioneering contributions to deep learning and neural networks." The media have often called him the “father of modern AI,” because the most cited neural networks all build on his lab’s work. He is quick to point out, however, that AI history goes back centuries. Despite his many accomplishments, at the age of 60, he feels mounting time pressure towards building an Artificial General Intelligence within his lifetime and remains committed to pushing the boundaries of AI research and development. He is currently director of the KAUST AI Initiative, scientific director of the Swiss AI Lab IDSIA, and co-founder and chief scientist of AI company NNAISENSE, whose motto is "AI∀" which is a math-inspired way of saying "AI For All." He continues to work on cutting-edge AI technologies and applications to improve human health and extend human lives and make lives easier for everyone. The following interview has been edited for clarity. Jones: Thank you Juergen for joining me. You have signed letters warning about AI weapons. But you didn't sign the recent publication, "Pause Gigantic AI Experiments: An Open Letter"? Is there a reason? Schmidhuber: Thank you Hessie. Glad to speak with you. I have realized that many of those who warn in public against the dangers of AI are just seeking publicity. I don't think the latest letter will have any significant impact because many AI researchers, companies, and governments will ignore it completely. The proposal frequently uses the word "we" and refers to "us," the humans. But as I have pointed out many times in the past, there is no "we" that everyone can identify with. Ask 10 different people, and you will hear 10 different opinions about what is "good." Some of those opinions will be completely incompatible with each other. Don't forget the enormous amount of conflict between the many people. The letter also says, "If such a pause cannot be quickly put in place, governments should intervene and impose a moratorium." The problem is that different governments have ALSO different opinions about what is good for them and for others. Great Power A will say, if we don't do it, Great Power B will, perhaps secretly, and gain an advantage over us. The same is true for Great Powers C and D. Jones: Everyone acknowledges this fear surrounding current generative AI technology. Moreover, the existential threat of this technology has been publicly acknowledged by Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI himself, calling for AI regulation. From your perspective, is there an existential threat? Schmidhuber: It is true that AI can be weaponized, and I have no doubt that there will be all kinds of AI arms races, but AI does not introduce a new quality of existential threat. The threat coming from AI weapons seems to pale in comparison to the much older threat from nuclear hydrogen bombs that don’t need AI at all. We should be much more afraid of half-century-old tech in the form of H-bomb rockets. The Tsar Bomba of 1961 had almost 15 times more destructive power than all weapons of WW-II combined. Despite the dramatic nuclear disarmament since the 1980s, there are still more than enough nuclear warheads to wipe out human civilization within two hours, without any AI I’m much more worried about that old existential threat than the rather harmless AI weapons. Jones: I realize that while you compare AI to the threat of nuclear bombs, there is a current danger that a current technology can be put in the hands of humans and enable them to “eventually” exact further harms to individuals of group in a very precise way, like targeted drone attacks. You are giving people a toolset that they've never had before, enabling bad actors, as some have pointed out, to be able to do a lot more than previously because they didn't have this technology. Schmidhuber: Now, all that sounds horrible in principle, but our existing laws are sufficient to deal with these new types of weapons enabled by AI. If you kill someone with a gun, you will go to jail. Same if you kill someone with one of these drones. Law enforcement will get better at understanding new threats and new weapons and will respond with better technology to combat these threats. Enabling drones to target persons from a distance in a way that requires some tracking and some intelligence to perform, which has traditionally been performed by skilled humans, to me, it seems is just an improved version of a traditional weapon, like a gun, which is, you know, a little bit smarter than the old guns. But, in principle, all of that is not a new development. For many centuries, we have had the evolution of better weaponry and deadlier poisons and so on, and law enforcement has evolved their policies to react to these threats over time. So, it's not that we suddenly have a new quality of existential threat and it's much more worrisome than what we have had for about six decades. A large nuclear warhead doesn’t need fancy face recognition to kill an individual. No, it simply wipes out an entire city with ten million inhabitants. Jones: The existential threat that’s implied is the extent to which humans have control over this technology. We see some early cases of opportunism which, as you say, tends to get more media attention than positive breakthroughs. But you’re implying that this will all balance out? Schmidhuber: Historically, we have a long tradition of technological breakthroughs that led to advancements in weapons for the purpose of defense but also for protection. From sticks, to rocks, to axes to gunpowder to cannons to rockets… and now to drones… this has had a drastic influence on human history but what has been consistent throughout history is that those who are using technology to achieve their own ends are themselves, facing the same technology because the opposing side is learning to use it against them. And that's what has been repeated in thousands of years of human history and it will continue. I don't see the new AI arms race as something that is remotely as existential a threat as the good old nuclear warheads. You said something important, in that some people prefer to talk about the downsides rather than the benefits of this technology, but that's misleading, because 95% of all AI research and AI development is about making people happier and advancing human life and health. Jones: Let’s touch on some of those beneficial advances in AI research that have been able to radically change present day methods and achieve breakthroughs. Schmidhuber: All right! For example, eleven years ago, our team with my postdoc Dan Ciresan was the first to win a medical imaging competition through deep learning. We analyzed female breast cells with the objective to determine harmless cells vs. those in the pre-cancer stage. Typically, a trained oncologist needs a long time to make these determinations. Our team, who knew nothing about cancer, were able to train an artificial neural network, which was totally dumb in the beginning, on lots of this kind of data. It was able to outperform all the other methods. Today, this is being used not only for breast cancer, but also for radiology and detecting plaque in arteries, and many other things. Some of the neural networks that we have developed in the last 3 decades are now prevalent across thousands of healthcare applications, detecting Diabetes and Covid-19 and what not. This will eventually permeate across all healthcare. The good consequences of this type of AI are much more important than the click-bait new ways of conducting crimes with AI. Jones: Adoption is a product of reinforced outcomes. The massive scale of adoption either leads us to believe that people have been led astray, or conversely, technology is having a positive effect on people’s lives. Schmidhuber: The latter is the likely case. There's intense commercial pressure towards good AI rather than bad AI because companies want to sell you something, and you are going to buy only stuff you think is going to be good for you. So already just through this simple, commercial pressure, you have a tremendous bias towards good AI rather than bad AI. However, doomsday scenarios like in Schwarzenegger movies grab more attention than documentaries on AI that improve people’s lives. Jones: I would argue that people are drawn to good stories – narratives that contain an adversary and struggle, but in the end, have happy endings. And this is consistent with your comment on human nature and how history, despite its tendency for violence and destruction of humanity, somehow tends to correct itself. Let’s take the example of a technology, which you are aware – GANs – General Adversarial Networks, which today has been used in applications for fake news and disinformation. In actuality, the purpose in the invention of GANs was far from what it is used for today. Schmidhuber: Yes, the name GANs was created in 2014 but we had the basic principle already in the early 1990s. More than 30 years ago, I called it artificial curiosity. It's a very simple way of injecting creativity into a little two network system. This creative AI is not just trying to slavishly imitate humans. Rather, it’s inventing its own goals. Let me explain: You have two networks. One network is producing outputs that could be anything, any action. Then the second network is looking at these actions and it’s trying to predict the consequences of these actions. An action could move a robot, then something happens, and the other network is just trying to predict what will happen. Now we can implement artificial curiosity by reducing the prediction error of the second network, which, at the same time, is the reward of the first network. The first network wants to maximize its reward and so it will invent actions that will lead to situations that will surprise the second network, which it has not yet learned to predict well. In the case where the outputs are fake images, the first network will try to generate images that are good enough to fool the second network, which will attempt to predict the reaction of the environment: fake or real image, and it will try to become better at it. The first network will continue to also improve at generating images whose type the second network will not be able to predict. So, they fight each other. The 2nd network will continue to reduce its prediction error, while the 1st network will attempt to maximize it. Through this zero-sum game the first network gets better and better at producing these convincing fake outputs which look almost realistic. So, once you have an interesting set of images by Vincent Van Gogh, you can generate new images that leverage his style, without the original artist having ever produced the artwork himself. Jones: I see how the Van Gogh example can be applied in an education setting and there are countless examples of artists mimicking styles from famous painters but image generation from this instance that can happen within seconds is quite another feat. And you know this is how GANs has been used. What’s more prevalent today is a socialized enablement of generating images or information to intentionally fool people. It also surfaces new harms that deal with the threat to intellectual property and copyright, where laws have yet to account for. And from your perspective this was not the intention when the model was conceived. What was your motivation in your early conception of what is now GANs? Schmidhuber: My old motivation for GANs was actually very important and it was not to create deepfakes or fake news but to enable AIs to be curious and invent their own goals, to make them explore their environment and make them creative. Suppose you have a robot that executes one action, then something happens, then it executes another action, and so on, because it wants to achieve certain goals in the environment. For example, when the battery is low, this will trigger “pain” through hunger sensors, so it wants to go to the charging station, without running into obstacles, which will trigger other pain sensors. It will seek to minimize pain (encoded through numbers). Now the robot has a friend, the second network, which is a world model ––it’s a prediction machine that learns to predict the consequences of the robot’s actions. Once the robot has a good model of the world, it can use it for planning. It can be used as a simulation of the real world. And then it can determine what is a good action sequence. If the robot imagines this sequence of actions, the model will predict a lot of pain, which it wants to avoid. If it plays this alternative action sequence in its mental model of the world, then it will predict a rewarding situation where it’s going to sit on the charging station and its battery is going to load again. So, it'll prefer to execute the latter action sequence. In the beginning, however, the model of the world knows nothing, so how can we motivate the first network to generate experiments that lead to data that helps the world model learn something it didn’t already know? That’s what artificial curiosity is about. The dueling two network systems effectively explore uncharted environments by creating experiments so that over time the curious AI gets a better sense of how the environment works. This can be applied to all kinds of environments, and has medical applications. Jones: Let’s talk about the future. You have said, “Traditional humans won’t play a significant role in spreading intelligence across the universe.” Schmidhuber: Let’s first conceptually separate two types of AIs. The first type of AI are tools directed by humans. They are trained to do specific things like accurately detect diabetes or heart disease and prevent attacks before they happen. In these cases, the goal is coming from the human. More interesting AIs are setting their own goals. They are inventing their own experiments and learning from them. Their horizons expand and eventually they become more and more general problem solvers in the real world. They are not controlled by their parents, but much of what they learn is through self-invented experiments. A robot, for example, is rotating a toy, and as it is doing this, the video coming in through the camera eyes, changes over time and it begins to learn how this video changes and learns how the 3D nature of the toy generates certain videos if you rotate it a certain way, and eventually, how gravity works, and how the physics of the world works. Like a little scientist! And I have predicted for decades that future scaled-up versions of such AI scientists will want to further expand their horizons, and eventually go where most of the physical resources are, to build more and bigger AIs. And of course, almost all of these resources are far away from earth out there in space, which is hostile to humans but friendly to appropriately designed AI-controlled robots and self-replicating robot factories. So here we are not talking any longer about our tiny biosphere; no, we are talking about the much bigger rest of the universe. Within a few tens of billions of years, curious self-improving AIs will colonize the visible cosmos in a way that’s infeasible for humans. Those who don’t won’t have an impact. Sounds like science fiction, but since the 1970s I have been unable to see a plausible alternative to this scenario, except for a global catastrophe such as an all-out nuclear war that stops this development before it takes off. Jones: How long have these AIs, which can set their own goals — how long have they existed? To what extent can they be independent of human interaction? Schmidhuber: Neural networks like that have existed for over 30 years. My first simple adversarial neural network system of this kind is the one from 1990 described above. You don’t need a teacher there; it's just a little agent running around in the world and trying to invent new experiments that surprise its own prediction machine. Once it has figured out certain parts of the world, the agent will become bored and will move on to more exciting experiments. The simple 1990 systems I mentioned have certain limitations, but in the past three decades, we have also built more sophisticated systems that are setting their own goals and such systems I think will be essential for achieving true intelligence. If you are only imitating humans, you will never go beyond them. So, you really must give AIs the freedom to explore previously unexplored regions of the world in a way that no human is really predefining. Jones: Where is this being done today? Schmidhuber: Variants of neural network-based artificial curiosity are used today for agents that learn to play video games in a human-competitive way. We have also started to use them for automatic design of experiments in fields such as materials science. I bet many other fields will be affected by it: chemistry, biology, drug design, you name it. However, at least for now, these artificial scientists, as I like to call them, cannot yet compete with human scientists. I don’t think it’s going to stay this way but, at the moment, it’s still the case. Sure, AI has made a lot of progress. Since 1997, there have been superhuman chess players, and since 2011, through the DanNet of my team, there have been superhuman visual pattern recognizers. But there are other things where humans, at the moment at least, are much better, in particular, science itself. In the lab we have many first examples of self-directed artificial scientists, but they are not yet convincing enough to appear on the radar screen of the public space, which is currently much more fascinated with simpler systems that just imitate humans and write texts based on previously seen human-written documents. Jones: You speak of these numerous instances dating back 30 years of these lab experiments where these self-driven agents are deciding and learning and moving on once they’ve learned. And I assume that that rate of learning becomes even faster over time. What kind of timeframe are we talking about when this eventually is taken outside of the lab and embedded into society? Schmidhuber: This could still take months or even years :-) Anyway, in the not-too-distant future, we will probably see artificial scientists who are good at devising experiments that allow them to discover new, previously unknown physical laws. As always, we are going to profit from the old trend that has held at least since 1941: every decade compute is getting 100 times cheaper. Jones: How does this trend affect modern AI such as ChatGPT? Schmidhuber: Perhaps you know that all the recent famous AI applications such as ChatGPT and similar models are largely based on principles of artificial neural networks invented in the previous millennium. The main reason why they works so well now is the incredible acceleration of compute per dollar. ChatGPT is driven by a neural network called “Transformer” described in 2017 by Google. I am happy about that because a quarter century earlier in 1991 I had a particular Transformer variant which is now called the “Transformer with linearized self-attention”. Back then, not much could be done with it, because the compute cost was a million times higher than today. But today, one can train such models on half the internet and achieve much more interesting results. Jones: And for how long will this acceleration continue? Schmidhuber: There's no reason to believe that in the next 30 years, we won't have another factor of 1 million and that's going to be really significant. In the near future, for the first time we will have many not-so expensive devices that can compute as much as a human brain. The physical limits of computation, however, are much further out so even if the trend of a factor of 100 every decade continues, the physical limits (of 1051 elementary instructions per second and kilogram of matter) won’t be hit until, say, the mid-next century. Even in our current century, however, we’ll probably have many machines that compute more than all 10 billion human brains collectively and you can imagine, everything will change then! Jones: That is the big question. Is everything going to change? If so, what do you say to the next generation of leaders, currently coming out of college and university. So much of this change is already impacting how they study, how they will work, or how the future of work and livelihood is defined. What is their purpose and how do we change our systems so they will adapt to this new version of intelligence? Schmidhuber: For decades, people have asked me questions like that, because you know what I'm saying now, I have basically said since the 1970s, it’s just that today, people are paying more attention because, back then, they thought this was science fiction. They didn't think that I would ever come close to achieving my crazy life goal of building a machine that learns to become smarter than myself such that I can retire. But now many have changed their minds and think it's conceivable. And now I have two daughters, 23 and 25. People ask me: what do I tell them? They know that Daddy always said, “It seems likely that within your lifetimes, you will have new types of intelligence that are probably going to be superior in many ways, and probably all kinds of interesting ways.” How should they prepare for that? And I kept telling them the obvious: Learn how to learn new things! It's not like in the previous millennium where within 20 years someone learned to be a useful member of society, and then took a job for 40 years and performed in this job until she received her pension. Now things are changing much faster and we must learn continuously just to keep up. I also told my girls that no matter how smart AIs are going to get, learn at least the basics of math and physics, because that’s the essence of our universe, and anybody who understands this will have an advantage, and learn all kinds of new things more easily. I also told them that social skills will remain important, because most future jobs for humans will continue to involve interactions with other humans, but I couldn’t teach them anything about that; they know much more about social skills than I do. You touched on the big philosophical question about people’s purpose. Can this be answered without answering the even grander question: What’s the purpose of the entire universe? We don’t know. But what’s happening right now might be connected to the unknown answer. Don’t think of humans as the crown of creation. Instead view human civilization as part of a much grander scheme, an important step (but not the last one) on the path of the universe from very simple initial conditions towards more and more unfathomable complexity. Now it seems ready to take its next step, a step comparable to the invention of life itself over 3.5 billion years ago. Alas, don’t worry, in the end, all will be good! Jones: Let’s get back to this transformation happening right now with OpenAI. There are many questioning the efficacy and accuracy of ChatGPT, and are concerned its release has been premature. In light of the rampant adoption, educators have banned its use over concerns of plagiarism and how it stifles individual development. Should large language models like ChatGPT be used in school? Schmidhuber: When the calculator was first introduced, instructors forbade students from using it in school. Today, the consensus is that kids should learn the basic methods of arithmetic, but they should also learn to use the “artificial multipliers” aka calculators, even in exams, because laziness and efficiency is a hallmark of intelligence. Any intelligent being wants to minimize its efforts to achieve things. And that's the reason why we have tools, and why our kids are learning to use these tools. The first stone tools were invented maybe 3.5 million years ago; tools just have become more sophisticated over time. In fact, humans have changed in response to the properties of their tools. Our anatomical evolution was shaped by tools such as spears and fire. So, it's going to continue this way. And there is no permanent way of preventing large language models from being used in school. Jones: And when our children, your children graduate, what does their future work look like? Schmidhuber: A single human trying to predict details of how 10 billion people and their machines will evolve in the future is like a single neuron in my brain trying to predict what the entire brain and its tens of billions of neurons will do next year. 40 years ago, before the WWW was created at CERN in Switzerland, who would have predicted all those young people making money as YouTube video bloggers? Nevertheless, let’s make a few limited job-related observations. For a long time, people have thought that desktop jobs may require more intelligence than skills trade or handicraft professions. But now, it turns out that it's much easier to replace certain aspects of desktop jobs than replacing a carpenter, for example. Because everything that works well in AI is happening behind the screen currently, but not so much in the physical world. There are now artificial systems that can read lots of documents and then make really nice summaries of these documents. That is a desktop job. Or you give them a description of an illustration that you want to have for your article and pretty good illustrations are being generated that may need some minimal fine-tuning. But you know, all these desktop jobs are much easier to facilitate than the real tough jobs in the physical world. And it's interesting that the things people thought required intelligence, like playing chess, or writing or summarizing documents, are much easier for machines than they thought. But for things like playing football or soccer, there is no physical robot that can remotely compete with the abilities of a little boy with these skills. So, AI in the physical world, interestingly, is much harder than AI behind the screen in virtual worlds. And it's really exciting, in my opinion, to see that jobs such as plumbers are much more challenging than playing chess or writing another tabloid story. Jones: The way data has been collected in these large language models does not guarantee personal information has not been excluded. Current consent laws already are outdated when it comes to these large language models (LLM). The concern, rightly so, is increasing surveillance and loss of privacy. What is your view on this? Schmidhuber: As I have indicated earlier: are surveillance and loss of privacy inevitable consequences of increasingly complex societies? Super-organisms such as cities and states and companies consist of numerous people, just like people consist of numerous cells. These cells enjoy little privacy. They are constantly monitored by specialized "police cells" and "border guard cells": Are you a cancer cell? Are you an external intruder, a pathogen? Individual cells sacrifice their freedom for the benefits of being part of a multicellular organism. Similarly, for super-organisms such as nations. Over 5000 years ago, writing enabled recorded history and thus became its inaugural and most important invention. Its initial purpose, however, was to facilitate surveillance, to track citizens and their tax payments. The more complex a super-organism, the more comprehensive its collection of information about its constituents. 200 years ago, at least, the parish priest in each village knew everything about all the village people, even about those who did not confess, because they appeared in the confessions of others. Also, everyone soon knew about the stranger who had entered the village, because some occasionally peered out of the window, and what they saw got around. Such control mechanisms were temporarily lost through anonymization in rapidly growing cities but are now returning with the help of new surveillance devices such as smartphones as part of digital nervous systems that tell companies and governments a lot about billions of users. Cameras and drones etc. are becoming increasingly tinier and more ubiquitous. More effective recognition of faces and other detection technology are becoming cheaper and cheaper, and many will use it to identify others anywhere on earth; the big wide world will not offer any more privacy than the local village. Is this good or bad? Some nations may find it easier than others to justify more complex kinds of super-organisms at the expense of the privacy rights of their constituents. Jones: So, there is no way to stop or change this process of collection, or how it continuously informs decisions over time? How do you see governance and rules responding to this, especially amid Italy’s ban on ChatGPT following suspected user data breach and the more recent news about the Meta’s record $1.3billion fine in the company’s handling of user information? Schmidhuber: Data collection has benefits and drawbacks, such as the loss of privacy. How to balance those? I have argued for addressing this through data ownership in data markets. If it is true that data is the new oil, then it should have a price, just like oil. At the moment, the major surveillance platforms such as Meta do not offer users any money for their data and the transitive loss of privacy. In the future, however, we will likely see attempts at creating efficient data markets to figure out the data's true financial value through the interplay between supply and demand. Even some of the sensitive medical data should not be priced by governmental regulators but by patients (and healthy persons) who own it and who may sell or license parts thereof as micro-entrepreneurs in a healthcare data market. Following a previous interview, I gave for one of the largest re-insurance companies , let's look at the different participants in such a data market: patients, hospitals, data companies. (1) Patients with a rare form of cancer can offer more valuable data than patients with a very common form of cancer. (2) Hospitals and their machines are needed to extract the data, e.g., through magnet spin tomography, radiology, evaluations through human doctors, and so on. (3) Companies such as Siemens, Google or IBM would like to buy annotated data to make better artificial neural networks that learn to predict pathologies and diseases and the consequences of therapies. Now the market’s invisible hand will decide about the data’s price through the interplay between demand and supply. On the demand side, you will have several companies offering something for the data, maybe through an app on the smartphone (a bit like a stock market app). On the supply side, each patient in this market should be able to profit from high prices for rare valuable types of data. Likewise, competing data extractors such as hospitals will profit from gaining recognition and trust for extracting data well at a reasonable price. The market will make the whole system efficient through incentives for all who are doing a good job. Soon there will be a flourishing ecosystem of commercial data market advisors and what not, just like the ecosystem surrounding the traditional stock market. The value of the data won’t be determined by governments or ethics committees, but by those who own the data and decide by themselves which parts thereof they want to license to others under certain conditions. At first glance, a market-based system seems to be detrimental to the interest of certain monopolistic companies, as they would have to pay for the data - some would prefer free data and keep their monopoly. However, since every healthy and sick person in the market would suddenly have an incentive to collect and share their data under self-chosen anonymity conditions, there will soon be many more useful data to evaluate all kinds of treatments. On average, people will live longer and healthier, and many companies and the entire healthcare system will benefit. Jones: Finally, what is your view on open source versus the private companies like Google and OpenAI? Is there a danger to supporting these private companies’ large language models versus trying to keep these models open source and transparent, very much like what LAION is doing? Schmidhuber: I signed this open letter by LAION because I strongly favor the open-source movement. And I think it's also something that is going to challenge whatever big tech dominance there might be at the moment. Sure, the best models today are run by big companies with huge budgets for computers, but the exciting fact is that open-source models are not so far behind, some people say maybe six to eight months only. Of course, the private company models are all based on stuff that was created in academia, often in little labs without so much funding, which publish without patenting their results and open source their code and others take it and improved it. Big tech has profited tremendously from academia; their main achievement being that they have scaled up everything greatly, sometimes even failing to credit the original inventors. So, it's very interesting to see that as soon as some big company comes up with a new scaled-up model, lots of students out there are competing, or collaborating, with each other, trying to come up with equal or better performance on smaller networks and smaller machines. And since they are open sourcing, the next guy can have another great idea to improve it, so now there’s tremendous competition also for the big companies. Because of that, and since AI is still getting exponentially cheaper all the time, I don't believe that big tech companies will dominate in the long run. They find it very hard to compete with the enormous open-source movement. As long as you can encourage the open-source community, I think you shouldn't worry too much. Now, of course, you might say if everything is open source, then the bad actors also will more easily have access to these AI tools. And there's truth to that. But as always since the invention of controlled fire, it was good that knowledge about how technology works quickly became public such that everybody could use it. And then, against any bad actor, there's almost immediately a counter actor trying to nullify his efforts. You see, I still believe in our old motto "AI∀" or "AI For All." Jones: Thank you, Juergen for sharing your perspective on this amazing time in history. It’s clear that with new technology, the enormous potential can be matched by disparate and troubling risks which we’ve yet to solve, and even those we have yet to identify. If we are to dispel the fear of a sentient system for which we have no control, humans, alone need to take steps for more responsible development and collaboration to ensure AI technology is used to ultimately benefit society. Humanity will be judged by what we do next.

[N] Inside DeepMind's secret plot to break away from Google

Article https://www.businessinsider.com/deepmind-secret-plot-break-away-from-google-project-watermelon-mario-2021-9 by Hugh Langley and Martin Coulter For a while, some DeepMind employees referred to it as "Watermelon." Later, executives called it "Mario." Both code names meant the same thing: a secret plan to break away from parent company Google. DeepMind feared Google might one day misuse its technology, and executives worked to distance the artificial-intelligence firm from its owner for years, said nine current and former employees who were directly familiar with the plans. This included plans to pursue an independent legal status that would distance the group's work from Google, said the people, who asked not to be identified discussing private matters. One core tension at DeepMind was that it sold the business to people it didn't trust, said one former employee. "Everything that happened since that point has been about them questioning that decision," the person added. Efforts to separate DeepMind from Google ended in April without a deal, The Wall Street Journal reported. The yearslong negotiations, along with recent shake-ups within Google's AI division, raise questions over whether the search giant can maintain control over a technology so crucial to its future. "DeepMind's close partnership with Google and Alphabet since the acquisition has been extraordinarily successful — with their support, we've delivered research breakthroughs that transformed the AI field and are now unlocking some of the biggest questions in science," a DeepMind spokesperson said in a statement. "Over the years, of course we've discussed and explored different structures within the Alphabet group to find the optimal way to support our long-term research mission. We could not be prouder to be delivering on this incredible mission, while continuing to have both operational autonomy and Alphabet's full support." When Google acquired DeepMind in 2014, the deal was seen as a win-win. Google got a leading AI research organization, and DeepMind, in London, won financial backing for its quest to build AI that can learn different tasks the way humans do, known as artificial general intelligence. But tensions soon emerged. Some employees described a cultural conflict between researchers who saw themselves firstly as academics and the sometimes bloated bureaucracy of Google's colossal business. Others said staff were immediately apprehensive about putting DeepMind's work under the control of a tech giant. For a while, some employees were encouraged to communicate using encrypted messaging apps over the fear of Google spying on their work. At one point, DeepMind's executives discovered that work published by Google's internal AI research group resembled some of DeepMind's codebase without citation, one person familiar with the situation said. "That pissed off Demis," the person added, referring to Demis Hassabis, DeepMind's CEO. "That was one reason DeepMind started to get more protective of their code." After Google restructured as Alphabet in 2015 to give riskier projects more freedom, DeepMind's leadership started to pursue a new status as a separate division under Alphabet, with its own profit and loss statement, The Information reported. DeepMind already enjoyed a high level of operational independence inside Alphabet, but the group wanted legal autonomy too. And it worried about the misuse of its technology, particularly if DeepMind were to ever achieve AGI. Internally, people started referring to the plan to gain more autonomy as "Watermelon," two former employees said. The project was later formally named "Mario" among DeepMind's leadership, these people said. "Their perspective is that their technology would be too powerful to be held by a private company, so it needs to be housed in some other legal entity detached from shareholder interest," one former employee who was close to the Alphabet negotiations said. "They framed it as 'this is better for society.'" In 2017, at a company retreat at the Macdonald Aviemore Resort in Scotland, DeepMind's leadership disclosed to employees its plan to separate from Google, two people who were present said. At the time, leadership said internally that the company planned to become a "global interest company," three people familiar with the matter said. The title, not an official legal status, was meant to reflect the worldwide ramifications DeepMind believed its technology would have. Later, in negotiations with Google, DeepMind pursued a status as a company limited by guarantee, a corporate structure without shareholders that is sometimes used by nonprofits. The agreement was that Alphabet would continue to bankroll the firm and would get an exclusive license to its technology, two people involved in the discussions said. There was a condition: Alphabet could not cross certain ethical redlines, such as using DeepMind technology for military weapons or surveillance. In 2019, DeepMind registered a new company called DeepMind Labs Limited, as well as a new holding company, filings with the UK's Companies House showed. This was done in anticipation of a separation from Google, two former employees involved in those registrations said. Negotiations with Google went through peaks and valleys over the years but gained new momentum in 2020, one person said. A senior team inside DeepMind started to hold meetings with outside lawyers and Google to hash out details of what this theoretical new formation might mean for the two companies' relationship, including specifics such as whether they would share a codebase, internal performance metrics, and software expenses, two people said. From the start, DeepMind was thinking about potential ethical dilemmas from its deal with Google. Before the 2014 acquisition closed, both companies signed an "Ethics and Safety Review Agreement" that would prevent Google from taking control of DeepMind's technology, The Economist reported in 2019. Part of the agreement included the creation of an ethics board that would supervise the research. Despite years of internal discussions about who should sit on this board, and vague promises to the press, this group "never existed, never convened, and never solved any ethics issues," one former employee close to those discussions said. A DeepMind spokesperson declined to comment. DeepMind did pursue a different idea: an independent review board to convene if it were to separate from Google, three people familiar with the plans said. The board would be made up of Google and DeepMind executives, as well as third parties. Former US president Barack Obama was someone DeepMind wanted to approach for this board, said one person who saw a shortlist of candidates. DeepMind also created an ethical charter that included bans on using its technology for military weapons or surveillance, as well as a rule that its technology should be used for ways that benefit society. In 2017, DeepMind started a unit focused on AI ethics research composed of employees and external research fellows. Its stated goal was to "pave the way for truly beneficial and responsible AI." A few months later, a controversial contract between Google and the Pentagon was disclosed, causing an internal uproar in which employees accused Google of getting into "the business of war." Google's Pentagon contract, known as Project Maven, "set alarm bells ringing" inside DeepMind, a former employee said. Afterward, Google published a set of principles to govern its work in AI, guidelines that were similar to the ethical charter that DeepMind had already set out internally, rankling some of DeepMind's senior leadership, two former employees said. In April, Hassabis told employees in an all-hands meeting that negotiations to separate from Google had ended. DeepMind would maintain its existing status inside Alphabet. DeepMind's future work would be overseen by Google's Advanced Technology Review Council, which includes two DeepMind executives, Google's AI chief Jeff Dean, and the legal SVP Kent Walker. But the group's yearslong battle to achieve more independence raises questions about its future within Google. Google's commitment to AI research has also come under question, after the company forced out two of its most senior AI ethics researchers. That led to an industry backlash and sowed doubt over whether it could allow truly independent research. Ali Alkhatib, a fellow at the Center for Applied Data Ethics, told Insider that more public accountability was "desperately needed" to regulate the pursuit of AI by large tech companies. For Google, its investment in DeepMind may be starting to pay off. Late last year, DeepMind announced a breakthrough to help scientists better understand the behavior of microscopic proteins, which has the potential to revolutionize drug discovery. As for DeepMind, Hassabis is holding on to the belief that AI technology should not be controlled by a single corporation. Speaking at Tortoise's Responsible AI Forum in June, he proposed a "world institute" of AI. Such a body might sit under the jurisdiction of the United Nations, Hassabis theorized, and could be filled with top researchers in the field. "It's much stronger if you lead by example," he told the audience, "and I hope DeepMind can be part of that role-modeling for the industry."

[D]Why isn't Hugging Face becoming one of the promising (and young) AI chatbot players on the table (like Mistral AI, Anthropic, Perplexity AI, etc)

I rememebered a few years ago people discussing about what HF's business model is or how to profit. I think now is the best time for them, but yet i am a bit suprised they didn't make their own one. They have talents, experiences, resources. Just wonder it.

[D] Elon Musk has a complex relationship with the A.I. community

Update: Yann LeCun stepped in, and I think they made peace, after agreeing on the awesomeness of PyTorch 😂 An article about Elon Musk and the machine learning research community leading to some interesting discussions between the head of Facebook AI research (apparently it is not Yann Lecun anymore, but some other dude), and Elon himself. Quotes from the article: Multiple AI researchers from different companies told CNBC that they see Musk’s AI comments as inappropriate and urged the public not to take his views on AI too seriously. The smartest computers can still only excel at a “narrow” selection of tasks and there’s a long way to go before human-level AI is achieved. “A large proportion of the community think he’s a negative distraction,” said an AI executive with close ties to the community who wished to remain anonymous because their company may work for one of Musk’s businesses. “He is sensationalist, he veers wildly between openly worrying about the downside risk of the technology and then hyping the AGI (artificial general intelligence) agenda. Whilst his very real accomplishments are acknowledged, his loose remarks lead to the general public having an unrealistic understanding of the state of AI maturity.” An AI scientist who specializes in speech recognition and wished to remain anonymous to avoid public backlash said Musk is “not always looked upon favorably” by the AI research community. “I instinctively fall on dislike, because he makes up such nonsense,” said another AI researcher at a U.K university who asked to be kept anonymous. “But then he delivers such extraordinary things. It always leaves me wondering, does he know what he’s doing? Is all the visionary stuff just a trick to get an innovative thing to market?” CNBC reached out to Musk and his representatives for this article but is yet to receive a response. (Well, they got one now! 👇) “I believe a lot of people in the AI community would be ok saying it publicly. Elon Musk has no idea what he is talking about when he talks about AI. There is no such thing as AGI and we are nowhere near matching human intelligence. #noAGI” (Jérôme Pesenti, VP of AI at Facebook) “Facebook sucks” (Elon Musk) Article: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/13/elon-musk-has-a-complex-relationship-with-the-ai-community.html

[D] How Facebook got addicted to spreading misinformation

Behind paywall: With new machine-learning models coming online daily, the company created a new system to track their impact and maximize user engagement. The process is still the same today. Teams train up a new machine-learning model on FBLearner, whether to change the ranking order of posts or to better catch content that violates Facebook’s community standards (its rules on what is and isn’t allowed on the platform). Then they test the new model on a small subset of Facebook’s users to measure how it changes engagement metrics, such as the number of likes, comments, and shares, says Krishna Gade, who served as the engineering manager for news feed from 2016 to 2018. If a model reduces engagement too much, it’s discarded. Otherwise, it’s deployed and continually monitored. On Twitter, Gade explained that his engineers would get notifications every few days when metrics such as likes or comments were down. Then they’d decipher what had caused the problem and whether any models needed retraining. But this approach soon caused issues. The models that maximize engagement also favor controversy, misinformation, and extremism: put simply, people just like outrageous stuff. Sometimes this inflames existing political tensions. The most devastating example to date is the case of Myanmar, where viral fake news and hate speech about the Rohingya Muslim minority escalated the country’s religious conflict into a full-blown genocide. Facebook admitted in 2018, after years of downplaying its role, that it had not done enough “to help prevent our platform from being used to foment division and incite offline violence.” While Facebook may have been oblivious to these consequences in the beginning, it was studying them by 2016. In an internal presentation from that year, reviewed by the Wall Street Journal, a company researcher, Monica Lee, found that Facebook was not only hosting a large number of extremist groups but also promoting them to its users: “64% of all extremist group joins are due to our recommendation tools,” the presentation said, predominantly thanks to the models behind the “Groups You Should Join” and “Discover” features. https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/03/11/1020600/facebook-responsible-ai-misinformation/

[Discussion]: Mark Zuckerberg on Meta's Strategy on Open Source and AI during the earnings call

During the recent earnings call, Mark Zuckerberg answered a question from Eric Sheridan of Goldman Sachs on Meta's AI strategy, opportunities to integrate into products, and why they open source models and how it would benefit their business. I found the reasoning to be very sound and promising for the OSS and AI community. The biggest risk from AI, in my opinion, is not the doomsday scenarios that intuitively come to mind but rather that the most powerful AI systems will only be accessible to the most powerful and resourceful corporations. Quote copied from Ben Thompson's write up on Meta's earning in his Stratechery blog post which goes beyond AI. It's behind a paywall but I highly recommend it personally. Some noteworthy quotes that signal the thought process at Meta FAIR and more broadly We’re just playing a different game on the infrastructure than companies like Google or Microsoft or Amazon We would aspire to and hope to make even more open than that. So, we’ll need to figure out a way to do that. ...lead us to do more work in terms of open sourcing, some of the lower level models and tools Open sourcing low level tools make the way we run all this infrastructure more efficient over time. On PyTorch: It’s generally been very valuable for us to provide that because now all of the best developers across the industry are using tools that we’re also using internally. I would expect us to be pushing and helping to build out an open ecosystem. For all the negative that comes out of the popular discourse on Meta, I think their work to open source key tech tools over the last 10 years has been exceptional, here's hoping it continues into this decade of AI and pushes other tech giants to also realize the benefits of Open Source. Full Transcript: Right now most of the companies that are training large language models have business models that lead them to a closed approach to development. I think there’s an important opportunity to help create an open ecosystem. If we can help be a part of this, then much of the industry will standardize on using these open tools and help improve them further. So this will make it easier for other companies to integrate with our products and platforms as we enable more integrations, and that will help our products stay at the leading edge as well. Our approach to AI and our infrastructure has always been fairly open. We open source many of our state of the art models so people can experiment and build with them. This quarter we released our LLaMa LLM to researchers. It has 65 billion parameters but outperforms larger models and has proven quite popular. We’ve also open-sourced three other groundbreaking visual models along with their training data and model weights — Segment Anything, DinoV2, and our Animated Drawings tool — and we’ve gotten positive feedback on all of those as well. I think that there’s an important distinction between the products we offer and a lot of the technical infrastructure, especially the software that we write to support that. And historically, whether it’s the Open Compute project that we’ve done or just open sourcing a lot of the infrastructure that we’ve built, we’ve historically open sourced a lot of that infrastructure, even though we haven’t open sourced the code for our core products or anything like that. And the reason why I think why we do this is that unlike some of the other companies in the space, we’re not selling a cloud computing service where we try to keep the different software infrastructure that we’re building proprietary. For us, it’s way better if the industry standardizes on the basic tools that we’re using and therefore we can benefit from the improvements that others make and others’ use of those tools can, in some cases like Open Compute, drive down the costs of those things which make our business more efficient too. So I think to some degree we’re just playing a different game on the infrastructure than companies like Google or Microsoft or Amazon, and that creates different incentives for us. So overall, I think that that’s going to lead us to do more work in terms of open sourcing, some of the lower level models and tools. But of course, a lot of the product work itself is going to be specific and integrated with the things that we do. So it’s not that everything we do is going to be open. Obviously, a bunch of this needs to be developed in a way that creates unique value for our products, but I think in terms of the basic models, I would expect us to be pushing and helping to build out an open ecosystem here, which I think is something that’s going to be important. On the AI tools, and we have a bunch of history here, right? So if you if you look at what we’ve done with PyTorch, for example, which has generally become the standard in the industry as a tool that a lot of folks who are building AI models and different things in that space use, it’s generally been very valuable for us to provide that because now all of the best developers across the industry are using tools that we’re also using internally. So the tool chain is the same. So when they create some innovation, we can easily integrate it into the things that we’re doing. When we improve something, it improves other products too. Because it’s integrated with our technology stack, when there are opportunities to make integrations with products, it’s much easier to make sure that developers and other folks are compatible with the things that we need in the way that our systems work. So there are a lot of advantages, but I view this more as a kind of back end infrastructure advantage with potential integrations on the product side, but one that should hopefully enable us to stay at the leading edge and integrate more broadly with the community and also make the way we run all this infrastructure more efficient over time. There are a number of models. I just gave PyTorch as an example. Open Compute is another model that has worked really well for us in this way, both to incorporate both innovation and scale efficiency into our own infrastructure. So I think that there’s, our incentives I think are basically aligned towards moving in this direction. Now that said, there’s a lot to figure out, right? So when you asked if there are going to be other opportunities, I hope so. I can’t speak to what all those things might be now. This is all quite early in getting developed. The better we do at the foundational work, the more opportunities I think that will come and present themselves. So I think that that’s all stuff that we need to figure out. But at least at the base level, I think we’re generally incentivized to move in this direction. And we also need to figure out how to go in that direction over time. I mean, I mentioned LLaMA before and I also want to be clear that while I’m talking about helping contribute to an open ecosystem, LLaMA is a model that we only really made available to researchers and there’s a lot of really good stuff that’s happening there. But a lot of the work that we’re doing, I think, we would aspire to and hope to make even more open than that. So, we’ll need to figure out a way to do that.

[D] A Jobless Rant - ML is a Fool's Gold

Aside from the clickbait title, I am earnestly looking for some advice and discussion from people who are actually employed. That being said, here's my gripe: I have been relentlessly inundated by the words "AI, ML, Big Data" throughout my undergrad from other CS majors, business and sales oriented people, media, and .ai type startups. It seems like everyone was peddling ML as the go to solution, the big money earner, and the future of the field. I've heard college freshman ask stuff like, "if I want to do CS, am I going to need to learn ML to be relevant" - if you're on this sub, I probably do not need to continue to elaborate on just how ridiculous the ML craze is. Every single university has opened up ML departments or programs and are pumping out ML graduates at an unprecedented rate. Surely, there'd be a job market to meet the incredible supply of graduates and cultural interest? Swept up in a mixture of genuine interest and hype, I decided to pursue computer vision. I majored in Math-CS at a top-10 CS university (based on at least one arbitrary ranking). I had three computer vision internships, two at startups, one at NASA JPL, in each doing non-trivial CV work; I (re)implemented and integrated CV systems from mixtures of recently published papers. I have a bunch of projects showing both CV and CS fundamentals (OS, networking, data structures, algorithms, etc) knowledge. I have taken graduate level ML coursework. I was accepted to Carnegie Mellon for an MS in Computer Vision, but I deferred to 2021 - all in all, I worked my ass off to try to simultaneously get a solid background in math AND computer science AND computer vision. That brings me to where I am now, which is unemployed and looking for jobs. Almost every single position I have seen requires a PhD and/or 5+ years of experience, and whatever I have applied for has ghosted me so far. The notion that ML is a high paying in-demand field seems to only be true if your name is Andrej Karpathy - and I'm only sort of joking. It seems like unless you have a PhD from one of the big 4 in CS and multiple publications in top tier journals you're out of luck, or at least vying for one of the few remaining positions at small companies. This seems normalized in ML, but this is not the case for quite literally every other subfield or even generalized CS positions. Getting a high paying job at a Big N company is possible as a new grad with just a bachelors and general SWE knowledge, and there are a plethora of positions elsewhere. Getting the equivalent with basically every specialization, whether operating systems, distributed systems, security, networking, etc, is also possible, and doesn't require 5 CVPR publications. TL;DR From my personal perspective, if you want to do ML because of career prospects, salaries, or job security, pick almost any other CS specialization. In ML, you'll find yourself working 2x as hard through difficult theory and math to find yourself competing with more applicants for fewer positions. I am absolutely complaining and would love to hear a more positive perspective, but in the meanwhile I'll be applying to jobs, working on more post-grad projects, and contemplating switching fields.

[N] Montreal-based Element AI sold for $230-million as founders saw value mostly wiped out

According to Globe and Mail article: Element AI sold for $230-million as founders saw value mostly wiped out, document reveals Montreal startup Element AI Inc. was running out of money and options when it inked a deal last month to sell itself for US$230-milion to Silicon Valley software company ServiceNow Inc., a confidential document obtained by the Globe and Mail reveals. Materials sent to Element AI shareholders Friday reveal that while many of its institutional shareholders will make most if not all of their money back from backing two venture financings, employees will not fare nearly as well. Many have been terminated and had their stock options cancelled. Also losing out are co-founders Jean-François Gagné, the CEO, his wife Anne Martel, the chief administrative officer, chief science officer Nick Chapados and Yoshua Bengio, the University of Montreal professor known as a godfather of “deep learning,” the foundational science behind today’s AI revolution. Between them, they owned 8.8 million common shares, whose value has been wiped out with the takeover, which goes to a shareholder vote Dec 29 with enough investor support already locked up to pass before the takeover goes to a Canadian court to approve a plan of arrangement with ServiceNow. The quartet also owns preferred shares worth less than US$300,000 combined under the terms of the deal. The shareholder document, a management proxy circular, provides a rare look inside efforts by a highly hyped but deeply troubled startup as it struggled to secure financing at the same time as it was failing to live up to its early promises. The circular states the US$230-million purchase price is subject to some adjustments and expenses which could bring the final price down to US$195-million. The sale is a disappointing outcome for a company that burst onto the Canadian tech scene four years ago like few others, promising to deliver AI-powered operational improvements to a range of industries and anchor a thriving domestic AI sector. Element AI became the self-appointed representative of Canada’s AI sector, lobbying politicians and officials and landing numerous photo ops with them, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. It also secured $25-million in federal funding – $20-million of which was committed earlier this year and cancelled by the government with the ServiceNow takeover. Element AI invested heavily in hype and and earned international renown, largely due to its association with Dr. Bengio. It raised US$102-million in venture capital in 2017 just nine months after its founding, an unheard of amount for a new Canadian company, from international backers including Microsoft Corp., Intel Corp., Nvidia Corp., Tencent Holdings Ltd., Fidelity Investments, a Singaporean sovereign wealth fund and venture capital firms. Element AI went on a hiring spree to establish what the founders called “supercredibility,” recruiting top AI talent in Canada and abroad. It opened global offices, including a British operation that did pro bono work to deliver “AI for good,” and its ranks swelled to 500 people. But the swift hiring and attention-seeking were at odds with its success in actually building a software business. Element AI took two years to focus on product development after initially pursuing consulting gigs. It came into 2019 with a plan to bring several AI-based products to market, including a cybersecurity offering for financial institutions and a program to help port operators predict waiting times for truck drivers. It was also quietly shopping itself around. In December 2018, the company asked financial adviser Allen & Co LLC to find a potential buyer, in addition to pursuing a private placement, the circular reveals. But Element AI struggled to advance proofs-of-concept work to marketable products. Several client partnerships faltered in 2019 and 2020. Element did manage to reach terms for a US$151.4-million ($200-million) venture financing in September, 2019 led by the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec and backed by the Quebec government and consulting giant McKinsey and Co. However, the circular reveals the company only received the first tranche of the financing – roughly half of the amount – at the time, and that it had to meet unspecified conditions to get the rest. A fairness opinion by Deloitte commissioned as part of the sale process estimated Element AI’s enterprises value at just US$76-million around the time of the 2019 financing, shrinking to US$45-million this year. “However, the conditions precedent the closing of the second tranche … were not going to be met in a timely manner,” the circular reads. It states “new terms were proposed” for a round of financing that would give incoming investors ranking ahead of others and a cumulative dividend of 12 per cent on invested capital and impose “other operating and governance constraints and limitations on the company.” Management instead decided to pursue a sale, and Allen contacted prospective buyers in June. As talks narrowed this past summer to exclusive negotiations with ServiceNow, “the company’s liquidity was diminishing as sources of capital on acceptable terms were scarce,” the circular reads. By late November, it was generating revenue at an annualized rate of just $10-million to $12-million, Deloitte said. As part of the deal – which will see ServiceNow keep Element AI’s research scientists and patents and effectively abandon its business – the buyer has agreed to pay US$10-million to key employees and consultants including Mr. Gagne and Dr. Bengio as part of a retention plan. The Caisse and Quebec government will get US$35.45-million and US$11.8-million, respectively, roughly the amount they invested in the first tranche of the 2019 financing.

[Discussion] When ML and Data Science are the death of a good company: A cautionary tale.

TD;LR: At Company A, Team X does advanced analytics using on-prem ERP tools and older programming languages. Their tools work very well and are designed based on very deep business and domain expertise. Team Y is a new and ambitious Data Science team that thinks they can replace Team X's tools with a bunch of R scripts and a custom built ML platform. Their models are simplistic, but more "fashionable" compared to the econometric models used by Team X, and team Y benefits from the ML/DS moniker so leadership is allowing Team Y to start a large scale overhaul of the analytics platform in question. Team Y doesn't have the experience for such a larger scale transformation, and is refusing to collaborate with team X. This project is very likely going to fail, and cause serious harm to the company as a whole financially and from a people perspective. I argue that this is not just because of bad leadership, but also because of various trends and mindsets in the DS community at large. Update (Jump to below the line for the original story): Several people in the comments are pointing out that this just a management failure, not something due to ML/DS, and that you can replace DS with any buzz tech and the story will still be relevant. My response: Of course, any failure at an organization level is ultimately a management failure one way or the other. Moreover, it is also the case that ML/DS when done correctly, will always improve a company's bottom line. There is no scenario where the proper ML solution, delivered at a reasonable cost and in a timely fashion, will somehow hurt the company's bottom line. My point is that in this case management is failing because of certain trends and practices that are specific to the ML/DS community, namely: The idea that DS teams should operate independently of tech and business orgs -- too much autonomy for DS teams The disregard for domain knowledge that seems prevalent nowadays thanks to the ML hype, that DS can be generalists and someone with good enough ML chops can solve any business problem. That wasn't the case when I first left academia for the industry in 2009 (back then nobody would even bother with a phone screen if you didn't have the right domain knowledge). Over reliance on resources who check all the ML hype related boxes (knows Python, R, Tensorflow, Shiny, etc..., has the right Coursera certifications, has blogged on the topic, etc...), but are lacking in depth of experience. DS interviews nowadays all seem to be: Can you tell me what a p-value is? What is elastic net regression? Show me how to fit a model in sklearn? How do you impute NAs in an R dataframe? Any smart person can look those up on Stackoverflow or Cross-Validated,.....Instead teams should be asking stuff like: why does portfolio optimization use QP not LP? How does a forecast influence a customer service level? When should a recommendation engine be content based and when should it use collaborative filtering? etc... (This is a true story, happening to the company I currently work for. Names, domains, algorithms, and roles have been shuffled around to protect my anonymity)  Company A has been around for several decades. It is not the biggest name in its domain, but it is a well respected one. Risk analysis and portfolio optimization have been a core of Company A's business since the 90s. They have a large team of 30 or so analysts who perform those tasks on a daily basis. These analysts use ERP solutions implemented for them by one the big ERP companies (SAP, Teradata, Oracle, JD Edwards,...) or one of the major tech consulting companies (Deloitte, Accenture, PWC, Capgemini, etc...) in collaboration with their own in house engineering team. The tools used are embarrassingly old school: Classic RDBMS running on on-prem servers or maybe even on mainframes, code written in COBOL, Fortran, weird proprietary stuff like ABAP or SPSS.....you get the picture. But the models and analytic functions were pretty sophisticated, and surprisingly cutting edge compared to the published academic literature. Most of all, they fit well with the company's enterprise ecosystem, and were honed based on years of deep domain knowledge.  They have a tech team of several engineers (poached from the aforementioned software and consulting companies) and product managers (who came from the experienced pools of analysts and managers who use the software, or poached from business rivals) maintaining and running this software. Their technology might be old school, but collectively, they know the domain and the company's overall architecture very, very well. They've guided the company through several large scale upgrades and migrations and they have a track record of delivering on time, without too much overhead. The few times they've stumbled, they knew how to pick themselves up very quickly. In fact within their industry niche, they have a reputation for their expertise, and have very good relations with the various vendors they've had to deal with. They were the launching pad of several successful ERP consulting careers.  Interestingly, despite dealing on a daily basis with statistical modeling and optimization algorithms, none of the analysts, engineers, or product managers involved describe themselves as data scientists or machine learning experts. It is mostly a cultural thing: Their expertise predates the Data Science/ML hype that started circa 2010, and they got most of their chops using proprietary enterprise tools instead of the open source tools popular nowadays. A few of them have formal statistical training, but most of them came from engineering or domain backgrounds and learned stats on the fly while doing their job. Call this team "Team X".  Sometime around the mid 2010s, Company A started having some serious anxiety issues: Although still doing very well for a company its size, overall economic and demographic trends were shrinking its customer base, and a couple of so called disruptors came up with a new app and business model that started seriously eating into their revenue. A suitable reaction to appease shareholders and Wall Street was necessary. The company already had a decent website and a pretty snazzy app, what more could be done? Leadership decided that it was high time that AI and ML become a core part of the company's business. An ambitious Manager, with no science or engineering background, but who had very briefly toyed with a recommender system a couple of years back, was chosen to build a data science team, call it team "Y" (he had a bachelor's in history from the local state college and worked for several years in the company's marketing org). Team "Y" consists mostly of internal hires who decided they wanted to be data scientists and completed a Coursera certification or a Galvanize boot camp, before being brought on to the team, along with a few of fresh Ph.D or M.Sc holders who didn't like academia and wanted to try their hand at an industry role. All of them were very bright people, they could write great Medium blog posts and give inspiring TED talks, but collectively they had very little real world industry experience. As is the fashion nowadays, this group was made part of a data science org that reported directly to the CEO and Board, bypassing the CIO and any tech or business VPs, since Company A wanted to claim the monikers "data driven" and "AI powered" in their upcoming shareholder meetings. In 3 or 4 years of existence, team Y produced a few Python and R scripts. Their architectural experience  consisted almost entirely in connecting Flask to S3 buckets or Redshift tables, with a couple of the more resourceful ones learning how to plug their models into Tableau or how to spin up a Kuberneties pod.  But they needn't worry: The aforementioned manager, who was now a director (and was also doing an online Masters to make up for his qualifications gap and bolster his chances of becoming VP soon - at least he now understands what L1 regularization is), was a master at playing corporate politics and self-promotion. No matter how few actionable insights team Y produced or how little code they deployed to production, he always had their back and made sure they had ample funding. In fact he now had grandiose plans for setting up an all-purpose machine learning platform that can be used to solve all of the company's data problems.  A couple of sharp minded members of team Y, upon googling their industry name along with the word "data science", realized that risk analysis was a prime candidate for being solved with Bayesian models, and there was already a nifty R package for doing just that, whose tutorial they went through on R-Bloggers.com. One of them had even submitted a Bayesian classifier Kernel for a competition on Kaggle (he was 203rd on the leaderboard), and was eager to put his new-found expertise to use on a real world problem. They pitched the idea to their director, who saw a perfect use case for his upcoming ML platform. They started work on it immediately, without bothering to check whether anybody at Company A was already doing risk analysis. Since their org was independent, they didn't really need to check with anybody else before they got funding for their initiative. Although it was basically a Naive Bayes classifier, the term ML was added to the project tile, to impress the board.  As they progressed with their work however, tensions started to build. They had asked the data warehousing and CA analytics teams to build pipelines for them, and word eventually got out to team X about their project. Team X was initially thrilled: They offered to collaborate whole heartedly, and would have loved to add an ML based feather to their already impressive cap. The product owners and analysts were totally onboard as well: They saw a chance to get in on the whole Data Science hype that they kept hearing about. But through some weird mix of arrogance and insecurity, team Y refused to collaborate with them or share any of their long term goals with them, even as they went to other parts of the company giving brown bag presentations and tutorials on the new model they created.  Team X got resentful: from what they saw of team Y's model, their approach was hopelessly naive and had little chances of scaling or being sustainable in production, and they knew exactly how to help with that. Deploying the model to production would have taken them a few days, given how comfortable they were with DevOps and continuous delivery (team Y had taken several months to figure out how to deploy a simple R script to production). And despite how old school their own tech was, team X were crafty enough to be able to plug it in to their existing architecture. Moreover, the output of the model was such that it didn't take into account how the business will consume it or how it was going to be fed to downstream systems, and the product owners could have gone a long way in making the model more amenable to adoption by the business stakeholders. But team Y wouldn't listen, and their leads brushed off any attempts at communication, let alone collaboration. The vibe that team Y was giving off was "We are the cutting edge ML team, you guys are the legacy server grunts. We don't need your opinion.", and they seemed to have a complete disregard for domain knowledge, or worse, they thought that all that domain knowledge consisted of was being able to grasp the definitions of a few business metrics.  Team X got frustrated and tried to express their concerns to leadership. But despite owning a vital link in Company A's business process, they were only \~50 people in a large 1000 strong technology and operations org, and they were several layers removed from the C-suite, so it was impossible for them to get their voices heard.  Meanwhile, the unstoppable director was doing what he did best: Playing corporate politics. Despite how little his team had actually delivered, he had convinced the board that all analysis and optimization tasks should now be migrated to his yet to be delivered ML platform. Since most leaders now knew that there was overlap between team Y and team X's objectives, his pitch was no longer that team Y was going to create a new insight, but that they were going to replace (or modernize) the legacy statistics based on-prem tools with more accurate cloud based ML tools. Never mind that there was no support in the academic literature for the idea that Naive Bayes works better than the Econometric approaches used by team X, let alone the additional wacky idea that Bayesian Optimization would definitely outperform the QP solvers that were running in production.  Unbeknownst to team X, the original Bayesian risk analysis project has now grown into a multimillion dollar major overhaul initiative, which included the eventual replacement of all of the tools and functions supported by team X along with the necessary migration to the cloud. The CIO and a couple of business VPs are on now board, and tech leadership is treating it as a done deal. An outside vendor, a startup who nobody had heard of, was contracted to help build the platform, since team Y has no engineering skills. The choice was deliberate, as calling on any of the established consulting or software companies would have eventually led leadership to the conclusion that team X was better suited for a transformation on this scale than team Y.  Team Y has no experience with any major ERP deployments, and no domain knowledge, yet they are being tasked with fundamentally changing the business process that is at the core of Company A's business. Their models actually perform worse than those deployed by team X, and their architecture is hopelessly simplistic, compared to what is necessary for running such a solution in production.  Ironically, using Bayesian thinking and based on all the evidence, the likelihood that team Y succeeds is close to 0%. At best, the project is going to end up being a write off of 50 million dollars or more. Once the !@#$!@hits the fan, a couple of executive heads are going to role, and dozens of people will get laid off. At worst, given how vital risk analysis and portfolio optimization is to Company A's revenue stream, the failure will eventually sink the whole company. It probably won't go bankrupt, but it will lose a significant portion of its business and work force. Failed ERP implementations can and do sink large companies: Just see what happened to National Grid US, SuperValu or Target Canada.  One might argue that this is more about corporate disfunction and bad leadership than about data science and AI. But I disagree. I think the core driver of this debacle is indeed the blind faith in Data Scientists, ML models and the promise of AI, and the overall culture of hype and self promotion that is very common among the ML crowd.  We haven't seen the end of this story: I sincerely hope that this ends well for the sake of my colleagues and all involved. Company A is a good company, and both its customers and its employees deserver better. But the chances of that happening are negligible given all the information available, and this failure will hit my company hard.

[N] How Verizon Uses AI For Enhanced Business Decisions with Anil Kumar, Executive Director – Head of AI Industrialization at Verizon - Thursday, December 2, 2021 at 11:30 AM ET

Hi r/MachineLearning! I wanted to share this free webinar with you all. Below are the details from the event website: Featured Speaker: Anil Kumar, Executive Director, Head of AI Industrialization at Verizon. As companies are looking to leverage cognitive technology, and deploying machine learning models, organizations need to make sure they have the correct people, processes, and technology in place to succeed. In this presentation, Anil will share what AI industrialization is and how Verizon is moving from pockets of AI/ML to AI/ML being implemented across the organization. He will also share some of the unique opportunities and challenges that adopting AI across an organization as large as Verizon presents. Agenda: 11:30-12:30pm: Featured Presentation 12:30-13:00pm: Your Q&A and interaction Link for free registration: https://events.cognilytica.com/CLNTQwMHwyNA

[D] LLMs causing more harm than good for the field?

This post might be a bit ranty, but i feel more and more share this sentiment with me as of late. If you bother to read this whole post feel free to share how you feel about this. When OpenAI put the knowledge of AI in the everyday household, I was at first optimistic about it. In smaller countries outside the US, companies were very hesitant before about AI, they thought it felt far away and something only big FANG companies were able to do. Now? Its much better. Everyone is interested in it and wants to know how they can use AI in their business. Which is great! Pre-ChatGPT-times, when people asked me what i worked with and i responded "Machine Learning/AI" they had no clue and pretty much no further interest (Unless they were a tech-person) Post-ChatGPT-times, when I get asked the same questions I get "Oh, you do that thing with the chatbots?" Its a step in the right direction, I guess. I don't really have that much interest in LLMs and have the privilege to work exclusively on vision related tasks unlike some other people who have had to pivot to working full time with LLMs. However, right now I think its almost doing more harm to the field than good. Let me share some of my observations, but before that I want to highlight I'm in no way trying to gatekeep the field of AI in any way. I've gotten job offers to be "ChatGPT expert", What does that even mean? I strongly believe that jobs like these don't really fill a real function and is more of a "hypetrain"-job than a job that fills any function at all. Over the past years I've been going to some conferences around Europe, one being last week, which has usually been great with good technological depth and a place for Data-scientists/ML Engineers to network, share ideas and collaborate. However, now the talks, the depth, the networking has all changed drastically. No longer is it new and exiting ways companies are using AI to do cool things and push the envelope, its all GANs and LLMs with surface level knowledge. The few "old-school" type talks being sent off to a 2nd track in a small room The panel discussions are filled with philosophists with no fundamental knowledge of AI talking about if LLMs will become sentient or not. The spaces for data-scientists/ML engineers are quickly dissapearing outside the academic conferences, being pushed out by the current hypetrain. The hypetrain evangelists also promise miracles and gold with LLMs and GANs, miracles that they will never live up to. When the investors realize that the LLMs cant live up to these miracles they will instantly get more hesitant with funding for future projects within AI, sending us back into an AI-winter once again. EDIT: P.S. I've also seen more people on this reddit appearing claiming to be "Generative AI experts". But when delving deeper it turns out they are just "good prompters" and have no real knowledge, expertice or interest in the actual field of AI or Generative AI.

[D] Overwhelmed by fast advances in recent weeks

I was watching the GTC keynote and became entirely overwhelmed by the amount of progress achieved from last year. I'm wondering how everyone else feels. &#x200B; Firstly, the entire ChatGPT, GPT-3/GPT-4 chaos has been going on for a few weeks, with everyone scrambling left and right to integrate chatbots into their apps, products, websites. Twitter is flooded with new product ideas, how to speed up the process from idea to product, countless promp engineering blogs, tips, tricks, paid courses. &#x200B; Not only was ChatGPT disruptive, but a few days later, Microsoft and Google also released their models and integrated them into their search engines. Microsoft also integrated its LLM into its Office suite. It all happenned overnight. I understand that they've started integrating them along the way, but still, it seems like it hapenned way too fast. This tweet encompases the past few weeks perfectly https://twitter.com/AlphaSignalAI/status/1638235815137386508 , on a random Tuesday countless products are released that seem revolutionary. &#x200B; In addition to the language models, there are also the generative art models that have been slowly rising in mainstream recognition. Now Midjourney AI is known by a lot of people who are not even remotely connected to the AI space. &#x200B; For the past few weeks, reading Twitter, I've felt completely overwhelmed, as if the entire AI space is moving beyond at lightning speed, whilst around me we're just slowly training models, adding some data, and not seeing much improvement, being stuck on coming up with "new ideas, that set us apart". &#x200B; Watching the GTC keynote from NVIDIA I was again, completely overwhelmed by how much is being developed throughout all the different domains. The ASML EUV (microchip making system) was incredible, I have no idea how it does lithography and to me it still seems like magic. The Grace CPU with 2 dies (although I think Apple was the first to do it?) and 100 GB RAM, all in a small form factor. There were a lot more different hardware servers that I just blanked out at some point. The omniverse sim engine looks incredible, almost real life (I wonder how much of a domain shift there is between real and sim considering how real the sim looks). Beyond it being cool and usable to train on synthetic data, the car manufacturers use it to optimize their pipelines. This change in perspective, of using these tools for other goals than those they were designed for I find the most interesting. &#x200B; The hardware part may be old news, as I don't really follow it, however the software part is just as incredible. NVIDIA AI foundations (language, image, biology models), just packaging everything together like a sandwich. Getty, Shutterstock and Adobe will use the generative models to create images. Again, already these huge juggernauts are already integrated. &#x200B; I can't believe the point where we're at. We can use AI to write code, create art, create audiobooks using Britney Spear's voice, create an interactive chatbot to converse with books, create 3D real-time avatars, generate new proteins (?i'm lost on this one), create an anime and countless other scenarios. Sure, they're not perfect, but the fact that we can do all that in the first place is amazing. &#x200B; As Huang said in his keynote, companies want to develop "disruptive products and business models". I feel like this is what I've seen lately. Everyone wants to be the one that does something first, just throwing anything and everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. &#x200B; In conclusion, I'm feeling like the world is moving so fast around me whilst I'm standing still. I want to not read anything anymore and just wait until everything dies down abit, just so I can get my bearings. However, I think this is unfeasible. I fear we'll keep going in a frenzy until we just burn ourselves at some point. &#x200B; How are you all fairing? How do you feel about this frenzy in the AI space? What are you the most excited about?

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup

forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/03/29/how-stability-ais-founder-tanked-his-billion-dollar-startup/ archive no paywall: https://archive.is/snbeV How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup Mar 29, 2024 Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque took the stage last week at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California to roaring applause and an introduction from an AI-generated Aristotle who announced him as “a modern Prometheus” with “the astuteness of Athena and the vision of Daedalus.” “Under his stewardship, AI becomes the Herculean force poised to vanquish the twin serpents of illness and ailment and extend the olive branch of longevity,” the faux Aristotle proclaimed. “I think that’s the best intro I’ve ever had,” Mostaque said. But behind Mostaque's hagiographic introduction lay a grim and fast metastasizing truth. Stability, once one of AI’s buzziest startups, was floundering. It had been running out of money for months and Mostaque had been unable to secure enough additional funding. It had defaulted on payments to Amazon whose cloud service undergirded Stability’s core offerings. The star research team behind its flagship text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion had tendered their resignations just three days before — as Forbes would first report — and other senior leaders had issued him an ultimatum: resign, or we walk too. Still, onstage before a massive audience of peers and acolytes, Mostaque talked a big game. “AI is jet planes for the mind,” he opined. “AI is our collective intelligence. It's the human Colossus.” He claimed a new, faster version of the Stable Diffusion image generator released earlier this month could generate “200 cats with hats per second.” But later, when he was asked about Stability’s financial model, Mostaque fumbled. “I can’t say that publicly,” he replied. “But it’s going well. We’re ahead of forecast.” Four days later, Mostaque stepped down as CEO of Stability, as Forbes first reported. In a post to X, the service formerly known as Twitter, he claimed he’d voluntarily abdicated his role to decentralize “the concentration of power in AI.” But sources told Forbes that was hardly the case. Behind the scenes, Mostaque had fought to maintain his position and control despite mounting pressure externally and internally to step down. Company documents and interviews with 32 current and former employees, investors, collaborators and industry observers suggest his abrupt exit was the result of poor business judgment and wild overspending that undermined confidence in his vision and leadership, and ultimately kneecapped the company. Mostaque, through his attorneys, declined to comment on record on a detailed list of questions about the reporting in this story. But in an email to Forbes earlier this week he broadly disputed the allegations. “Nobody tells you how hard it is to be a CEO and there are better CEOs than me to scale a business,” he said in a statement. “I am not sure anyone else would have been able to build and grow the research team to build the best and most widely used models out there and I’m very proud of the team there. I look forward to moving onto the next problem to handle and hopefully move the needle.” In an emailed statement, Christian Laforte and Shan Shan Wong, the interim co-CEOs who replaced Mostaque, said, "the company remains focused on commercializing its world leading technology” and providing it “to partners across the creative industries." After starting Stability in 2019, Mostaque built the company into an early AI juggernaut by seizing upon a promising research project that would become Stable Diffusion and funding it into a business reality. The ease with which the software generated detailed images from the simplest text prompts immediately captivated the public: 10 million people used it on any given day, the company told Forbes in early 2023. For some true believers, Mostaque was a crucial advocate for open-source AI development in a space dominated by the closed systems of OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. But his startup’s rise to one of the buzziest in generative AI was in part built on a series of exaggerations and misleading claims, as Forbes first reported last year (Mostaque disputed some points at the time). And they continued after he raised $100 million at a $1 billion valuation just days after launching Stable Diffusion in 2022. His failure to deliver on an array of grand promises, like building bespoke AI models for nation states, and his decision to pour tens of millions into research without a sustainable business plan, eroded Stability’s foundations and jeopardized its future. "He was just giving shit away,” one former employee told Forbes. “That man legitimately wanted to transform the world. He actually wanted to train AI models for kids in Malawi. Was it practical? Absolutely not." By October 2023, Stability would have less than $4 million left in the bank, according to an internal memo prepared for a board meeting and reviewed by Forbes. And mounting debt, including months of overdue Amazon Web Services payments, had already left it in the red. To avoid legal penalties for skipping Americans staff’s payroll, the document explained, the London-based startup was considering delaying tax payments to the U.K. government. It was Stability’s armada of GPUs, the wildly powerful and equally expensive chips undergirding AI, that were so taxing the company’s finances. Hosted by AWS, they had long been one of Mostaque’s bragging points; he often touted them as one of the world’s 10 largest supercomputers. They were responsible for helping Stability’s researchers build and maintain one of the top AI image generators, as well as break important new ground on generative audio, video and 3D models. “Undeniably, Stability has continued to ship a lot of models,” said one former employee. “They may not have profited off of it, but the broader ecosystem benefitted in a huge, huge way.” But the costs associated with so much compute were now threatening to sink the company. According to an internal October financial forecast seen by Forbes, Stability was on track to spend $99 million on compute in 2023. It noted as well that Stability was “underpaying AWS bills for July (by $1M)” and “not planning to pay AWS at the end of October for August usage ($7M).” Then there were the September and October bills, plus $1 million owed to Google Cloud and $600,000 to GPU cloud data center CoreWeave. (Amazon, Google and CoreWeave declined to comment.) With an additional $54 million allocated to wages and operating expenses, Stability’s total projected costs for 2023 were $153 million. But according to its October financial report, its projected revenue for the calendar year was just $11 million. Stability was on track to lose more money per month than it made in an entire year. The company’s dire financial position had thoroughly soured Stability’s current investors, including Coatue, which had invested tens of millions in the company during its $101 million funding round in 2022. In the middle of 2023, Mostaque agreed to an independent audit after Coatue raised a series of concerns, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The outcome of the investigation is unclear. Coatue declined to comment. Within a week of an early October board meeting where Mostaque shared that financial forecast, Lightspeed Venture Partners, another major investor, sent a letter to the board urging them to sell the company. The distressing numbers had “severely undermined” the firm’s confidence in Mostaque’s ability to lead the company. “In particular, we are surprised and deeply concerned by a cash position just now disclosed to us that is inconsistent with prior discussions on this topic,” Lightspeed’s general counsel Brett Nissenberg wrote in the letter, a copy of which was viewed by Forbes. “Lightspeed believes that the company is not likely financeable on terms that would assure the company’s long term sound financial position.” (Lightspeed declined a request for comment.) The calls for a sale led Stability to quietly begin looking for a buyer. Bloomberg reported in November that Stability approached AI startups Cohere and Jasper to gauge their interest. Stability denied this, and Jasper CEO Timothy Young did the same when reached for comment by Forbes. A Cohere representative declined to comment. But one prominent AI company confirmed that Mostaque’s representatives had reached out to them to test the waters. Those talks did not advance because “the numbers didn’t add up,” this person, who declined to be named due to the confidential nature of the talks, told Forbes. Stability also tried to court Samsung as a buyer, going so far as to redecorate its office in advance of a planned meeting with the Korean electronics giant. (Samsung said that it invested in Stability in 2023 and that it does not comment on M&A discussions.) Coatue had been calling for Mostaque’s resignation for months, according to a source with direct knowledge. But it and other investors were unable to oust him because he was the company’s majority shareholder. When they tried a different tact by rallying other investors to offer him a juicy equity package to resign, Mostaque refused, said two sources. By October, Coatue and Lightspeed had had enough. Coatue left the board and Lightspeed resigned its observer seat. “Emad infuriated our initial investors so much it’s just making it impossible for us to raise more money under acceptable terms,” one current Stability executive told Forbes. The early months of 2024 saw Stability’s already precarious position eroding further still. Employees were quietly laid off. Three people in a position to know estimated that at least 10% of staff were cut. And cash reserves continued to dwindle. Mostaque mentioned a lifeline at the October board meeting: $95 million in tentative funding from new investors, pending due diligence. But in the end, only a fraction of it was wired, two sources say, much of it from Intel, which Forbes has learned invested $20 million, a fraction of what was reported. (Intel did not return a request for comment by publication time.) Two hours after Forbes broke the news of Mostaque’s plans to step down as CEO, Stability issued a press release confirming his resignation. Chief operating officer Wong and chief technology officer Laforte have taken over in the interim. Mostaque, who said on X that he still owns a majority of the company, also stepped down from the board, which has now initiated a search for a permanent CEO. There is a lot of work to be done to turn things around, and very little time in which to do it. Said the current Stability executive, “There’s still a possibility of a turnaround story, but the odds drop by the day.” In July of 2023, Mostaque still thought he could pull it off. Halfway through the month, he shared a fundraising plan with his lieutenants. It was wildly optimistic, detailing the raise of $500 million in cash and another $750 million in computing facilities from marquee investors like Nvidia, Google, Intel and the World Bank (Nvidia and Google declined comment. Intel did not respond. The World Bank said it did not invest in Stability). In a Slack message reviewed by Forbes, Mostaque said Google was “willing to move fast” and the round was “likely to be oversubscribed.” It wasn’t. Three people with direct knowledge of these fundraising efforts told Forbes that while there was some interest in Stability, talks often stalled when it came time to disclose financials. Two of them noted that earlier in the year, Mostaque had simply stopped engaging with VCs who asked for numbers. Only one firm invested around that time: actor Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, which invested $35 million in the form of a convertible SAFE note during the second quarter, according to an internal document. (Sound Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.) And though he’d managed to score a meeting with Nvidia and its CEO Jensen Huang, it ended in disaster, according to two sources. “Under Jensen's microscopic questions, Emad just fell apart,” a source in position to know told Forbes. Huang quickly concluded Stability wasn’t ready for an investment from Nvidia, the sources said. Mostaque told Forbes in an email that he had not met with Huang since 2022, except to say “hello and what’s up a few times after.” His July 2023 message references a plan to raise $150 million from Nvidia. (Nvidia declined to comment.) After a June Forbes investigation citing more than 30 sources revealed Mostaque’s history of misleading claims, Mostaque struggled to raise funding, a Stability investor told Forbes. (Mostaque disputed the story at the time and called it "coordinated lies" in his email this week to Forbes). Increasingly, investors scrutinized his assertions and pressed for data. And Young, now the CEO of Jasper, turned down a verbal offer to be Stability’s president after reading the article, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The collapse of the talks aggravated the board and other executives, who had hoped Young would compensate for the sales and business management skills that Mostaque lacked, according to four people in a position to know. (Young declined to comment.) When Stability’s senior leadership convened in London for the CogX conference in September, the financing had still not closed. There, a group of executives confronted Mostaque asking questions about the company’s cash position and runway, according to three people with direct knowledge of the incident. They did not get the clarity they’d hoped for. By October, Mostaque had reduced his fundraising target by more than 80%. The months that followed saw a steady drumbeat of departures — general counsel Adam Avrunin, vice presidents Mike Melnicki, Ed Newton-Rex and Joe Penna, chief people officer Ozden Onder — culminating in the demoralizing March exit of Stable Diffusion’s primary developers Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz. Rombach, who led the team, had been angling to leave for months, two sources said, first threatening to resign last summer because of the fundraising failures. Others left over concerns about cash flow, as well as liabilities — including what four people described as Mostaque’s lax approach to ensuring that Stability products could not be used to produce child sexual abuse imagery. “Stability AI is committed to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibits the use of our image models and services for unlawful activity, including attempts to edit or create CSAM,” Ella Irwin, senior vice president of integrity, said in a statement. Newton-Rex told Forbes he resigned because he disagreed with Stability’s position that training AI on copyrighted work without consent is fair use. Melnicki and Penna declined to comment. Avrunin and Onder could not be reached for comment. None of the researchers responded to requests for comment. The Stable Diffusion researchers’ departure as a cohort says a lot about the state of Stability AI. The company’s researchers were widely viewed as its crown jewels, their work subsidized with a firehose of pricey compute power that was even extended to people outside the company. Martino Russi, an artificial intelligence researcher, told Forbes that though he was never formally employed by Stability, the company provided him a “staggering” amount of compute between January and April 2023 to play around with developing an AI video generator that Stability might someday use. “It was Candy Land or Coney Island,” said Russi, who estimates that his experiment, which was ultimately shelved, cost the company $2.5 million. Stable Diffusion was simultaneously Stability’s marquee product and its existential cash crisis. One current employee described it to Forbes as “a giant vacuum that absorbed everything: money, compute, people.” While the software was widely used, with Mostaque claiming downloads reaching into the hundreds of millions, Stability struggled to translate that wild success into revenue. Mostaque knew it could be done — peers at Databricks, Elastic and MongoDB had all turned a free product into a lucrative business — he just couldn’t figure out how. His first attempt was Stability’s API, which allowed paying customers to integrate Stable Diffusion into their own products. In early 2023, a handful of small companies, like art generator app NightCafe and presentation software startup Tome, signed on, according to four people with knowledge of the deals. But Stability’s poor account management services soured many, and in a matter of months NightCafe and Tome canceled their contracts, three people said. NightCafe founder Angus Russell told Forbes that his company switched to a competitor which “offered much cheaper inference costs and a broader service.” Tome did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, Mostaque’s efforts to court larger companies like Samsung and Snapchat were failing, according to five people familiar with the effort. Canva, which was already one of the heaviest users of open-sourced Stable Diffusion, had multiple discussions with Stability, which was angling for a contract it hoped would generate several millions in annual revenue. But the deal never materialized, four sources said. “These three companies wanted and needed us,” one former employee told Forbes. “They would have been the perfect customers.” (Samsung, Snap and Canva declined to comment.) “It’s not that there was not an appetite to pay Stability — there were tons of companies that would have that wanted to,” the former employee said. “There was a huge opportunity and demand, but just a resistance to execution.” Mostaque’s other big idea was to provide governments with bespoke national AI models that would invigorate their economies and citizenry. “Emad envisions a world where AI through 100 national models serves not as a tool of the few, but as a benefactor to all promising to confront great adversaries, cancer, autism, and the sands of time itself,” the AI avatar of Aristotle said in his intro at the conference. Mostaque told several prospective customers that he could deliver such models within 60 days — an untenable timeline, according to two people in position to know. Stability attempted to develop a model for the Singaporean government over the protestation of employees who questioned its technical feasibility, three sources familiar with the effort told Forbes. But it couldn’t pull it off and Singapore never became a customer. (The government of Singapore confirmed it did not enter into a deal with Stability, but declined to answer additional questions.) As Stability careened from one new business idea to another, resources were abruptly reallocated and researchers reassigned. The whiplash shifts in a largely siloed organization demoralized and infuriated employees. “There were ‘urgent’ things, ‘urgent urgent’ things and ‘most urgent,’” one former employee complained. “None of these things seem important if everything is important.” Another former Stability executive was far more pointed in their assessment. “Emad is the most disorganized leader I have ever worked with in my career,” this person told Forbes. “He has no vision, and changes directions every week, often based on what he sees on Twitter.” In a video interview posted shortly before this story was published, Mostaque explained his leadership style: “I'm particularly great at taking creatives, developers, researchers, others, and achieving their full potential in designing systems. But I should not be dealing with, you know, HR and operations and business development and other elements. There are far better people than me to do that.” By December 2023, Stability had partially abandoned its open-source roots and announced that any commercial use of Stable Diffusion would cost customers at least $20 per month (non-commercial and research use of Stable Diffusion would remain free). But privately, Stability was considering a potentially more lucrative source of revenue: reselling the compute it was leasing from providers like AWS, according to six people familiar with the effort. Though it was essentially GPU arbitrage, Stability framed the strategy to investors as a “managed services” offering. Its damning October financial report projected optimistically that such an offering would bring in $139 million in 2024 — 98% of its revenue. Multiple employees at the time told Forbes they feared reselling compute, even if the company called it “managed services,” would violate the terms of Stability’s contract with AWS. Amazon declined to comment. “The line internally was that we are not reselling compute,” one former employee said. “This was some of the dirtiest feeling stuff.” Stability also discussed reselling a cluster of Nvidia A100 chips, leased via CoreWeave, to the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, three sources said. “It was under the guise of managed services, but there wasn’t any management happening,” one of these people told Forbes. Andreessen Horowitz and CoreWeave declined to comment. Stability did not respond to questions about if it plans to continue this strategy now that Mostaque is out of the picture. Regardless, interim co-CEOs Wong and Laforte are on a tight timeline to clean up his mess. Board chairman Jim O’Shaughnessy said in a statement that he was confident the pair “will adeptly steer the company forward in developing and commercializing industry-leading generative AI products.” But burn continues to far outpace revenue. The Financial Times reported Friday that the company made $5.4 million of revenue in February, against $8 million in costs. Several sources said there are ongoing concerns about making payroll for the roughly 150 remaining employees. Leadership roles have gone vacant for months amid the disarray, leaving the company increasingly directionless. Meanwhile, a potentially catastrophic legal threat looms over the company: A trio of copyright infringement lawsuits brought by Getty Images and a group of artists in the U.S. and U.K., who claim Stability illegally used their art and photography to train the AI models powering Stable Diffusion. A London-based court has already rejected the company’s bid to throw out one of the lawsuits on the basis that none of its researchers were based in the U.K. And Stability’s claim that Getty’s Delaware lawsuit should be blocked because it's a U.K.-based company was rejected. (Stability did not respond to questions about the litigation.) AI-related copyright litigation “could go on for years,” according to Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. He told Forbes that though plaintiffs suing AI firms face an uphill battle overcoming the existing legal precedent on copyright infringement, the quantity of arguments available to make are virtually inexhaustible. “Like in military theory, if there’s a gap in your lines, that’s where the enemy pours through — if any one of those arguments succeeds, it could completely change the generative AI environment,” he said. “In some sense, generative AI as an industry has to win everything.” Stability, which had more than $100 million in the bank just a year and a half ago, is in a deep hole. Not only does it need more funding, it needs a viable business model — or a buyer with the vision and chops to make it successful in a fast-moving and highly competitive sector. At an all hands meeting this past Monday, Stability’s new leaders detailed a path forward. One point of emphasis: a plan to better manage resources and expenses, according to one person in attendance. It’s a start, but Mostaque’s meddling has left them with little runway to execute. His resignation, though, has given some employees hope. “A few people are 100% going to reconsider leaving after today,” said one current employee. “And the weird gloomy aura of hearing Emad talking nonsense for an hour is gone.” Shortly before Mostaque resigned, one current Stability executive told Forbes that they were optimistic his departure could make Stability appealing enough to receive a small investment or sale to a friendly party. “There are companies that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars that have much less intrinsic value than Stability,” the person said. “A white knight may still appear.”

[D] Misuse of Deep Learning in Nature Journal’s Earthquake Aftershock Paper

Recently, I saw a post by Rajiv Shah, Chicago-based data-scientist, regarding an article published in Nature last year called Deep learning of aftershock patterns following large earthquakes, written by scientists at Harvard in collaboration with Google. Below is the article: Stand Up for Best Practices: Misuse of Deep Learning in Nature’s Earthquake Aftershock Paper The Dangers of Machine Learning Hype Practitioners of AI, machine learning, predictive modeling, and data science have grown enormously over the last few years. What was once a niche field defined by its blend of knowledge is becoming a rapidly growing profession. As the excitement around AI continues to grow, the new wave of ML augmentation, automation, and GUI tools will lead to even more growth in the number of people trying to build predictive models. But here’s the rub: While it becomes easier to use the tools of predictive modeling, predictive modeling knowledge is not yet a widespread commodity. Errors can be counterintuitive and subtle, and they can easily lead you to the wrong conclusions if you’re not careful. I’m a data scientist who works with dozens of expert data science teams for a living. In my day job, I see these teams striving to build high-quality models. The best teams work together to review their models to detect problems. There are many hard-to-detect-ways that lead to problematic models (say, by allowing target leakage into their training data). Identifying issues is not fun. This requires admitting that exciting results are “too good to be true” or that their methods were not the right approach. In other words, it’s less about the sexy data science hype that gets headlines and more about a rigorous scientific discipline. Bad Methods Create Bad Results Almost a year ago, I read an article in Nature that claimed unprecedented accuracy in predicting earthquake aftershocks by using deep learning. Reading the article, my internal radar became deeply suspicious of their results. Their methods simply didn’t carry many of the hallmarks of careful predicting modeling. I started to dig deeper. In the meantime, this article blew up and became widely recognized! It was even included in the release notes for Tensorflow as an example of what deep learning could do. However, in my digging, I found major flaws in the paper. Namely, data leakage which leads to unrealistic accuracy scores and a lack of attention to model selection (you don’t build a 6 layer neural network when a simpler model provides the same level of accuracy). To my earlier point: these are subtle, but incredibly basic predictive modeling errors that can invalidate the entire results of an experiment. Data scientists are trained to recognize and avoid these issues in their work. I assumed that this was simply overlooked by the author, so I contacted her and let her know so that she could improve her analysis. Although we had previously communicated, she did not respond to my email over concerns with the paper. Falling On Deaf Ears So, what was I to do? My coworkers told me to just tweet it and let it go, but I wanted to stand up for good modeling practices. I thought reason and best practices would prevail, so I started a 6-month process of writing up my results and shared them with Nature. Upon sharing my results, I received a note from Nature in January 2019 that despite serious concerns about data leakage and model selection that invalidate their experiment, they saw no need to correct the errors, because “Devries et al. are concerned primarily with using machine learning as [a] tool to extract insight into the natural world, and not with details of the algorithm design.” The authors provided a much harsher response. You can read the entire exchange on my github. It’s not enough to say that I was disappointed. This was a major paper (it’s Nature!) that bought into AI hype and published a paper despite it using flawed methods. Then, just this week, I ran across articles by Arnaud Mignan and Marco Broccardo on shortcomings that they found in the aftershocks article. Here are two more data scientists with expertise in earthquake analysis who also noticed flaws in the paper. I also have placed my analysis and reproducible code on github. Standing Up For Predictive Modeling Methods I want to make it clear: my goal is not to villainize the authors of the aftershocks paper. I don’t believe that they were malicious, and I think that they would argue their goal was to just show how machine learning could be applied to aftershocks. Devries is an accomplished earthquake scientist who wanted to use the latest methods for her field of study and found exciting results from it. But here’s the problem: their insights and results were based on fundamentally flawed methods. It’s not enough to say, “This isn’t a machine learning paper, it’s an earthquake paper.” If you use predictive modeling, then the quality of your results are determined by the quality of your modeling. Your work becomes data science work, and you are on the hook for your scientific rigor. There is a huge appetite for papers that use the latest technologies and approaches. It becomes very difficult to push back on these papers. But if we allow papers or projects with fundamental issues to advance, it hurts all of us. It undermines the field of predictive modeling. Please push back on bad data science. Report bad findings to papers. And if they don’t take action, go to twitter, post about it, share your results and make noise. This type of collective action worked to raise awareness of p-values and combat the epidemic of p-hacking. We need good machine learning practices if we want our field to continue to grow and maintain credibility. Link to Rajiv's Article Original Nature Publication (note: paywalled) GitHub repo contains an attempt to reproduce Nature's paper Confrontational correspondence with authors

[D] What is your honest experience with reinforcement learning?

In my personal experience, SOTA RL algorithms simply don't work. I've tried working with reinforcement learning for over 5 years. I remember when Alpha Go defeated the world famous Go player, Lee Sedol, and everybody thought RL would take the ML community by storm. Yet, outside of toy problems, I've personally never found a practical use-case of RL. What is your experience with it? Aside from Ad recommendation systems and RLHF, are there legitimate use-cases of RL? Or, was it all hype? Edit: I know a lot about AI. I built NexusTrade, an AI-Powered automated investing tool that lets non-technical users create, update, and deploy their trading strategies. I’m not an idiot nor a noob; RL is just ridiculously hard. Edit 2: Since my comments are being downvoted, here is a link to my article that better describes my position. It's not that I don't understand RL. I released my open-source code and wrote a paper on it. It's the fact that it's EXTREMELY difficult to understand. Other deep learning algorithms like CNNs (including ResNets), RNNs (including GRUs and LSTMs), Transformers, and GANs are not hard to understand. These algorithms work and have practical use-cases outside of the lab. Traditional SOTA RL algorithms like PPO, DDPG, and TD3 are just very hard. You need to do a bunch of research to even implement a toy problem. In contrast, the decision transformer is something anybody can implement, and it seems to match or surpass the SOTA. You don't need two networks battling each other. You don't have to go through hell to debug your network. It just naturally learns the best set of actions in an auto-regressive manner. I also didn't mean to come off as arrogant or imply that RL is not worth learning. I just haven't seen any real-world, practical use-cases of it. I simply wanted to start a discussion, not claim that I know everything. Edit 3: There's a shockingly number of people calling me an idiot for not fully understanding RL. You guys are wayyy too comfortable calling people you disagree with names. News-flash, not everybody has a PhD in ML. My undergraduate degree is in biology. I self-taught myself the high-level maths to understand ML. I'm very passionate about the field; I just have VERY disappointing experiences with RL. Funny enough, there are very few people refuting my actual points. To summarize: Lack of real-world applications Extremely complex and inaccessible to 99% of the population Much harder than traditional DL algorithms like CNNs, RNNs, and GANs Sample inefficiency and instability Difficult to debug Better alternatives, such as the Decision Transformer Are these not legitimate criticisms? Is the purpose of this sub not to have discussions related to Machine Learning? To the few commenters that aren't calling me an idiot...thank you! Remember, it costs you nothing to be nice! Edit 4: Lots of people seem to agree that RL is over-hyped. Unfortunately those comments are downvoted. To clear up some things: We've invested HEAVILY into reinforcement learning. All we got from this investment is a robot that can be super-human at (some) video games. AlphaFold did not use any reinforcement learning. SpaceX doesn't either. I concede that it can be useful for robotics, but still argue that it's use-cases outside the lab are extremely limited. If you're stumbling on this thread and curious about an RL alternative, check out the Decision Transformer. It can be used in any situation that a traditional RL algorithm can be used. Final Edit: To those who contributed more recently, thank you for the thoughtful discussion! From what I learned, model-based models like Dreamer and IRIS MIGHT have a future. But everybody who has actually used model-free models like DDPG unanimously agree that they suck and don’t work.

[N] Last Week in AI News Digest - Automated chemical synthesis, using heartbeats to detect deepfakes, and more!

Hi there, just sharing the latest edition of our AI news digest newsletter! We're just a couple of AI grad students doing this for fun, so hope the self promotion is not too annoying (also, welcome feedback). See it below, and feel free to subscribe. Mini Briefs Robotics, AI, and Cloud Computing Combine to Supercharge Chemical and Drug Synthesis IBM recently demoed a complex system for chemical testing and drug synthesis. The system has an AI component that predicts the results of chemical reactions, and a fully automated robotic experiment setup that runs chemical tests 24/7. Users can access the remote robotics lab online, and IBM can also install the system on-premise. With these tools working together, IBM is hoping to reduce typical drug discovery and verification time by half. AI researchers use heartbeat detection to identify deepfake videos Researchers from multiple groups are tackling the challenge of detecting deepfake videos by analyzing the apparent heartbeat of the people depicted in the video. This is possible, because a person’s blood flow changes their skin color ever so slightly, and this change is often detectable via a process called photoplethysmography (PPG). Because deepfakes are not currently optimizing to generate realisitic heartbeats, temporal or spatial anomalies in PPG signals allow resesarchers to detect deepfakes with a 97% accuracy. Advances & Business This AI Expert From Senegal Is Helping Showcase Africans In STEM \- Adji Bousso Dieng will be Princeton’s School of Engineering’s first Black female faculty. Google’s AI-powered flood alerts now cover all of India and parts of Bangladesh \- India, the world’s second most populated nation, sees more than 20% of the global flood-related fatalities each year as overrun riverbanks sweep tens of thousands of homes with them. Two years ago, Google volunteered to help. Finding magnetic eruptions in space with an AI assistant \- MMS look for explosive reconnection events as it flies through the magnetopause - the boundary region where Earth’s magnetic butts up against the solar wind that flows throughout the solar system. This know-it-all AI learns by reading the entire web nonstop \- Diffbot is building the biggest-ever knowledge graph by applying image recognition and natural-language processing to billions of web pages. Bosch and Ford will test autonomous parking in Detroit \- Ford, Bosch, and Dan Gilbert’s real estate firm Bedrock today detailed an autonomous parking pilot scheduled to launch in September at The Assembly, a mixed-used building in Detroit’s Corktown neighborhood. Create your own moody quarantine music with Google’s AI \- Lo-Fi Player, the latest project out of Google Magenta, lets you mix tunes with the help of machine learning by interacting with a virtual room. Apple launches AI/ML residency program to attract niche experts \- As Apple’s artificial language and machine learning initiatives continue to expand, its interest in attracting talent has grown - a theme that’s barely under the surface of the company’s occasionally updated Machine Learning Research blog. Dusty Robotics CEO Tessa Lau Discusses Robotics Start-Ups and Autonomous Robots for Construction \- Tessa Lau is Founder/CEO at Dusty Robotics, whose mission is to increase construction industry productivity by introducing robotic automation on the jobsite. Concerns & Hype Google Offers to Help Others With the Tricky Ethics of AI \- Companies pay cloud computing providers like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google big money to avoid operating their own digital infrastructure. The Peace Dividends Of The Autonomous Vehicle Wars \- The rapid growth of the mobile market in the late 2000s and early 2010s led to a burst of technological progress. Ethics must be part of the development process’ \- The increasing use of AI (artificial intelligence) in the development of new medical technologies demands greater attention to ethical aspects. Analysis & Policy China’s new AI trade rules could hamper a TikTok sale \- TikTok’s attempt to sell itself and avert a possible US ban may run into some complications. The Wall Street Journal reports that China has unveiled new restrictions on AI technology exports that could affect TikTok. Podcast Check out our weekly podcast covering these stories! Website | RSS | iTunes | Spotify | YouTube

I tested hundreds of marketing tools in the last three years and these 50 made it to the list. I'll sum up my top 50 marketing tools with one or two sentences + give you pricings.

Hey guys, I'm working in a growth marketing agency. Marketing tools are 30% of what we do, so we use them a lot and experiment with the new ones as much as possible. There are thousands of tools and it's easy to get lost, so I wanted to share the tools we use most on a daily basis. And divide the list into 14 categories. I thought this could be handy for Entrepreneurs subreddit. Why adopt tools? I see marketing tools as tireless colleagues. If you can't hire an employee, choosing the right tool can solve your problems, because they Are super cheap. Work 7/24 for you. Don’t make mistakes. Don’t need management. (or needless management) Help you to automate the majority of your lead gen process. Onwards to the list. (With the pricings post ended up quite long, you can find a link in the end if you want to check the prices) Email marketing tools #1 ActiveCampaign is armed with the most complicated email automation features and has the most intuitive user experience. It feels like you already know how to use it. \#2 Autopilot is visual marketing automation and customer journey tool that helps you acquire, nurture based on behaviors, interest etc. #3 Mailjet: This is the tool we use to send out bulky email campaigns such as newsletters. It doesn't have sexy features like others but does its job for a cheap price. Email address finders #4 Skrapp finds email of your contacts by name and company. It also works with LinkedIn Sales Navigator and can extract thousands of emails in bulk + have a browser add-on. #5 Hunter: Similar to Skrapp but doesn't work with LinkedIn Sales Navigator directly. In addition, there are email templates and you can set up email campaigns. Prospecting and outreach tools #6 Prospect combines the personal emails, follow-up calls, other social touches and helps you create multichannel campaigns.  #7 Reply is a more intuitive version of Prospect. It is easy to learn and use; their UX makes you feel good and sufficient.  CRM tools #8 Salesflare helps you to stop managing your data and start managing your customers. Not yet popular as Hubspot and etc but the best solution for smaller B2B businesses. (we're fans) \#9 Hubspot: The most popular CRM for good reason and has a broader product range you can adopt in your next steps. Try this if you have a bulky list of customers because it is free. #10 Pardot: Pardot is by Salesforce, it's armed with features that can close the gap between marketing and sales. Sales Tools #11 Salesforce is the best sales automation and lead management software. It helps you to create complicated segmentations and run, track, analyze campaigns from the same dashboard. #12 LinkedIn Sales Navigator gives you full access to LinkedIn's user database. You can even find a kidnapped CEO if you know how to use it with other marketing automation tools like Skrapp. #13 Pipedrive is a simple tool and excels in one thing. It tracks your leads and tells you when to take the next action. It makes sales easier. #14 Qwilr creates great-looking docs, at speed. You can design perfect proposals, quotes, client updates, and more in a flash. We use it a lot to close deals, it's effective. #15 Crystalknows is an add-on that tells you anyone’s personality on LinkedIn and gives you a detailed approach specific to that person. It's eerily accurate. #16 Leadfeeder shows you the companies that visited your website. Tells how they found you and what they’re interested in. It has a free version. Communication Tools #17 Intercom is a sweet and smart host that welcomes your visitors when you’re not home. It’s one of the best chatbot tools in the market. #18 Drift is famous for its conversational marketing features and more sales-focused than Intercom. #19 Manychat is a chatbot that helps you create high converting Facebook campaigns. #20 Plann3r helps you create your personalized meeting page. You can schedule meetings witch clients, candidates, and prospects. #21 Loom is a video messaging tool, it helps you to be more expressive and create closer relationships. #22 Callpage collects your visitors’ phone number and connects you with them in seconds. No matter where you are. Landing page tools #23 Instapage is the best overall landing page builder. It has a broad range of features and even squirrel can build a compelling landing page with templates. No coding needed. #24 Unbounce can do everything that Instapage does and lets you build a great landing page without a developer. But it's less intuitive. Lead generation / marketing automation tools #25 Phantombuster is by far the most used lead generation software in our tool kit. It extracts data, emails, sends requests, customized messages, and does many things on autopilot in any platform. You can check this, this and this if you want to see it in action. #26 Duxsoup is a Google Chrome add-on and can also automate some of LinkedIn lead generation efforts like Phantombuster. But not works in the cloud. #27 Zapier is a glue that holds all the lead generation tools together. With Zapier, You can connect different marketing tools and no coding required. Conversion rate optimization tools #28 Hotjar tracks what people are doing on your website by recording sessions and capturing mouse movements. Then it gives you a heatmap. #29 UsabilityHub shows your page to a digital crowd and measures the first impressions and helps you to validate your ideas. #30 Optinmonster is a top tier conversion optimization tool. It helps you to capture leads and enables you to increase conversions rates with many features. #31 Notifia is one mega tool of widgets that arms your website with the wildest social proof and lead capturing tactics. #32 Sumo is a much simpler version of Notifia. But Sumo has everything to help you capture leads and build your email lists. Web scrapers #33 Data Miner is a Google Chrome browser extension that helps you scrape data from web pages and into a CSV file or Excel spreadsheet. #34 Webscraper does the same thing as Data Miner; however, it is capable of handling more complex tasks. SEO and Content #35 Grammarly: Your English could be your first language and your grammar could be better than Shakespeare. Grammarly still can make your writing better. #36 Hemingwayapp is a copywriting optimization tool that gives you feedback about your copy and improves your readability score, makes your writing bolder and punchier. Free. #37 Ahrefs is an all-rounder search engine optimization tool that helps you with off-page, on-page or technical SEO. #38 SurferSEO makes things easier for your on-page SEO efforts. It’s a tool that analyzes top Google results for specific keywords and gives you a content brief based on that data. Video editing and design tools #39 Canva is a graphic design platform that makes everything easy. It has thousands of templates for anything from Facebook ads, stylish presentations to business cards.  #40 Kapwing is our go-to platform for quick video edits. It works on the browser and can help you to create stylish videos, add subtitles, resize videos, create memes, or remove backgrounds. #41 Animoto can turn your photos and video clip into beautiful video slideshows. It comes handy when you want to create an advertising material but don’t have a budget. Advertising tools #42 AdEspresso lets you create and test multiple ads with few clicks. You can optimize your FB, IG, and Google ads from this tool and measure your ads with in-depth analytics. #43 AdRoll is an AI-driven platform that connects and coordinates marketing efforts across ads, email, and online stores. Other tools #44 Replug helps you to shorten, track, optimize your links with call-to-actions, branded links, and retargeting pixels #45 Draw.io = Mindmaps, schemes, and charts. With Draw.io, you can put your brain in a digital paper in an organized way. #46 Built With is a tool that finds out what websites are built with. So you can see what tools they're using and so on. #47 Typeform can turn data collection into an experience with Typeform. This tool helps you to engage your audience with conversational forms or surveys and help you to collect more data. #48 Livestorm helped us a lot, especially in COVID-19 tiles. It’s a webinar software that works on your browser, mobile, and desktop. #49 Teachable \- If you have an online course idea but hesitating because of the production process, Teachable can help you. It's easy to configure and customizable for your needs. #50 Viral Loops provides a revolutionary referral marketing solution for modern marketers. You can create and run referral campaigns in a few clicks with templates. Remember, most of these tools have a free trial or free version. Going over them one by one can teach you a lot and help you grow your business with less work power in the early stages of your business. I hope you enjoyed the read and can find some tools to make things easier! Let me know about your favorite tools in the comments, so I can try them out. \------ If you want to check the prices and see a broader explanation about the tools, you can go here.

12 months ago, I was unemployed. Last week my side hustle got acquired by a $500m fintech company

I’ve learned so much over the years from this subreddit. I thought I’d return the favour and share some of my own learnings. In November 2020 my best friend and I had an idea. “What if we could find out which stocks the Internet is talking about?” This formed the origins of Ticker Nerd. 9 months later we sold Ticker Nerd to Finder (an Australian fintech company valued at around $500m). In this post, I am going to lay out how we got there. How we came up with the idea First off, like other posts have covered - you don’t NEED a revolutionary or original idea to build a business. There are tonnes of “boring” businesses making over 7 figures a year e.g. law firms, marketing agencies, real estate companies etc. If you’re looking for an exact formula to come up with a great business idea I’m sorry, but it doesn’t exist. Finding new business opportunities is more of an art than a science. Although, there are ways you can make it easier to find inspiration. Below are the same resources I use for inspiration. I rarely ever come up with ideas without first searching one of the resources below for inspiration: Starter Story Twitter Startup Ideas My First Million Trends by the Hustle Trends VC To show how you how messy, random and unpredictable it can be to find an idea - let me explain how my co-founder and I came up with the idea for Ticker Nerd: We discovered a new product on Twitter called Exploding Topics. It was a newsletter that uses a bunch of software and algorithms to find trends that are growing quickly before they hit the mainstream. I had recently listened to a podcast episode from My First Million where they spoke about Motley Fool making hundreds of millions from their investment newsletters. We asked ourselves what if we could build a SaaS platform similar to Exploding Topics but it focused on stocks? We built a quick landing page using Carrd + Gumroad that explained what our new idea will do and included a payment option to get early access for $49. We called it Exploding Stock (lol). We shared it around a bunch of Facebook groups and subreddits. We made $1,000 in pre-sales within a couple days. My co-founder and I can’t code so we had to find a developer to build our idea. We interviewed a bunch of potential candidates. Meanwhile, I was trawling through Wall Street Bets and found a bunch of free tools that did roughly what we wanted to build. Instead of building another SaaS tool that did the same thing as these free tools we decided to pivot from our original idea. Our new idea = a paid newsletter that sends a weekly report that summarises 2 of the best stocks that are growing in interest on the Internet. We emailed everyone who pre-ordered access, telling them about the change and offered a full refund if they wanted. tl;dr: We essentially combined two existing businesses (Exploding Topics and Motley Fool) and made it way better. We validated the idea by finding out if people will actually pay money for it BEFORE we decided to build it. The idea we started out with changed over time. How to work out if your idea will actually make money It’s easy to get hung up on designing the logo or choosing the perfect domain name for your new idea. At this stage none of that matters. The most important thing is working out if people will pay money for it. This is where validation comes in. We usually validate ideas using Carrd. It lets you build a simple one page site without having to code. The Ticker Nerd site was actually built using a Carrd template. Here’s how you can do it yourself (at a high level): Create a Carrd pro account (yes it's a $49 one off payment but you’ll get way more value out of it). Buy a cheap template and send it to your Carrd account. You can build your own template but this will save you a lot of time. Once the template reaches your Carrd account, duplicate it. Leave the original so it can be duplicated for other ideas. Jump onto Canva (free) and create a logo using the free logos provided. Import your logo. Add copy to the page that explains your idea. Use the AIDA formula. Sign up to Gumroad (free) and create a pre-sale campaign. Create a discounted lifetime subscription or version of the product. This will be used pre-sales. Add the copy from the site into the pre-sale campaign on Gumroad. Add a ‘widget’ to Carrd and connect it to Gumroad using the existing easy integration feature. Purchase a domain name. Connect it to Carrd. Test the site works. Share your website Now the site is ready you can start promoting it in various places to see how the market reacts. An easy method is to find relevant subreddits using Anvaka (Github tool) or Subreddit Stats. The Anvaka tool provides a spider map of all the connected subreddits that users are active in. The highlighted ones are most relevant. You can post a thread in these subreddits that offer value or can generate discussion. For example: ‘I’m creating a tool that can write all your copy, would anyone actually use this?’ ‘What does everything think of using AI to get our copy written faster?’ ‘It’s time to scratch my own itch, I’m creating a tool that writes marketing copy using GPT-3. What are the biggest problems you face writing marketing copy? I’ll build a solution for it’ Reddit is pretty brutal these days so make sure the post is genuine and only drop your link in the comments or in the post if it seems natural. If people are interested they’ll ask for the link. Another great place to post is r/entrepreuerridealong and r/business_ideas. These subreddits expect people to share their ideas and you’ll likely make some sales straight off the bat. I also suggest posting in some Facebook groups (related to your idea) as well just for good measure. Assess the results If people are paying you for early access you can assume that it’s worth building your idea. The beauty of posting your idea on Reddit or in Facebook groups is you’ll quickly learn why people love/hate your idea. This can help you decide how to tweak the idea or if you should drop it and move on to the next one. How we got our first 100 customers (for free) By validating Ticker Nerd using subreddits and Facebook groups this gave us our first paying customers. But we knew this wouldn’t be sustainable. We sat down and brainstormed every organic strategy we could use to get traction as quickly as possible. The winner: a Product Hunt launch. A successful Product Hunt launch isn’t easy. You need: Someone that has a solid reputation and audience to “hunt” your product (essentially an endorsement). An aged Product Hunt account - you can’t post any products if your account is less than a week old. To be following relevant Product Hunt members - since they get notified when you launch a new product if they’re following you. Relationships with other builders and makers on Product Hunt that also have a solid reputation and following. Although, if you can pull it off you can get your idea in front of tens of thousands of people actively looking for new products. Over the next few weeks, I worked with my co-founder on connecting with different founders, indie hackers and entrepreneurs mainly via Twitter. We explained to them our plans for the Product Hunt launch and managed to get a small army of people ready to upvote our product on launch day. We were both nervous on the day of the launch. We told ourselves to have zero expectations. The worst that could happen was no one signed up and we were in the same position as we’re in now. Luckily, within a couple of hours Ticker Nerd was on the homepage of Product Hunt and in the top 10. The results were instant. After 24 hours we had around 200 people enter their payment details to sign up for our free trial. These signups were equal to around $5,800 in monthly recurring revenue. \-- I hope this post was useful! Drop any questions you have below and I’ll do my best to respond :)

Is being a solopreneur really that fatal?

Okay, so I need to get something off my chest... People love to say that solopreneurship is a death sentence. That if you can’t find a cofounder, you’ll never build a team, never scale, never succeed. But I wonder about the other side of the coin—something that, browsing here and in other subs, doesn’t seem to get nearly as much attention—how fatal cofounder conflicts can be. I’ve personally seen three startups fail before even getting to an MVP because of cofounder issues. One of them was a company I was briefly a cofounder for. The other two are startups coworkers were previous cofounders for that fell apart before they even got to an MVP. In each case, it wasn’t lack of funding or product-market fit that killed them—it was the people. Yet, somehow, the startup world keeps pushing the idea that finding a cofounder is the most important thing you can do. But here’s the thing: if you can’t find a cofounder, that doesn’t mean you can’t build a business. It doesn’t even mean you can’t build a team. With the tools available today (no-code, AI, fractional hiring), a single person can get an MVP off the ground, validate demand, and take those first steps without needing to rush into a partnership with someone they barely know. And also—I wonder how many people actually succeed with a cofounder they met casually at a networking event or online? People talk about the risks of going solo, but not enough about the risks of tying your company’s future to someone you just met. (If you’re going to have a cofounder, IMO it should be someone you trust deeply, someone whose skills and working style you know complement yours—not just someone you brought on because startup X/YouTube told you to.). At the end of the day, I honestly think it’s about the product. If you can build something valuable and find market fit—whether solo or with a team—you’ll have the leverage to hire, partner, and grow. That’s what actually matters. That said—I know how incredibly hard it is to be a solopreneur—and not to have someone along the journey with you who can take half of the emotional and psychological burden, in addition to the actual work... What do you think? Any thoughts here appreciated.

Tech founders -- you're being lied to

I've been meaning to post this for a while. I saw a video recently that put me over the edge. You guys need to know what's up. Venture capitalists, angels, and accelerators all want you to build fast and fail faster. They want to you get your mvp buult in as little as a couple weeks. I'm a software dev and I own SaaS company. I'm here to tell you that you're being lied to. It's 2023. Unless some customer is about to drown because of their problem, they are not going to respect, or consider your trashy looking mvp. People these days expect a certain level of polish and professionalism when it comes to software before they give it more than 3s of their time. If your software took 80 hours to build, good chance that even customers from your target market will disregard it unless you're solving some insanely painful problem. And if you're using you're mvp for market research, people aren't going to talk to you if they believe that they spent more time getting dressed that morning than you put into your product. Build things that you can be proud of. Time boxing your first dev cycle into a few days or even weeks limits the scope of what you can build. I've spent more time than this figuring out a single api. Its this time boxing that leads 1000s of people to build the same shit. It's low quality work and exists in a super saturated market. And given the small scope of the product, the amount you'll be able to charge means the LTV of a customer will be lower than you CAC. Meaning your company will always lose money. The negative reception from your pre alpha product will have you think that people don't like you or your work. It's simply not the case. Few on this planet could produce something captivating in 100 hours. VCs tell you to ship your garbage MVP asap because of the following reason. They view every product that ships as a lotto ticket. If they like the look of it, they'll buy a ticket. And the more products there are and the shittier they are, it means a) they have more ticket numbers to select from and b) the cost of the ticket is a lot cheaper than it would otherwise be if the product was nice. VCs are not your friends and often, don't know how to build or market products. They are in it for the money and any advice they give to you or the community will be self serving. The indie community needs to wake up and realize that quality software built by a small team that people will pay for in this saturated market often takes months if not years to build. The idea of building a product and putting it in front of customers in 2 weeks is dumb. I've used some of these products and they are so limited in scope, broken and poorly designed that I don't give them anymore than a minute or two of my time. Note: validate your ideas before writing code. I'm not advocating spending a year writing software for an unproven market or problem. Yes, there are exceptions and stories of people shipping in no time and getting traction, but these are not the norm. Lastly, this philosophy is why you have and will continue to see a million products centered around AI. For those of you who aren't devs, Open AI made chatgpt accessible to developers and it's like 3 lines of code to ask it a question, get a response and save that response within your program. It's super low effort to integrate and that's why everyone will be building the same types of products with it. Tl;dr: Investors and gurus have agendas. Be logical about the level of effort required to build a software company and put forth only work that you're proud of. Being able to code doesn't give you a magical ability to create massive value with only a few weeks of work. You have to grind like pretty much every other successful business owner. I'll likely be banned for this, but fuck it. Ive got a sub where I'll share more insight and ban bullshit and idiotic posts with zero warning. It's not for everyone and I'll usually let you know pretty quick if our relationship isn't going to work. 6000 people and growing. r/cutthebull I'll write a post on that sub in the next few mins on how to guarentee accountability from top level management at your company.

Free No-Code & AI Community - No-Coder Academy (Tutorials, Courses)

Hey Entrepreneur Community, &#x200B; I've noticed a lot more people on here asking questions around No-Code & AI platforms such as Bubble, Webflow, ChatGPT/OpenAI. Today I've started a free Skool community dedicated to No-Code & AI. It is called "No-Coder Academy". I've uploaded a few tutorials/courses on Bubble, Webflow, and OpenAI/ChatGPT. &#x200B; Here's the invite for anyone interested on joining (it is free): https://www.skool.com/no-coder-academy-1594?invite=45dd65fdb7ea4284a9b1306ca869b9bf &#x200B; It's only been live for a few hours and we already have 14 people in the community. Over the next few weeks I'll be moving my Udemy courses onto the platform along with releasing a few new ones. Enjoy!

Learn NoCode & AI Skills for free in 100 days

Hi everyone, I hope you're having a good month so far! I wanted to share and hopefully get feedback on the free challenges we're relaunching next week. Both challenges are free, fun, and effective 30-minute bite-sized lessons delivered to your inbox. It's quite similar to taking a course but with a different take on it where the lessons are split and sent to you on a daily basis. \#100DaysOfAI and \#100DaysOfNoCode were launched to facilitate a transformative journey. Think of it as your daily 30-minute AI lab, where bite-sized lessons replace the overwhelming tide of information. Our shared mission? To navigate the vast landscape of AI and NoCode, demystifying its potential, and unveiling its practical implications in everyday life. We're putting countless hours into building the right curriculum for participants. So far, we have more than 12,000 people on the waitlist for April 1st! I'd love to hear your thoughts on this approach. (Email bite-size lessons, etc) Is there anything you'd like to learn in the NoCode or AI space? We'd be glad to include it! Thank you 🙏

tools I use to not have to hire anyone

I’ve spent unreasonable amount of time with AI tools and here’s curated list of ones I recommend for productivity (honestly, some of them can replace an employee): General assistants ChatGPT \- You probably know it. It’s a great tool for ideating, brainstorming, document summarization and quick question-answer work. There’s a desktop app available so you can quickly pop it up by pressing control + space, which makes it even better for productivity. Claude \- Another chat interface, similar to ChatGPT. It’s a different model provider so the answers and behavior might be different. From my experience, Claude 3.5 Sonnet is performing better than GPT-4o (but not o1) in tasks that focus on reasoning, code writing and copywriting. There’s also a desktop app available. Gemini \- Honestly, I’m not even sure where to put it. It’s Google’s model, one of the most powerful in terms of multimodal capabilities (text, image, audio). And it’s tailored for your Google Workspace. Email, docs, spreadsheets, meets, presentation. Anything. Research Perplexity \- Perplexity is an AI search engine that provides answers to questions with up-to-date information. So, forget Google. Use Perplexity to get answers to questions and dive down the rabbit hole. Exa AI \- Exa is another advanced search engine that combines AI-driven neural search with traditional keyword search. It understands the semantic meaning of queries and documents. And you can also choose what you want to search: academic articles, news, reports, tweets etc. Meetings, calendar and email Granola \- Great AI notepad for meetings. It’s a desktop app, so there’s no bot joining your meetings. It automatically transcribes and enhances meeting notes, helping organize and summarize key takeaways and generates action items, follow-up emails, etc. It also allows you to ask questions about the transcript and get answers. Reclaim \- AI-powered calendar that optimizes for productivity. Essentially, it automates meetings, tracks tasks, and protects deep work time. Cool thing is that it syncs with Google Calendar and Slack. Cora \- Batch processing emails is one of the main productivity tactics. Cora enables that. You only see emails that you need to respond to. And it generates automatic replies for you. All other emails are summarized twice a day. Knowledge summarization Particle News \- Short summaries of the daily news. Pretty straightforward. Notebook LM \- Notebook LM helps process and summarize various types of content, such as PDFs, websites, videos, and more. The cool thing is that it provides insights and connections between topics, cites sources and offers audio summaries. I use it when the content to read is too long and I’m on the go. Napkin \- For creating visuals from text. You can easily generate and customize infographics, diagrams etc. So, if you’re brainstorming, writing or preparing for a presentation, Napkin will work well. Writing and brainstorming Grammarly \- Well known grammar checker. It helps improve writing by focusing on clarity and tone. Sometimes the Grammarly icon popping up is annoying though. Flow \- Flow helps you write and edit notes by speaking. And it integrates across all the apps you use, adapts to your tone and style. Cool tool for just yapping! Automations Gumloop \- Think AI-first Zapier, but 100x more powerful. It's is a platform for automating complex work using AI via a no-code drag and drop interface. It’s very easy to automate work without needing engineers. And they have loads of templates. Wordware \- A platform for building AI agents with natural language. Honestly, for folks who are a bit more technical. You simply prompt LLM to perform a task for you. And you can build any integration you want. If you’re a builder, you can later on connect the agent via API. I strongly believe that technology is leverage. And with AI we can be in top 0.1% of people. If you want bit deeper dive into the topic, I shared that on my substack (available via link in my profile) Any other recommendations for apps I could use? What works if you want to keep the team super lean in early days?