Think

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?

Entrepreneurs using AI tools such as chatgpt for Strategic thinking in small business

Hey Reddit, I’m working on a project and am curious everyone’s thoughts about how Entrepreneurs are using AI tools such as chatgpt for strategic thinking such as Forecasting, Risk management and Mergers in small business and what issues they are facing. I will be asking these questions on various topics pertaining to a small business. Hope everyone can benefit from this!!!

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.

My Manager Thinks ML Projects Takes 5 Minutes 🤦‍♀️

Hey, everyone! I’ve got to vent a bit because work has been something else lately. I’m a BI analyst at a bank, and I’m pretty much the only one dealing with machine learning and AI stuff. The rest of my team handles SQL and reporting—no Python, no R, no ML knowledge AT ALL. You could say I’m the only one handling data science stuff So, after I did a Python project for retail, my boss suddenly decided I’m the go-to for all things ML. Since then, I’ve been getting all the ML projects dumped on me (yay?), but here’s the kicker: my manager, who knows nothing about ML, acts like he’s some kind of expert. He keeps making suggestions that make zero sense and setting unrealistic deadlines. I swear, it’s like he read one article and thinks he’s cracked the code. And the best part? Whenever I finish a project, he’s all “we completed this” and “we came up with these insights.” Ummm, excuse me? We? I must’ve missed all those late-night coding sessions you didn’t show up for. The higher-ups know it’s my work and give me credit, but my manager just can’t help himself. Last week, he set a ridiculous deadline of 10 days for a super complex ML project. TEN DAYS! Like, does he even know that data preprocessing alone can take weeks? I’m talking about cleaning up messy datasets, handling missing values, feature engineering, and then model tuning. And that’s before even thinking about building the model! The actual model development is like the tip of the iceberg. But I just nodded and smiled because I was too exhausted to argue. 🤷‍♀️ And then, this one time, they didn’t even invite me to a meeting where they were presenting my work! The assistant manager came to me last minute, like, “Hey, can you explain these evaluation metrics to me so I can present them to the heads?” I was like, excuse me, what? Why not just invite me to the meeting to present my own work? But nooo, they wanted to play charades on me So, I gave the most complicated explanation ever, threw in all the jargon just to mess with him. He came back 10 minutes later, all flustered, and was like, “Yeah, you should probably do the presentation.” I just smiled and said, “I know… data science isn’t for everyone.” Anyway, they called me in at the last minute, and of course, I nailed it because I know my stuff. But seriously, the nerve of not including me in the first place and expecting me to swoop in like some kind of superhero. I mean, at least give me a cape if I’m going to keep saving the day! 🤦‍♀️ Honestly, I don’t know how much longer I can keep this up. I love the work, but dealing with someone who thinks they’re an ML guru when they can barely spell Python is just draining. I have built like some sort of defense mechanism to hit them with all the jargon and watch their eyes glaze over How do you deal with a manager who takes credit for your work and sets impossible deadlines? Should I keep pushing back or just let it go and keep my head down? Any advice! TL;DR: My manager thinks ML projects are plug-and-play, takes credit for my work, and expects me to clean and process data, build models, and deliver results in 10 days. How do I deal with this without snapping? #WorkDrama

[D] What do you think of Mistral.ai's value proposition and open source strategy?

Mistral.ai, a 4 week old startup founded by star researchers from DeepMind and FAIR recently raised a whopping €105m in their seed round just 4 weeks after set up. Their leaked pitch "deck" made several arguments that I find quite interesting and debatable (not that I think they are totally wrong) given recent progress in research and open source. They seem to believe that a moat can be built around better models, or at least the engineering know-how required to pursue such endeavours That closed sourced models served behind an API poses integration challenges and safety issues that will become a bottleneck for adoption That open sourcing the majority of their work, puts them in a position to win over the very finite research talent necessary to keep them ahead of competition Open source models and tools accelerate the development of ecosystems and aid in dominance through standard setting. (personally I think this is their strongest argument). Very similar to what Yann LeCun cited as reasons for FAIR's commitment to open sourcing. Curious what the industry practitioners and academics here think about this? https://sifted.eu/articles/pitch-deck-mistral

[D] Next big thing in IT is ML/AI. It used to be the Internet. Do you think this would make it harder for amateurs to start a business in IT or would be much the same?

The Internet changed the world and although web development is not an easy task, the Internet helped many young developers without a degree in computer science to make a fortune, for example, Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk. But ML/AI seems definitely harder to enter compared to web development. Frankly, I don't know much about ML/AI (and that's why I am asking you guys). But do you think starting a business with ML as a core product would be hard for an amateur several years later when ML starts to deliver the hype?

Thinking about commercializing my B2B tool for LinkedIn posts automation – Need feedback from other businesses please

Hey everyone, I’ve been running my own small company selling industrial equipment, and as a one-person operation, I built a tool that’s been a real lifesaver for me. It automates all my LinkedIn posts, and I’m wondering if this could be useful for others in the industry. I’m considering commercializing it, but before I go down that road, I’d love some feedback. Here’s how it works: The tool uses AI to study your brand identity, products, audience, and past LinkedIn posts, following your brand guidelines to replicate your company’s style. It builds a full-year content calendar with different types of posts, like case studies, industry news, etc. You get an email on the days you need to post, with three ready-to-go options generated by AI. All you need to do is copy and paste on LinkedIn. There’s also a form where you can create custom posts for special occasions, like company recognitions or events. It’s been super helpful for me, but I’m curious if other businesses would see value in something like this. Would you use a tool like this? Or do you think it’s overkill for most businesses? Any feedback would be appreciated! Thanks in advance!

Think of Caryn AI (a 23-year-old Snapchat influencer) but with entrepreneur personas

Over the past few days, I got the AI craze and I'm really excited about this idea of solving a common pain that creators often face: keep a personnal and close relationship with their fans. ​ I came up with this idea of creating a second brain for successful entrepreneurs based on their internet knowledge (like they did for Caryn AI). ​ The end goal would be to have them own & enrich their 2nd Brain with their personal data (from WhatsApp, notion, email …). ​ Values: For successful entrepreneurs ( or any creators), the ability to scale their time. Daily summary of the most exciting conversation between 2nd Brain and their community. highlight conversation where 2nd Brain would need them to reply. Eventually, 2nd brain could take action (Reply to tweet, post etc..) For the community, 1-1 chat with Shaan & Sam 24/7. Get valuable advice for their business. Think of questions like: \- how can I make more revenue? \- what's the best marketing strategy for reaching out to users x, y, and z? ​ What do you think? Would you be interested in talking with their 2nd Brain? What would you ask them? Curious to hear your thoughts

What do you think of SaaS 2.0: Service-as-a-Software?

A new term has recently emerged in the business world: Service-as-a-Software a.k.a. SaaS 2.0 In general, some authors of articles promoting this term assume that the new and rapidly growing possibilities offered by AI and automation mean that problems that were previously too individual or support-intensive can now be tackled. The focus is on (human) service on the customer side and the background processes in the company are fully AI-supported and automated. Unlike traditional SaaS, no software is primarily offered here as self-use. In other words: "Service as a Software" (SaaS 2.0) is a new type of business model that mixes software automation with real human support. Unlike traditional SaaS, which provides self-service tools for users to solve problems on their own, SaaS 2.0 focuses on delivering results by combining technology with human expertise. In this model, software handles repetitive tasks like data processing, scheduling, or matching, while humans step in to provide guidance, handle exceptions, or solve complex issues. This approach is often called Human-in-the-Loop because humans are actively involved in key parts of the process, ensuring a personalized and empathetic experience for the customer. SaaS 2.0 is especially useful in industries like healthcare, education, or elderly care placement, where trust and personalization are critical. For example, a traditional SaaS might offer a tool to search for care homes, while a SaaS 2.0 solution would also provide a care consultant to help families make the best choice. In this case no traditional marketplace is needed where the supply and demand side used to be scaled simultaneously. Instead, an AI can now search for the best match for a place in a retirement home and a human in the loop can be the external face for the customer and the retirement homes and thus act as an agent. By automating routine tasks and using humans for high-value touchpoints, SaaS 2.0 delivers better outcomes, builds stronger relationships with customers, and stands out from traditional software that relies only on automation. What do you think about the potential of this concept?

What do you think of SaaS 2.0: Service-as-a-Software?

A new term has recently emerged in the business world: Service-as-a-Software a.k.a. SaaS 2.0 In general, some authors of articles promoting this term assume that the new and rapidly growing possibilities offered by AI and automation mean that problems that were previously too individual or support-intensive can now be tackled. The focus is on (human) service on the customer side and the background processes in the company are fully AI-supported and automated. Unlike traditional SaaS, no software is primarily offered here as self-use. In other words: "Service as a Software" (SaaS 2.0) is a new type of business model that mixes software automation with real human support. Unlike traditional SaaS, which provides self-service tools for users to solve problems on their own, SaaS 2.0 focuses on delivering results by combining technology with human expertise. In this model, software handles repetitive tasks like data processing, scheduling, or matching, while humans step in to provide guidance, handle exceptions, or solve complex issues. This approach is often called Human-in-the-Loop because humans are actively involved in key parts of the process, ensuring a personalized and empathetic experience for the customer. SaaS 2.0 is especially useful in industries like healthcare, education, or elderly care placement, where trust and personalization are critical. For example, a traditional SaaS might offer a tool to search for care homes, while a SaaS 2.0 solution would also provide a care consultant to help families make the best choice. In this case no traditional marketplace is needed where the supply and demand side used to be scaled simultaneously. Instead, an AI can now search for the best match for a place in a retirement home and a human in the loop can be the external face for the customer and the retirement homes and thus act as an agent. By automating routine tasks and using humans for high-value touchpoints, SaaS 2.0 delivers better outcomes, builds stronger relationships with customers, and stands out from traditional software that relies only on automation. What do you think about the potential of this concept?

Using Claude.. I think I may have built something - suggested next steps, maybe get a dev house to build it? (I will not promote)

So, for context, I am an IT manager (non code) so I can converse all around tech, but I've just never had the nack for coding. My brain doesn't like it. I've been using different AI's for a while for general stuff, but I thought I would give Claude a go to build something that just popped into my head. Took me a while to figure out how to prompt it correctly, but it appears to have built each of the sections of this browser extension tool and even wrote me a business plan on it (which I didn't ask it to do). I had to pay for premium but boy did it just go to work. It has absolutely given me more than any other AI model yet including deepseek, chatgpt (free) and google gemini advanced (pro), I just don't know if it is good. Claude gave me the code as requested for the admin dashboard, backend implementation, browser extension, and security implementation - though I do recognise it probably won't be perfect and there will still be loads to do to get a fully functioning mvp together. So, I have this code... that I don't know how to use :D I'm a business mind that can speak technical, and I am looking to progress this forward. What are your suggestions to get it fully implemented? Find a partner/CTO (up for 50/50 split preferably in the UK), engage a dev shop to build it out, or I've heard places like fiverr are decent? Thoughts?

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

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.

Just recorded a new interview episode where we talk about transitioning from a Fortune 500 to a startup. Let us know what you think!

0:00 Shilpa's Introduction 2:16 A Cosmopolitan Journey 4:46 All Roads Lead to Tech 8:35 From JP Morgan to Intel 12:25 Shilpa's $1 Billion Revenue Pipeline 15:27 Transitioning from IOT to AI 17:42 Flyte Co-Founders (and Marriage Partners!) 22:30 Building an AI Model, for two! 28:04 Flyte's Integration for Workflow Software 30:03 Fundraising Success 31:09 The Bright Flyte Ahead 32:18 Biggest Challenges Building the AI 36:05 Advice to Other AI Founders 38:46 Flyte's Incredible Collaboration Process 44:32 Life Lessons from Shilpa 45:54 Find Flyte! ​ https://preview.redd.it/w4bx22cl10d71.png?width=2042&format=png&auto=webp&s=c14ea0b96a1ffb34165ec84a86ca45b16256c21b Shilpa is a lifelong tech admirer, worldly businesswoman, and now CEO of Flyte -- a Workflow Automation Platform for Complex, Mission-Critical Data and ML Processes at Scale. From her incredible journey from India to her current home in Canada, to the vital role collaboration plays in small teams, Shilpa shares a breadth of knowledge any Entrepreneur would be lucky to hear. Regular link to episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJJgAhwSqqo&t=1s

I created an AI Model that counts cards in blackjack automatically and can play perfect strategy blackjack. Thinking of selling how to replicate it

People have long ago figured out how to play blackjack via card counting. I haven’t seen anyone create a user-friendly tool for a layman to know exactly how to play any permutation of blackjack with any rule set (ie any amount of decks of cards, any cards shown, etc.) Anyway, I’ve developed that and am curious if people would be willing to buy it. How can i find out who to market the product to and how much to charge? Is it even a feasible idea to profit off of?

Just Used AI to Create My First Video Ad for Automating Businesses—What Do You Think?

Setting a Generative AI Strategy

In this course, we delve into the potential impact of GenAI on various facets of business with a particular focus on customer value creation and productivity. We’ll review research from leaders in academia and industry to understand emerging thinking on GenAI’s business impact. Imagine a future where GenAI not only drives business growth but also reshapes the very fabric of industry operations. That's the transformative power of GenAI. Guest expert Robert Brenner (University of Illinois) will share his thoughts on what’s coming next and the implications this might have for businesses.

Trustworthy Generative AI

We see lots of news reports of Generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, making mistakes and producing inaccurate information. Many of these mistakes happen because humans use the tools in the wrong way - trying to solve unsuitable problems and not thinking about risk. Hallucination isn't a bug, it's a feature when you approach problems correctly. This course teaches techniques for determining if a problem fits Generative AI's capabilities, framing problems to reduce risk, prompt engineering for trust, and appropriate human engagement in the process. Students learn concrete prompt designs, how to check outputs, how to use Generative AI for ideation and creation, ways to augment human skills, and more ethical, beneficial applications.

$1.2 MRR, should I do paid ads?

Hello, I launched a bootstrapped b2b SaaS end of last year and I've just hit 1.2k MRR. It's a 50-60% profit margin, so $600 are going to my pocket, I also do freelancing where most of my revenue comes from, that's about 3k monthly average. My project has essentially been stuck around this 1k MRR mark for months, I'm sticking to my strategy: Daily outreach on LinkedIn Weekly Post on LinkedIn (my company is a no code tool for building AI SEO & content workflows, so every week I share a new tool) Weekly Blog Post Reaching out to influencers/newsletter writers to see if they'd be willing to write about it. Now I'm thinking if I should set $500-$1000 monthly budget for paid ads, I'm primarily considering Google Ads and LinkedIn Ads. Essentially I'm wondering if 1.2k MRR a good point to start investing back into the company.

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;

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.

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'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

My startup does $740k on no code. I have other ideas - should I build those on no code or use AI?

Hey yall - I'm the founder of a startup in the HR tech space. We rely almost entirely on no code (mainly bubble). Bubble can do 90% of what we need it to and then I can use third party tools like supabase for the remaining 10% I love Bubble because I don't know how to code but it still lets me build apps. I'm seeing a lot of action in the ai space about how AI makes coding super easy, and I'm wondering if folks think this is a good time to finally learn to code. I'm HUGE on no code, but I've also seen its limits (bubble specifically sucks at handling complex calculations and the way it handles load is pretty wonky). I've been wanting to learn to code for some time now but it never felt worth it since, again, bubble can get me 90% there. But now it looks like I can use AI to get 100% there What do yall think? Worth dropping no code to learn to code with AI? Or is AI not as advanced at coding as folks make it seem?

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!

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.

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)

ChatGPT is down! How is your startup product doing?

So it looks like today one of those rare days when OpenAI ChatGPT downtime. I've noticed something interesting - many of my favorite AI tools that use OpenAI under the hood are still operating. This makes me think that the APIs might still be working, even though some services are down. It got me thinking: What gameplan have you all put in place for your products that heavily rely on OpenAI's APIs? How do you handle situations when the API becomes unavailable? I'm curious to hear about your strategies, especially from those who've dealt with previous outages.

$1.2 MRR, should I do paid ads?

Hello, I launched a bootstrapped b2b SaaS end of last year and I've just hit 1.2k MRR. It's a 50-60% profit margin, so $600 are going to my pocket, I also do freelancing where most of my revenue comes from, that's about 3k monthly average. My project has essentially been stuck around this 1k MRR mark for months, I'm sticking to my strategy: Daily outreach on LinkedIn Weekly Post on LinkedIn (my company is a no code tool for building AI SEO & content workflows, so every week I share a new tool) Weekly Blog Post Reaching out to influencers/newsletter writers to see if they'd be willing to write about it. Now I'm thinking if I should set $500-$1000 monthly budget for paid ads, I'm primarily considering Google Ads and LinkedIn Ads. Essentially I'm wondering if 1.2k MRR a good point to start investing back into the company.

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! 🙏

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!

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)

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 would I go about using ai to analyze stats and creating predictions based off of data?

Sorry if I’m asking the question the wrong way but I’ve been a avid sports bettor for years and with the recent surge in ai and it being more accessible to the average person Ive been thinking it were some how possible to use with betting I mean it’s all numbers at the end of the day. If I were to be able to feed info to the bot & have it analyze past games it could pick up on trends and predict outcomes for specific stats and what not. Obviously there is no way to predict something 100% but even if I were to be able to make something that was accurate 40% of the time I look at it as a win. I know alot of bettors of late have been implementing the ai into their strategies as well so I know it’s possible but my question more so is where would be the right direction to start in for some one with ver little knowledge of ai outside of chatgpt?

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?

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

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/

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!

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!

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.

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

Looking for a B2C Platform Tech Stack (Repo/Stack/Boilerplate)

Hi everyone, I'm a non-technical founder and am looking for a complete tech stack/repo for a B2C platform, where user participation (e.g. upvotes) is key. I’m familiar with solutions like ShipFast, but it is super tuned in for SaaS and I need something more similar to a ProductHunt-style platform. Ideally, I’d love to find a repo that also includes a boilerplate to simplify setup and customization. I use an AI co-pilot for many of my tasks, so having a pre-configured stack would be incredibly useful to streamline my work. If you know of any existing repos that I can clone, or if you think it might be a good idea to hire someone from a platform like Upwork to create one for me, I'd love to hear your thoughts. Any recommendations or help would be greatly appreciated!

Is my idea + progress good enough to raise pre-seed round? CRM for construction niches. Non-tech founder.

Is my startup idea and progress good enough to raise a pre-seed round? It’s a CRM with meaningful AI integrations for specific type of B2B construction companies. I only want to continue at my current pace if it’s realistic to start raising within the next 2 weeks. At first, I thought it was fine because simple companies still get on Y-comb such as hammr and Relate CRM , but now I’m not sure. Would love to get the community’s thoughts on this. I’ve been working on this for about a week. &#x200B; Key Highlights (You can skip to longer section below) Product is CRM for B2B construction companies. The previous tech company I worked at used an in-house built CRM for their workflow, and I’m creating that solution and applying it to B2B construction companies that have similar workflows. No competitors I’ve found. I’m uniquely positioned to spearhead: B2B SaaS/tech sales + expertise in construction I’m a non-tech sales founder with experience in UI/UX. Will bring on CTO co-founder once I start raising as that would entice better talent Progress + Traction $400 MRR in pre-sales, can get to \~$800-1000 EOM Validated through customer interviews Created some Figma frames, product overview, user journeys, business plan Made a simple but meaningful AI tool that will be available to those that sign up for waitlist. Did this with GitHub + ChatGPT Landing page website going up this week followed by PPC campaign, email marketing, and outreach. My GF works in enterprise sales and she’ll help me generate more leads. &#x200B; Long Version Background B2B SaaS/Tech sales. I worked at enterprise company as an Account Executive where I worked with funded startups and their development, UI/UX, and Product management teams. I have a general knowledge in all these - my best being UI/UX design as I can work with Figma well Domain expertise: my family has had a construction company since I was young. I have a large network because of this. Problem At my previous company, we had a custom in-house built CRM for our workflow. It worked okay, despite being maintained by multiple engineers costing hundreds of thousands a year. I’m creating a CRM that solves that, and applying it to construction industries that can make use of it. I have a great network here which makes it easy for me get sales quickly. Vision Building this CRM for construction niche will allow us to generate MRR fast. We will be first movers in bringing meaningful AI tools to construction, which is generating significant interest. This gives us the opportunity to build the foundational technology that can be adapted to a wider audience such as my previous company and others - think researchers, consultants, etc. Traction + Current Progress (1 week) Validated idea through user interviews and pre-sales. Currently have $400 MRR in pre-sales. I expect $800-1000 in a month if I continue at my pace. This is from doing typical B2B sales. I’ve set up a CRM for this. Created product overview, user journeys, wireframes and some Figma frames, business plan Created a simple but meaningful AI tool for the niche which will be available to those that sign up for the waitlist. Created with GitHub + ChatGPT Completing landing page website this week. Will start PPC ads (I’m experienced in this) after that to generate sign-ups. I’ll also start email marketing from lists I’ve scraped. Team Solo-founder, will bring on CTO co-founder once I start raising funds. I have promising candidates, but feel that I need to raise funds to really entice a good co-founder. I’m uniquely positioned to head this product; B2B sales having worked with many CRMs + construction expertise and network. That said, I’ve never actually done anything that* impressive besides being an AE at a known enterprise techy company (but not FAANG level). &#x200B; I want to acknowledge that my progress might sound more impressive than it is - it's still just a CRM after all, and I'm non-technical. Should I keep going? Advice? I also have a great offer to lead sales at a profitable startup, but I could always do both if it was worth it. I’m feeling really uncertain for some reason :/ maybe it’s just burnout.

Early stage startups do outreach and skip content marketing, did that change recently?

Since venturing into the startup world in 2021 as a technical solo founder, I always had to pursue advice on the non-technical stuff such as marketing. When starting out as a boostrapped project, it's commonly adviced that you should focus on direct outreach and skip any SEO/Content Marketing work. But I'm wondering if this memo changed recently due to all the advancements in AI and text generation. What took 10 hours to write can now take 3 with the right automations setup. So if this change means that it would be good idea for founders to semi-automate their content marketing even in the very early stages. To be clear, by early stage I mean you have a few users and maybe handful of customers not a blank zero. Also by 'content automation' I wouldn't solely rely on ChatGPT to generate my blogs, but it for sure can help me with research, ideation, drafting, and reviewing. What do you guys think?

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?

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!

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!

Competing with much bigger companies that have lame products? How do I market and carve out a niche? (I will not promote)

I've been working on a product for the last few months that competes with CapCut, Adobe Premier, Veed, Descript, DaVinci Resolve, etc. Basically, it's a fancy video editor. (no link and I will not promote but just some background context) I'm very technical and started creating videos for TikTok but really wanted to take my game to the next level. My channel sort of blew up on me in the first month and I was able to get 2M views and 10k followers. My initial thinking was that I was going to use AI to make video editing fancy/faster and sort of have this as a "script" that I used personally. Basically, give myself a serious competitive advantage. However, it sort of spiraled out of control! What started off as a weekend project, turned into 2 weekends, which turned into about 2 months of continuous hacking. If I'm going to spend a significant amount of time on this, I might as well try to productize it and try to at least make enough money that I break even on my time. The thing I'm worried about, in the back of my mind, is that if I shop this, that my competitors, with their signifiant resources, could clone what I'm doing quickly. However, at the same time, why haven't they done so already? I mean maybe I have a better understanding of the market than they do because they don't actually use their products. I know that sounds like a bit of a cop out in a way but there are plenty of entrepreneurs who have started companies and crushed it just because they were heads down and focused. Another problem I face, is that I think VCs may not be super excited about this because it's B2C-ish and it's not in a super exciting space. Maybe you could say it's in the AI video space, and they're excited about AI video, but it's just an AI video editor, not fully creating AI videos from scratch like SORA. I think since I blew up my TikTok feed before, that I could do it again, and if I get 2M views, and I have a outro on my video, that I could start to convert some of these as customers. Especially, if I started to create videos for creators which is more focused on the target market. So without funding, can I really tackle these existing competitors? PS. "I will not promote" but I have to talk about this somewhat abstractly but I won't link to anything.

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.

We're building a tool to help you find grants. Would you use it?

Hi there! In Europe alone, we spend almost € 400 billion annually on subsidies to support businesses. We estimate there are around 18,000 different grants available to entrepreneurs. Via the EU of course, but also via cities, national governments and literally countless public bodies all offering different kinds of support. I've been working for the government for about 10 years now, and I've noticed how difficult it can be for smaller companies to identify the right subsidy opportunities. Because they don't know they exist (and thus don't know where to find them), or because the eligibility criteria are just overwhelming, for example. Together with my co-founder we're building a tool to make it easier to find the grants that best align with your goals (fingers crossed!). Basically we scan all subsidies in Europe, use AI to analyze the goals and criteria and match companies with those subsidies that work best for them. So my question for you guys: do you look for subsidies or grants at all? And would such a tool be helpful for you? And if so, what kind of features would be most helpful for you? Really appreciate any thoughts from your side! Also if you think the idea is just rubbish :) Jesse

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 do I, as a Data Scientist, get familiar with the business knowledge and jargon I need to start my AI startup and sell my product?

Here’s my situation: I'm a Data Scientist working on an MVP, almost ready to launch, called Attendify. It simplifies the attendance process in schools—no more teachers calling out names and sending records to principals. Instead, teachers create an account, upload student images, and start a live camera feed, all through the app. The app detects students using deep learning, stores everything in a database, and automates the process. Plus, I plan to add features based on school needs and pitch it directly to them. Now, I’m looking to establish a proper AI startup with a website and digital presence, but I'm lacking in business knowledge, especially the lingo like "B2B" and other terms. My goal is to be a sole founder with an online workforce. Can anyone recommend a cost-effective course (maybe on Coursera) that covers the basics I need to know to effectively talk with clients and understand the business side of things? Attendify is just one of them, I might create more in the future so I'm going towards SaaS side I was thinking about Entrepreneurship Specialization by University of Pennsylvania on Coursera if anyone got any feedback on it

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.

Why you should consider using small open source fine-tuned models

Context I want to start off by giving some context on what fine-tuning is, why it's useful and who it would be useful for: What is fine-tuning? When controlling the output of an LLM there are, broadly, three levels. Prompt engineering, RAG and fine-tuning. Most of you are likely familiar with the first two. Prompt engineering is when you try to optimize the prompt to get the model to do what you want better. RAG (retrieval augmented generation) is when you first do a search on some data (usually stored in a vector database which allows you to search by similarity), then you insert the results into the prompt so that the model can use that context to more accurately answer any questions. It's like letting the LLM access external information right before answering, using that additional context to improve its response Fine-tuning is when you want to fundamentally teach a model something new or teach it to behave in a particular way. You would provide the model with high quality data (i.e. inputs and outputs) which it will train on. Why is it useful? At the moment, many of you use the largest and best LLMs because they give the best results. However, for a lot of use cases you are likely using a sledgehammer for a small nail. Does it do a great job? Damn yeah! Well... why not use a smaller hammer? Because it might miss or hit your finger. The solution shouldn't be to use a sledgehammer, but rather to learn how to use a smaller hammer properly so you never miss! That's exactly what fine-tuning a smaller model is like. Once you fine-tune it on a specific task with good high quality data, it can surpass even the best models at that specific task. It'll be 10x cheaper to run, much faster and, if you use an open source model, you'll own the model (no vendor lock-in!). If you run a SaaS and your biggest expense is AI costs then you should definitely consider fine-tuning. It'll take some time to set up but it'll be well worth it in the medium/long term (a bit like SEO). You can always resort to the best models for more complex tasks. How to fine-tune? I'm going to give you a breakdown of the process from beginning to end. You do need to be (a bit) technical in order to do this. Getting the data Let's suppose we want to fine-tune a model to make high-quality SEO content. At the moment, you might be using a large sophisticated prompt or using multiple large LLMs to write different parts or utilizing RAG. This is all slow and expensive but might be giving you great results. Our goal is to replace this with a fine-tuned model that is great at one thing: writing high-quality SEO content quickly at a much lower cost. The first step is gathering the appropriate data. If you want the model to write 3 or 4 paragraphs based on a prompt that contains the topic and a few keywords, then your data should match that. There are a few way you can do this: You can manually gather high-quality SEO content. You'd write the prompt and the response that the model should give. You can use a larger more powerful LLM to generate the content for you (also known as synthetic data). It'll be expensive but remember that it'll be a larger one-off cost to get the data. If you already have a pipeline that works great then you can use the prompts and the generated content that you already have from that pipeline. You can buy a high-quality dataset or get someone to make it for you. The data is the most important part of this process. Remember, garbage in garbage out. Your data needs to have a good variety and should not contain any bad examples. You should aim for around 1000 examples. The more the better! The actual fine-tuning. At this stage you are now ready to choose a model and setup the fine-tuning. If you are unsure I'd stick to the Llama 3.1 family of models. They are great and reliable. There are three models: 8b, 70b and 405b. Depending on the complexity of the task you should select an appropriate size. However, to really reap the cost saving benefits and the speed you should try to stick with the 8b model or the the 70b model if the 8b is not good enough. For our SEO example, let's use the 8b model. Important note on selecting a model: You might see multiple models with the 8b flag. You might see 4bit-bnb or instruct. The instruct version of the models have basically been trained to be chatbots. So if you want to keep the chatbot-like instruction-following functionality then you should use the instruct version as the base. The non-instruct version simply generates text. It won't 'act' like a chatbot which is better for use cases like creative writing. The 4bit-bnb means that the model has been 'quantized'. Basically it has been made 4x smaller (the original is in 16 bits) so that it is faster to download and faster to fine-tune. This slightly reduces the accuracy of the model but it's usually fine for most use cases :) Fine-tuning should be done on a good GPU. CPU aren't good enough. So you can't spin up a droplet on digital ocean and use that. You'll specifically need to spin up a GPU. One website that I think is great is Runpod .io (I am not affiliated with them). You simply pay for the GPU by the hour. If you want the training to be fast you can use the H100, if you want something cheaper but slower you can use the A40. Although the A40 won't be good enough to run the 70b parameter model. For the 405b model you'll need multiple H100s but let's leave that for more advanced use cases. Once you've spun up your H100 and ssh-ed into it. I would recommend using the unsloth open source library to do the fine-tuning. They have great docs and good boilerplate code. You want to train using a method called QLoRA. This won't train the entire model but only "part of it". I don't want to get into the technical details as t3hat isn't important but essentially it's a very efficient and effective way of fine-tuning models. When fine-tuning you can provide something called a 'validation set'. As your model is training it will be tested against the 'validation set' to see how well it's doing. You'll get an 'eval loss' which basically means how well is your model doing when compared with the unseen validation data. If you have 1000 training examples I'd recommend taking out 100-200 so it can act as the validation set. Your model may start off with an eval loss of 1.1 and by the end of the training (e.g. 3 epochs - the number of epochs is the number of times your model will be trained on the entire dataset. It's like reading a book more than once so you can understand it better. Usually 3-5 epochs is enough) the eval loss would drop to 0.6 or 0.7 which means your model has made great progress in learning your dataset! You don't want it to be too low as that means it is literally memorizing which isn't good. Post fine-tuning You'll want to save the model with the best eval loss. You actually won't have the whole model, just something called the "QLoRA adapters". These are basically like the new neurons that contain the "understanding" of the data you trained the model on. You can combine these with the base model (using unsloth again) to prompt the model. You can also (and I recommend this) convert the model to GGUF format (using unsloth again). This basically packages the QLoRA adapters and model together into an optimized format so you can easily and efficiently run it and prompt it (using unsloth again... lol). I would then recommend running some evaluations on the new model. You can do this by simply prompting the new model and a more powerful model (or using your old pipeline) and then asking a powerful model e.g. Claude to judge which is better. If your model consistently does better then you've hit a winner! You can then use runpod again to deploy the model to their serverless AI endpoint so you only pay when it's actually being inferenced. (Again, I'm not affiliated with them) I hope this was useful and you at least got a good idea of what fine-tuning is and how you might go about doing it. By the way, I've just launched a website where you can easily fine-tune Llama 3.1 models. I'm actually hoping to eventually automate this entire process as I believe small fine-tuned models will be much more common in the future. If you want more info, feel free to DM me :)

Voice AI Isn’t Just for Big Brands – Here’s How Startups Can Use It (I will not promote)

When you think about Voice AI, it’s easy to picture massive companies like Amazon or Google pouring millions into complex systems. But it isn’t just for the big guys anymore. Startups can use it too, and it doesn’t have to cost a fortune. Why Startups Should Care About Voice AI Voice AI used to be expensive and complicated, but that’s changed a lot. Today, even small startups can use it to save time, cut costs, and make customers happier—all without needing a massive budget. If you think that repetitive tasks are eating up your team’s time, or if customers are getting frustrated by slow responses, Voice AI can help. And it’s not just for call centers or tech giants. Startups can benefit from it just as much, if not more. 3 Practical Ways Startups Can Use Voice AI Automated Scheduling and Appointment Setting Whether it’s booking meetings, setting reminders, or rescheduling, Voice AI can handle it all. This is especially useful for service-based startups, like healthcare clinics, legal firms, or consulting agencies. Answering Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Every startup gets repetitive questions—“What are your hours?” “What’s your refund policy?” Instead of answering the same things over and over, Voice AI can automate it. Order Tracking and Status Updates For e-commerce startups, Voice AI can provide real-time order updates without involving a human. Customers get quick answers, and your team can focus on more important tasks. Simple Workflow: How It Works Customer Initiates Call Customer calls the business for scheduling, FAQs, or order updates. Voice AI Answers AI responds with a natural, human-like voice. AI Handles the Request Schedules appointments, answers FAQs, or provides order updates. Integration and Confirmation Syncs with calendars or order management systems. Confirms booking or provides tracking info. Call Ends Customer gets what they need without waiting. Team stays focused on higher-priority tasks. If the fear is that Voice AI will sound robotic or annoy customers, it’s worth reconsidering. Today’s tech is way more natural and human-like than it used to be. You can use free trial of platforms like Retell AI or Play AI or Bland AI (I will not promote) Would it make sense for your startup to try Voice AI?

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!

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. :-)

After building an AI Co-founder to solve my startup struggles, I realized we might be onto something bigger. What problems would you want YOUR AI Co-founder to solve?

A few days ago, I shared my entrepreneurial journey and the endless loop of startup struggles I was facing. The response from the community was overwhelming, and it validated something I had stumbled upon while trying to solve my own problems. In just a matter of days, we've built out the core modules I initially used for myself, deep market research capabilities, automated outreach systems, and competitor analysis. It's surreal to see something born out of personal frustration turning into a tool that others might actually find valuable. But here's where it gets interesting (and where I need your help). While we're actively onboarding users for our alpha test, I can't shake the feeling that we're just scratching the surface. We've built what helped me, but what would help YOU? When you're lying awake at 3 AM, stressed about your startup, what tasks do you wish you could delegate to an AI co-founder who actually understands context and can take meaningful action? Of course, it's not a replacement for an actual AI cofounder, but using our prior entrepreneurial experience and conversations with other folks, we understand that OUTREACH and SALES might actually be a big problem statement we can go deeper on as it naturally helps with the following: Idea Validation - Testing your assumptions with real customers before building Pricing strategy - Understanding what the market is willing to pay Product strategy - Getting feedback on features and roadmap Actually revenue - Converting conversations into real paying customers I'm not asking you to imagine some sci-fi scenario, we've already built modules that can: Generate comprehensive 20+ page market analysis reports with actionable insights Handle customer outreach Monitor competitors and target accounts, tracking changes in their strategy Take supervised actions based on the insights gathered (Manual effort is required currently) But what else should it do? What would make you trust an AI co-founder with parts of your business? Or do you think this whole concept is fundamentally flawed? I'm committed to building this the right way, not just another AI tool or an LLM Wrapper, but an agentic system that can understand your unique challenges and work towards overcoming them. Whether you think this is revolutionary or ridiculous, I want to hear your honest thoughts. But more importantly, I want to hear your unfiltered feedback in the comments. What would make this truly valuable for YOU? Edit 1: The AI cofounder will take no equity in your startup.

Looking for an accountability partner as a solo founder. [I will not promote]

Hello! I am a technical founder focused on using AI solutions to drive automation. Recently had a co-founder split after working together for a couple month. We had a very good traction but I made a decision to leave because I believed we didn't have a solid foundational relationship that can be sustained for a long time. Had more of a co-worker style relationship. Took on the short-term pain to set myself up for a long term success. He was the one leading the sales and relation with the businesses, so we decided he will be leading the company moving forward and we split on very good terms. Back in the gulag now and starting from scratch. Took three days to reset and recover. When I tried to get back at things yesterday, my brain wasn't just having it. My stress activation got so high, i did like 4 wim hof breathing sessions and a 10 mile run to relieve the stress buildup. There is something about uncertainty and working without a lack of clear path that is super hard to process especially when you are solo. Currently I am working through my previous idea backlogs that I have built up and re-starting previous conversations. But my brain isn't giving me the dopamine hit from driving toward action as much as I used to. So any work that i do feels like a slogging through mud. I am looking to experiment with having an accountability partner, to make the initial ramp up easier. Thinking of doing the elon musk style "What have you done this week?" report that we can do to drive accountability and give that extra motivation. If you're navigating similar challenges as a solo founder and believe mutual accountability could accelerate our progress and growth, I'd love to connect. Let's help each other build momentum and stay motivated—drop a comment or DM if interested! I will not promote

What I Learned from a Failed Startup: Seeking Advice on Engineering, Co-Founder Agreements & Execution (i will not promote)

Hey everyone! Long-time lurker, first-time founder here. I’m reaching out to get feedback on a recent startup experience—what went wrong, what I could have done better, and how I should approach future opportunities. The Background There were three founders in this venture: • Founder A (CEO, 50%) – The product/growth guy who identified the problem space. • Founder B (Me, CTO, 37.5%) – A software engineer with a software dev shop and multiple clients. I wanted to diversify into building my own products but am not inherently a “product person.” • Founder C (COO, 12.5%) – Brought into the mix by Founder A, with the goal of leveraging his network for traction once the product was built. The idea was to create Product X, a solution targeting the SMB space while competitors were moving upmarket. It wasn’t revolutionary—more of a strategic market play. The Initial Plan & My Role • Founder A would define and prioritize product specs, guiding what needed to be built. • I (Founder B) didn’t have time to code myself, so I allocated engineers from my dev shop (which I personally paid for). My stake was adjusted from 32.5% to 37.5% to reflect this contribution. • Founder C was more of an observer early on, planning to help with traction once we had a product ready. We agreed on a 1-year cliff and a 4-year vesting schedule for equity. Where Things Started to Go Wrong • Lack of a Clear Product Roadmap – Founder A was very focused on getting something built fast, but we never signed off on a structured roadmap or milestones. I underestimated the complexity of what was actually needed for customer conversations. • Engineering Expectations vs. Reality – The team (one part-time lead + two full-time juniors from my dev shop) faced early feedback that development was too slow. In response, I ramped up the lead to full-time and added a part-time PM. But Founder A continued pushing for speed, despite real hurdles (OAuth integrations, etc.). • Shifting MVP Goalposts – Midway, Founder A concluded that an MVP wouldn’t cut it—we needed a more complete product to be competitive. This meant more engineering, more delays, and more of my own money spent on development. The Breaking Point Near the 1-year vesting mark, we had an opportunity: a paying client willing to fund an app. I didn’t have devs on the bench, so I asked Founder A to hold off our project briefly while I hired more engineers to avoid stalling either effort. This was the final straw. Founder A (with Founder C somewhat aligned) decided the arrangement wasn’t working—citing past disagreements and the “slowness” issue. The decision was made to end the partnership. Now, Founder A, as majority holder, is requesting a full handover of the code, Founder C is indifferent, and all engineering costs I covered are essentially lost. Key Takeaways (So Far) Crystal-Clear Agreements Upfront – A formalized product roadmap and timeline should’ve been locked in from day one. Business Needs > Engineering Standards – I wanted to build something solid and scalable, but in an early-stage startup, speed to market is king. This was before AI tools became mainstream, so our approach wasn’t as optimized. Don’t Overextend Without Protection – I personally financed all engineering, but without clear safeguards, that investment became a sunk cost. Expenses Must Be Distributed – I was solely covering engineering salaries, which created an imbalance in financial risk. Future partnerships should ensure costs are shared proportionally, rather than one person shouldering the burden. Where I Need Advice Looking back, I want to improve as an engineer, CEO, and co-founder. • What should I have done differently in structuring this partnership? • How do you balance engineering quality with the startup need for speed? • As a dev shop owner, how can I better navigate equity deals where I’m also bringing in engineering resources? I really appreciate everyone who went through this long post and provide any insights from founders, engineers, or anyone who has been in a similar situation. Thanks for reading! ===================================================================== For readers who might be thinking what set this type of expectation? Because I had a dev shop and I thought my co-founders will be understanding of my business circumstance and I was a bit trigger to build a product with a C-exec team, I gave the impression of "unlimited" engineering which I later realized down the line that it was not feasible for me. Something I learned that I have to be more careful with and set expectations accordingly from the very beginning. And from the feedback of the commenters here, I am much more aware what I should offer and how to set expectations, esp. in the early stages of execution. So thank you all! 🙏🏾 EDIT: I would like to thank everyone who contributed to this thread. You not only helped me but future founders who are considering to get into the startup scene!

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/

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;

We received 25k investment offer, need advice [I will not promote]

We received a $25k for 2.5% on a convertible note offer from a US based investor. The note matures in 18 months with an interest rate of 5%, but the investor said they can extend it further. It’s an AI SaaS in graphic design. We have been bootstrapping till now, and we feel that this money could help us hire better engineers and marketeers, we want to grow it to a good revenue, but don't see it becoming a billion dollar startup as such. Our initial plans were to build it like an indie-hacker, grow it a decent revenue and sell it to someone who can take better care of it. We built it as a side project with full time jobs. We already have decent traction with 10k+ signups and $600+ in revenue per month with <100 dollars spent on marketing. But our AI model costs are high, 0.2 USD per user that we onboard and provide free credits. But we as founders are more interested in another idea that we have been thinking about and see a bigger potential + founder market fit in. The current product is good, and we can foresee that with better hiring and marketing, we can grow our revenue to about 10-20k a month, like a regular online business. What should we do? We don't want to simply let go of the product because it's not that it doesn't work, it's just that we as founders are better fit for something else. We can't sell it yet as the revenue isn't too high and we haven't even incorporated. Is it okay if we think of growing it to 10-20k+ a month and then intend to sell it to someone who can take better care of it? Should we take the investment in such a case, given this investment is definitely gonna help us grow? Process of incorporation will also help us in selling this business later I think?

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.

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.

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!

After building an AI Co-founder to solve my startup struggles, I realized we might be onto something bigger. What problems would you want YOUR AI Co-founder to solve?

A few days ago, I shared my entrepreneurial journey and the endless loop of startup struggles I was facing. The response from the community was overwhelming, and it validated something I had stumbled upon while trying to solve my own problems. In just a matter of days, we've built out the core modules I initially used for myself, deep market research capabilities, automated outreach systems, and competitor analysis. It's surreal to see something born out of personal frustration turning into a tool that others might actually find valuable. But here's where it gets interesting (and where I need your help). While we're actively onboarding users for our alpha test, I can't shake the feeling that we're just scratching the surface. We've built what helped me, but what would help YOU? When you're lying awake at 3 AM, stressed about your startup, what tasks do you wish you could delegate to an AI co-founder who actually understands context and can take meaningful action? Of course, it's not a replacement for an actual AI cofounder, but using our prior entrepreneurial experience and conversations with other folks, we understand that OUTREACH and SALES might actually be a big problem statement we can go deeper on as it naturally helps with the following: Idea Validation - Testing your assumptions with real customers before building Pricing strategy - Understanding what the market is willing to pay Product strategy - Getting feedback on features and roadmap Actually revenue - Converting conversations into real paying customers I'm not asking you to imagine some sci-fi scenario, we've already built modules that can: Generate comprehensive 20+ page market analysis reports with actionable insights Handle customer outreach Monitor competitors and target accounts, tracking changes in their strategy Take supervised actions based on the insights gathered (Manual effort is required currently) But what else should it do? What would make you trust an AI co-founder with parts of your business? Or do you think this whole concept is fundamentally flawed? I'm committed to building this the right way, not just another AI tool or an LLM Wrapper, but an agentic system that can understand your unique challenges and work towards overcoming them. Whether you think this is revolutionary or ridiculous, I want to hear your honest thoughts. But more importantly, I want to hear your unfiltered feedback in the comments. What would make this truly valuable for YOU? Edit 1: The AI cofounder will take no equity in your startup.

What I Learned from a Failed Startup: Seeking Advice on Engineering, Co-Founder Agreements & Execution (i will not promote)

Hey everyone! Long-time lurker, first-time founder here. I’m reaching out to get feedback on a recent startup experience—what went wrong, what I could have done better, and how I should approach future opportunities. The Background There were three founders in this venture: • Founder A (CEO, 50%) – The product/growth guy who identified the problem space. • Founder B (Me, CTO, 37.5%) – A software engineer with a software dev shop and multiple clients. I wanted to diversify into building my own products but am not inherently a “product person.” • Founder C (COO, 12.5%) – Brought into the mix by Founder A, with the goal of leveraging his network for traction once the product was built. The idea was to create Product X, a solution targeting the SMB space while competitors were moving upmarket. It wasn’t revolutionary—more of a strategic market play. The Initial Plan & My Role • Founder A would define and prioritize product specs, guiding what needed to be built. • I (Founder B) didn’t have time to code myself, so I allocated engineers from my dev shop (which I personally paid for). My stake was adjusted from 32.5% to 37.5% to reflect this contribution. • Founder C was more of an observer early on, planning to help with traction once we had a product ready. We agreed on a 1-year cliff and a 4-year vesting schedule for equity. Where Things Started to Go Wrong • Lack of a Clear Product Roadmap – Founder A was very focused on getting something built fast, but we never signed off on a structured roadmap or milestones. I underestimated the complexity of what was actually needed for customer conversations. • Engineering Expectations vs. Reality – The team (one part-time lead + two full-time juniors from my dev shop) faced early feedback that development was too slow. In response, I ramped up the lead to full-time and added a part-time PM. But Founder A continued pushing for speed, despite real hurdles (OAuth integrations, etc.). • Shifting MVP Goalposts – Midway, Founder A concluded that an MVP wouldn’t cut it—we needed a more complete product to be competitive. This meant more engineering, more delays, and more of my own money spent on development. The Breaking Point Near the 1-year vesting mark, we had an opportunity: a paying client willing to fund an app. I didn’t have devs on the bench, so I asked Founder A to hold off our project briefly while I hired more engineers to avoid stalling either effort. This was the final straw. Founder A (with Founder C somewhat aligned) decided the arrangement wasn’t working—citing past disagreements and the “slowness” issue. The decision was made to end the partnership. Now, Founder A, as majority holder, is requesting a full handover of the code, Founder C is indifferent, and all engineering costs I covered are essentially lost. Key Takeaways (So Far) Crystal-Clear Agreements Upfront – A formalized product roadmap and timeline should’ve been locked in from day one. Business Needs > Engineering Standards – I wanted to build something solid and scalable, but in an early-stage startup, speed to market is king. This was before AI tools became mainstream, so our approach wasn’t as optimized. Don’t Overextend Without Protection – I personally financed all engineering, but without clear safeguards, that investment became a sunk cost. Expenses Must Be Distributed – I was solely covering engineering salaries, which created an imbalance in financial risk. Future partnerships should ensure costs are shared proportionally, rather than one person shouldering the burden. Where I Need Advice Looking back, I want to improve as an engineer, CEO, and co-founder. • What should I have done differently in structuring this partnership? • How do you balance engineering quality with the startup need for speed? • As a dev shop owner, how can I better navigate equity deals where I’m also bringing in engineering resources? I really appreciate everyone who went through this long post and provide any insights from founders, engineers, or anyone who has been in a similar situation. Thanks for reading! ===================================================================== For readers who might be thinking what set this type of expectation? Because I had a dev shop and I thought my co-founders will be understanding of my business circumstance and I was a bit trigger to build a product with a C-exec team, I gave the impression of "unlimited" engineering which I later realized down the line that it was not feasible for me. Something I learned that I have to be more careful with and set expectations accordingly from the very beginning. And from the feedback of the commenters here, I am much more aware what I should offer and how to set expectations, esp. in the early stages of execution. So thank you all! 🙏🏾 EDIT: I would like to thank everyone who contributed to this thread. You not only helped me but future founders who are considering to get into the startup scene!

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.

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)

AI Startups: Are We in a Gold Rush or a Bubble? (I will not promote)

AI is everywhere—from automating workflows to building fully autonomous agents, startups are racing to integrate AI into everything. Funding is still flowing, and AI-powered tools are disrupting multiple industries. But here’s the reality: not all AI startups will survive. Many are just wrappers around existing models, offering little real innovation. The cost of running AI at scale is massive, and monetization is still a challenge. The ones that will last? Startups solving real problems, not just riding the hype. I see AI as a long-term game, but not every startup will make it. The ones that truly integrate AI as a value-add, rather than just a marketing buzzword, will thrive. What do you think—is AI the future, or are we in for a reality check? (I will not promote)

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.

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!

Is an AI-powered cold outreach tool that gets you meetings useful?

Hey, Quick question - do you think a tool that automates your cold outreach process and gets you meetings with interested prospects would be useful? I'm working on a product that does exactly that - you just define your initial cold email, and AI takes care of the rest. It personalizes the outreach, handles follow-ups, and ultimately schedules meetings for you via Calendly. I'd love to get the community's feedback on two things: Is this something you'd find genuinely useful? Is manual cold outreach a pain point for you? Any major concerns or objections to the idea of using AI for cold outreach automation? I appreciate any insights you can share. Just trying to validate the need before I dive head-first into building this. Cheers!

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.

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.

Month 2 of building my startup after being laid off - $200 in revenue and 4 (actual) paying customers

In September 2024, I got laid off from my Silicon Valley job. It fucking sucked. I took a day to be sad, then got to work - I'm not one to wallow, I prefer action. Updated my resume, hit up my network, started interviewing. During this time, I had a realization - I'm tired of depending on a single income stream. I needed to diversify. Then it hit me: I literally work with RAG (retrieval augmented generation) in AI. Why not use this knowledge to help small businesses reduce their customer service load and boost sales? One month later, Answer HQ 0.5 (the MVP) was in the hands of our first users (shoutout to these alpha testers - their feedback shaped everything). By month 2, Answer HQ 1.0 launched with four paying customers, and growing. You're probably thinking - great, another chatbot. Yes, Answer HQ is a chatbot at its core. But here's the difference: it actually works. Our paying customers are seeing real results in reducing support load, plus it has something unique - it actively drives sales by turning customer questions into conversions. How? The AI doesn't just answer questions, it naturally recommends relevant products and content (blogs, social media, etc). Since I'm targeting small business owners (who usually aren't tech wizards) and early startups, Answer HQ had to be dead simple to set up. Here's my onboarding process - just 4 steps. I've checked out competitors like Intercom and Crisp, and I can say this: if my non-tech fiancée can set up an assistant on her blog in minutes, anyone can. Key learnings so far: Building in public is powerful. I shared my journey on Threads and X, and the support for a solo founder has been amazing. AI dev tools (Cursor, Claude Sonnet 3.5) have made MVP development incredibly accessible. You can get a working prototype frontend ready in days. I don't see how traditional no-code tools can survive in this age. But.. for a production-ready product? You still need dev skills and background. Example: I use Redis for super-fast loading of configs and themes. An AI won't suggest this optimization unless you know to ask for it. Another example: Cursor + Sonnet 3.5 struggles with code bases with many files and dependencies. It will change things you don't want it to change. Unless you can read code + understand it + know what needs to be changed and not changed, you'll easily run into upper limits of what prompting alone can do. I never mention "artificial intelligence" "AI" "machine learning" or any of these buzzwords once in my copy in my landing page, docs, product, etc. There is no point. Your customers do not care that something has AI in it. AI is not the product. Solving their pain points and problems is the product. AI is simply a tool of many tools like databases, APIs, caching, system design, etc. Early on, I personally onboarded every user through video calls. Time-consuming? Yes. But it helped me deeply understand their pain points and needs. I wasn't selling tech - I was showing them solutions to their problems. Tech stack: NextJS/React/Tailwind/shadcn frontend, Python FastAPI backend. Using Supabase Postgres, Upstash Redis, and Pinecone for different data needs. Hosted on Vercel and Render.com. Customer growth: Started with one alpha tester who saw such great results (especially in driving e-commerce sales) that he insisted on paying for a full year to keep me motivated. This led to two monthly customers, then a fourth annual customer after I raised prices. My advisor actually pushed me to raise prices again, saying I was undercharging for the value provided. I have settled on my final pricing now. I am learning so much. Traditionally, I have a software development and product management background. I am weak in sales and marketing. Building that app, designing the architecture, talking to customers, etc, these are all my strong suits. I enjoy doing it too. But now I need to improve on my ability to market the startup and really start learning things like SEO, content marketing, cold outreach, etc. I enjoying learning new skills. Happy to answer any questions about the journey so far!

Seeking Feedback: Would a No-Code AI Solution Benefit Your Business?

Hi, fellow small business owners. I'm currently working on an AI startup, with the goal of providing small businesses a seamless and intuitive way to integrate AI into operations without the need for any coding or tech expertise. We're designing an auto machine learning application that's user-friendly and tailored to the unique needs of small businesses. Before we scale, I would really appreciate any insights and feedback. Here are a few questions that would be helpful to get answers to: Pain Points: Are there specific tasks or processes in your operations that you think could be automated or enhanced using AI? This could be anything from customer service chatbots, inventory management, sales forecasting, or anything else you might think of. Features: What features would you want in a no-code AI solution? Perhaps easy integration with existing software? Drag-and-drop model training? Pre-built models for common tasks? Training & Support: How important would training and support be for you in implementing and using an AI solution? Would you prefer video tutorials, live-chat support, or hands-on workshops? Pricing: Would you be willing to invest in such a tool? If so, what would be a reasonable price point for you? We're considering a tiered model based on usage, with a potential starting point of $X/month. Does that sound feasible? Trial Period: Would a free trial period be beneficial for you? How long would you need to assess the tool's impact on your business? Data Concerns: How comfortable are you with sharing data with an AI application? What privacy and security measures would make you feel at ease? Your feedback is really useful. We're building this solution with you in mind, and your insights will guide the next steps. In appreciation for your time and input, we're offering a special discount for early adopters from this community once we launch. Just drop a comment below, and I'll make sure to get in touch when we are ready. Many Thanks, Chris Parker

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.

Struggling with my dog-themed clothing store – How can I make it better?

TL;DR: I own a dog-inspired store that’s struggling to make sales. I need your honest feedback to make it better. Hey reddit, I’m turning to you because I really need your honest feedback. I run a small online shop, dogloverclothing.com, where I sell dog-inspired fashion items and accessories (product list is growing). I poured my heart into creating it because I’m a huge dog lover (I own a Corgi and a Beagle), and I thought there must be others out there who’d resonate with the style of my designs. I truly believe my shop is fun and creative and I thought other dog lovers would easily connect with the dog-theme behind it. But I’m struggling. I’ve only made 1-2 sales a year and I feel like I’ve hit a wall. Let me be completely transparent about my situation: I have a small child who needs my care in the afternoons. I work part-time in the mornings, and the only time I'm able to work on my shop is in the evenings (once all the usual household chaos is settled) or on weekends. That gives me maybe 1-2 hours a day to focus on this project. I don’t have the money or time for big ad campaigns, influencer cooperations, daily social media activity, or even professional photoshoots for my products. My visuals are mostly created with AI tools, stock imagery, and mockup generators, but I think they look professional enough to be converting. I tried small ad campaigns, and while I got a few sales, the ad costs ended up being higher than my revenue, so I had to stop. I also tried organic Social Media activity, but the time I put into that did not turn into any traffic, followers or sales, so I also stopped that. I know that putting myself/my face out there on social media could help, but I’m not comfortable showing my face or apartment in videos or ads. I could do flatlays or simple videos with the products I have at home. Right now, I’m putting all my energy into SEO, hoping to attract organic traffic and customers. Otherwise, I feel stuck with marketing. I want to make the most of the limited time and resources I have. My dream definitely isn’t to get rich here from this shop. I would love to make an extra $300-500 a month to make life a little easier for my family, while fulfilling my creative streak – and that's about it. I’m not sure if that’s even realistic, but it’s what keeps me going. So, guys: What do you think I’m doing wrong or could do better? Is it the designs? The pricing? The website layout? The lack of time/lack of money? How can I make this work with my limited time and resources? Are there any affordable, creative marketing strategies you’d recommend for someone in my shoes? Is my goal of $300-500/month realistic for a store like mine? I’m open to all your ideas, tips, and even brutal honesty. This isn’t just a business for me, it’s my passion project, and I’d love to make it somewhat of sustainable. I’m not here to sell you something. I’m here to learn. I know Reddit doesn’t hold back, and that’s what I need. Can you take a look at my site, tell me what you think, and help me figure out why this dream hasn’t taken off yet? I know running a business is tough, and I deeply admire everyone in this community who’s making it work. I’d love to hear your insights, experiences, and even your tough love if that’s what it takes to get my dream back on track. Thank you so much for taking the time to read this and for any advice you can offer!

Ai C-Level team

I've been exploring ways to run a company where I'm essentially the only internal team member, relying entirely on a suite of specialized AIs for executive roles, supported occasionally by external consultants for niche expertise. My goal is to stay lean, agile, and highly creative, especially in a fashion/tech brand context. Essentially, I'm building an AI-driven C-Level team, or what I like to call a "C-Level AI Wallet." Here's what I'm thinking for the key executive roles I'd need to cover with AI: CEO AI – Responsible for overall strategy, decision-making, trend analysis, and guiding the company's vision. I'd probably lean on something advanced like Gemini, GPT-4, or similar models, fine-tuned with market-specific data. COO AI (Operations): I'd need tools that streamline and automate logistics, supply chain management, and day-to-day operations (think something along the lines of Zapier AI integrations or Make). CMO AI (Marketing & Content): For branding, content creation, digital marketing, and consumer insights, I'd use Jasper or Copy.ai, combined with predictive analytics tools like Google Vertex AI to understand trends better. Additionally, for generating engaging visual and multimedia content, tools like Midjourney, DALL·E, Adobe Firefly, and Runway ML would be perfect. CFO AI (Financial Management): For financial management, cash flow control, and investment decisions, I'd probably leverage AI tools like Bloomberg GPT, combined with AI-powered forecasting platforms. CHRO AI (Human Resources & Culture): Although the internal team is minimal (just myself!), I'd still rely on AI for tasks like project management, freelancer hiring, and performance tracking—tools like HireVue AI, Motion, or even Notion's AI could be beneficial here. CSO AI (Sustainability & Compliance): Since sustainability and ethical sourcing are critical, I'd integrate ESG-focused AI tools to ensure transparency and responsible sourcing. My idea is that, with the right AI tools seamlessly integrated, I can manage the strategic vision and creative direction personally, leveraging external consultants only when necessary. This setup would ideally allow me to operate as a one-person internal team supported by a robust "wallet" of AI executives. Has anyone tried a similar approach? What AI tools would you recommend for a truly lean, innovative brand structure? I'm very curious about your experiences or suggestions—let me know your thoughts!

What are some B2B sales strategies for an AI startup?

Hey folks, need some advice on how I can book meetings with clients to sell a software that I've built. I'm a Software engineer working at a Fortune 500 company. After grinding on the side for a few months now, I've now built a software product to really automate manual every day tasks using LLMs. Its going to be sold to B2B sales teams, and I think my initial market would be mid-market/small companies. Here's a demo that I recently recorded if you are interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPTCHBnItkI Let me know what you guys think of it? I’d really appreciate any advice.

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?

Anyone seen success with this AI stuff?

Hey r/smallbusiness , I'm an eCommerce manager for a regional electronics retailer (online and physical stores). We focus on higher-end stuff - TVs, audio systems, laptops, appliances, etc. I was recently approached by a startup pitching an AI Sales Assistant for websites. They showed it conversing with customers via voice & chat, and is designed to really guide customers through complex purchases. Think product questions, comparisons, even handling objections etc. I'm curious if anyone has actually implemented AI sales assistants, especially for higher-consideration products like electronics. Have you seen tangible success? And even if you're in a different product category, I'd be interested to hear if you've experimented with this type of tech and what your experience was. Any insights on what worked, what didn't, or general advice would be super helpful as we explore this. Thanks in advance for any thoughts!

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.

My clients are obsessed with AI and it's driving me nuts – are there any actually useful AI tools for service businesses?

I have a roster of a few home service companies (plumbers, roofers, landscapers, etc.) that I do freelance marketing for. Lately, the owners I work with have developed a serious case of AI shiny object syndrome. They’re bombarding me with links to scammy IG ads for “game-changing” AI tools they think will save their businesses overnight. Even talking about replacing their CSRs with "virtual agents". This will obviously lead to some terrible customer experiences, but all they can see is dollar signs at the prospect of laying off that part of their labor force. If I keep pushing back and pointing out how short sighted some of these ideas are, they’ll eventually find someone else that will implement them. So, I’m trying to get out in front of this a little bit and find any AI tools that don’t suck—something I can pitch back to them that’s actually useful and not just a fancy new way to ruin their customer experience. Then when they brag to their other buddies in the trades about how "cutting edge" their business is, it will be in part because of me, not in spite of me. Any suggestions for AI tools that: Help small service businesses without completely alienating their customers? Automate repetitive tasks in a way that doesn’t scream “this was done by a robot”? Aren’t just some scammy overpriced subscription service with a flashy demo? If you’ve actually used something that works, I’d love to hear about it. Honestly, the bar is low. Just help me stop these guys from accidentally burning their businesses down with bad AI ideas.

The "AI Agent" Hype is out of control and businesses suffer

Ah, the sweet smell of AI hype in the morning. Nothing quite like it to get the blood pumping and the venture capital flowing. Let's cut through the BS... The "AI Agent" craze is the tech industry's latest attempt to separate businesses from their hard-earned cash. It's like watching a bunch of sheep rushing towards a cliff, except the cliff is made of overpriced software and empty promises. The tech giants are having a field day with this nonsense. Microsoft, Google, Salesforce - they're all pushing AI agents like they're the second coming. The sad truth is, businesses are suffering from a severe case of FOMO (Fear of Missing Out). They're so terrified of being left behind in the AI race that they're willing to throw good money after bad. Here's a radical idea: how about focusing on actual business problems instead of chasing the latest tech fad? I know, I know, it's not as sexy as having an AI Agent, but it might actually, you know, work. In the end, the only ones truly benefiting from this AI agent hype are the vendors selling the snake oil and the consultants charging exorbitant fees to implement it. Everyone else is just along for the ride, hoping they don't crash and burn too spectacularly. So, to all the businesses out there considering jumping on the AI Agent bandwagon... take a step back, take a deep breath, and ask yourself if you really need an overpriced chatbot with delusions of grandeur. Chances are, you don't. The AI agent hype is like a bad reality TV show—overproduced, lacking substance, and leaving businesses with nothing but regret. Companies are throwing money at AI solutions, expecting miracles, only to find they've bought into overpriced fantasies. The AI agent hype is nothing more than a high-tech emperor with no clothes. It's time for businesses to wake up, smell the silicon, and start making decisions based on reality rather than sci-fi fantasies.  I think AI Agents are the future, but as of right now AI Agents aren't autonomous or agentic. From what I've seen as of now is glorified Chatbots, ChatGPT wrappers and basic automations, and nothing actually autonomous. So far it's all just hype, but we'll see how it improves businesses and the bottom line! How do you think AI Agents will help small businesses now or in the future?

Implementing AI features on your business website

Hi, with AI making headlines recently, I am wondering ways that different business owners have thought to improve their websites using AI (aside from generating content). What AI tools do you think would add value to your website?

(Social Media) Marketing Advice

I'm a founder, currently with just my 2 other co-founders in the team. We have gotten through the ideation phase, with the help of an accelerator and have been given a grant of $5000. We're two technical founders and one non-technical founder, so do not need to hire any devs for now and are close to releasing our MVP. We're mainly using our money at this point for subscriptions (notion, chatGPT, etc.). Now we want to start spending on ads and social media marketing, but we all suck at social media, so we found a tool to do it for us: https://www.kendal.ai/. Do you think it's a good idea for us to spend $99 on a subscription to this AI tool so it can handle our content for us? If not, how can we do it better/cheaper?

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.

Looking for Feedback on this Idea

Hey everyone, I’d love some honest feedback on an idea I’ve been working on (currently just in paper). A little about me: I started in hospitality across South America and Asia, then moved into social entrepreneurship in a rural area, and eventually ecommerce using WordPress. Now, I’m deep into programming here in Europe, which I’ve really come to enjoy. So yes, I understand the perspective of businesses, entrepreneurs and programmers.  Back when I had tons of ideas for businesses and optimizing processes, I always hit the same drama: "You need a developer." But hiring one was too expensive or unreliable or shady business practice, and partnering with a programmer, someone I barely knew often felt too risky (I've learned the hard way that partnerships can feel like marriages). Now, as a programmer, I get a lot of requests from small businesses needing help and sometimes with very simple ideas. And while I can do it, I often don’t have the time, so I have to tell them I can't. And when I do have time, I know the cost can be too much for their budget. This got me thinking: What if I created a course to teach business owners just enough programming to solve their own problems? Not to become full time coders, but to gain enough knowledge to build simple tools or, better yet, understand code enough to ask the right questions whether it's to AI or a future developer. The course would focus on programming but talking business language, starting with building more flexible websites, managing your own content and creating custom tools without the limitations of templates or paid widgets. I’m thinking of creating a supportive community where we learn and grow together (maybe using your business as an example), and I’d be available to help along the way, plus I will be adding tools that you could reuse for your business (mostly because you will be able to read it and understand it → that's the goal). Talking about money, I can only tell you will be way more affordable compared to multiple payments in different places. So, does this resonate with you? I’d really appreciate your honest thoughts. Do you feel you have the time to learn or you still prefer looking for a developer? Feel free to share any frustrations or ideas. And if this sounds interesting, write me a PM, and I’ll keep you updated. Thanks for reading. I'm excited to hear what you think! :)

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!

How do you learn details / potential strategy about technically important new laws in the jurisdictions you operate in?

I am reading “The Entrepreneur’s Guide to Law and Strategy” and it’s really fantastic so far about giving a pretty great overview of these aspects of business. It was published by Wiley (a reputable textbook publisher) in 2018. In one chapter, the authors go into the EU’s “right to be forgotten” and it got me thinking about complying with laws like that. Unfortunately, the latest edition of the book is still nearly 7 years old and written pre-COVID, pre-genAI, pre-social network and privacy pushback, etc. I assume every time a new law comes out that can impact my business (say, a random privacy law in California) that businesses aren’t just telling their lawyers “use any amount of hours you need to in order to read the San Jose papers every day and then write me a one paragraph brief with an outline and potential changes needed to our business, also all the other papers across the world”. They’d spend a fortune. There has to be something I’m missing. Is there a law review for business that I should be following? I operate in the US only at this time. A more technical newspaper (I take WSJ, but it’s not technical enough for this sort of thing. It might give the “what”, but won’t give a small business owner “what to do with it”)? PS: I’m the type of person who read every word of my mortgage. I am aware the answer might be “don’t worry about it”. But I do worry about it, and am trying to fix that. For example, the insanely popular new lawsuits about website accessibility. I want to avoid things (essentially low hanging lawsuit fruit) like that before they happen to me.

Looking for Feedback: AI-Powered Platform to Help Entrepreneurs Find Profitable Digital Businesses

Hi everyone! I’m launching DealSight, an AI-driven platform designed to help entrepreneurs find and analyze digital businesses for acquisition. It monitors 20+ broker sites, applies smart deal filtering, performs deep analysis, and sends priority alerts for deals that match your criteria. Our goal is to save entrepreneurs time and help them make better data-driven decisions. Here’s how it works: 1️⃣ Set your preferences (industry, size, location, etc.). 2️⃣ Our AI continuously matches your criteria with new listings. 3️⃣ Get customizable alerts with detailed deal reports. We’ve already analyzed $250M+ in deal value and saved users an average of 45% in time. I’d love to hear your thoughts: Would this be useful for your business-buying journey? Any features you think we should add or improve? Any concerns that might stop you from using a platform like this? You can learn more or try it for free \here\. Thanks in advance for your feedback!

I’ve Tested All the Image Generation Tools for My Small Business

Personally I hate paying for subscriptions unless it was absolutely necessary. Given that I don't have the budget to hire a graphic designer I started playing with all the new Generative AI tools and these are the ones I've narrowed it down to that have made the most impact. I posted this breakdown on r/AIforBusinessFounders but will share it here as well. Hope this compilation helps a fellow entrepreneur. If you’ve been exploring AI tools for generating images, you’ve probably come across big names like DALL·E, Adobe Photoshop, and MidJourney (finally moved off the dreadful Discord prompting thankfully!)  While they each have their strengths, they also have their quirks. Here’s the breakdown: DALL·E by OpenAI Pros: It’s integrated directly into ChatGPT, so if you’re already on a paid plan, you’re good to go—no extra fees. It's also embedded in Canva which is convenient if you’re designing social media posts or quick mockups. Cons: The image quality isn’t amazing. It often looks a bit flat or off, but I think where I struggle is you only get one output per generation, so there’s not much variety. Adobe Photoshop Pros: If you’re already using Photoshop, this is a nice addition. It lets you partially generate images within your edits, which can be handy for things like background replacements. When it comes to generating full images though, I find this tool really struggles. Cons: The image quality still has room for improvement—hands and fingers, in particular, are a consistent issue. Plus, you need an Adobe Creative Cloud subscription to access it. MidJourney Pros: Hands down, this tool produces the best-quality images. You get multiple outputs per prompt, and what really sets it apart is the ability to refine your favorite image. You can subtly tweak or drastically change it, depending on your needs. It previously only operated on Discord but it now has migrated to it's own platform so that's been a huge pro for me. Cons: It’s not cheap—MidJourney requires its own paid membership and comes with limited tokens, so you’ll need to budget your usage. The biggest con for me in the past was that you had to prompt in a Discord channel but now that it has own platform, it's no longer an issue. After putting all three to the test, my personal favorite is MidJourney. If image quality and creative control are your priorities, it’s hard to beat. That said, DALL·E and Adobe are solid options if you’re already using their platforms and want to save money. Are there any hidden gems I might have missed? If so let me know, I'd love to give them a try.

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.

POS system with inventory tracking and ordering?

I work for a small business and want to open my own eventually, however I like automation. Im not sure if this is the best place to ask about this but i was wondering if there was a POS system (either a mass produced one or one that i kind of have to buy and setup myself with 0 support from a brand) that supports sales, inventory tracking AND automatic ordering using possibly AI or any other method to call or to navigate a website to place orders when the stock of certain items are low? Essentially i would want it to work like this: Customer buys an item that item stock is now <10 system automatically adds item to an "need to order list" every 3 days the system takes that list with my preferred supplier and either navigates the website to place the order or calls and uses voice to talk and speech to text or AI to talk to rep to place the order for me. IDK if that is possible or anything but as someone who loves automation i think it would be awesome to have something like that if there is something out there like that.

What to look for in the Best PDF Invoice Parser?

I've been thinking about starting using PDF Invoice Parser, so these are some key features to look out for in a PDF invoice parser I've learned about these days on Affinda. Machine Learning - There are invoice parsers available that use machine learning algorithms to learn from their mistakes, resulting in them being able to parse many data sources and become more accurate over time. Optical Character Recognition - An OCR invoice parser is one that uses optical character recognition to take images lacking text data and turn them into digital files. Natural Language Processing - This results in more efficient and effective invoice processing that seeks to understand the text and sort invoice fields correctly. Artificial Intelligence - Many parsers struggle to adapt and fail to complete information extraction from nonstandard invoice formats. That’s why you need a parser that leverages document AI to analyze the template and extract structured data no matter what invoice layout is used. Different Types Analysed - For example, you might receive a mailed invoice or Word document. You need a parser that can analyze and get extracted data from any format of the supplier invoice. So, is this enough information and benefits for me to choose this product? I guess so, I've even heard great stuff about it, but I would love to share all of this with you and maybe some of you already had any experience to share with all of us. Have a nice day, guys!

Impact of AI on business valuation?

I see many businesses thinking and experimenting with how AI can help improve their business processes. I seem to find far fewer thinking about how AI could impact or even demolish their actual product. I’ve been thinking about this a lot as (thankfully?) I sold my 15 year old business last year. We have teams of specialists that create digital content in narrow but very high value topic areas. Our value has been the ability of our team of experts to distill and explain the impact of the topic. Now, just a few months later, we’ve shown how three specialist AI systems can basically do the same for near zero cost. Our business and model is highly threatened. Anyone else worried about AI on their product, and thereby the value of their business, and perhaps even looking at exiting while the value is high? And yes, I do expect AI will also create new opportunities to create value. Already thinking of ideas…!

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 Feedback on My Business Idea – SaaS + Lead Generation for Small Businesses

Edit: TL;DR I’m Sarvesh, a digital marketer with 10 years of experience in paid ads. After losing my job last year, I started freelancing and discovered how much small businesses struggle with getting reviews (Google, Yelp, TrustPilot, etc.). My Business Idea – SaaS + Paid Ads Free Plan: Businesses can track & reply to reviews across 40+ platforms in one dashboard. Paid Plan ($99/month): Automates review collection, AI-powered responses, social media posting, and spam detection. Custom Plan: Paid ads to generate leads, offered only to businesses on my paid plan for 3+ months. Goal: SaaS platform attracts users → Some upgrade to paid plan → Best clients get lead-generation help → More leads → More reviews → More organic customers → A profitable business cycle. Need Feedback: Does this idea have potential? How can I get my first beta users? Any features I should add/remove? Would love your thoughts—thanks for reading! 😊 TL: Hi everyone, I’m Sarvesh, and I’m in the process of starting my own business. Since my target audience is small businesses, I’d love to get some input, advice, or critiques from this community. A Little About Me I’ve spent the last 10 years working in paid advertising, helping medium and large businesses generate leads through Facebook and Google Ads. I also have experience running e-commerce campaigns. You can check out my background on LinkedIn: LinkedIn Profile Last year, my second daughter was born, and around the same time, my company shut down all its offices (India & UK), leaving me without a job. I decided to take a break and spend time with my wife and newborn, something I regretted not doing with my first child. By November, I started job hunting again, but in the meantime, I got some freelance work through Reddit, helping small businesses with ads for the first time. For context, in my previous jobs, I managed ad campaigns with daily budgets of £4K–£8K. Working with small businesses was a new challenge, but to my surprise, I was able to generate solid leads for beauty salons, hair salons, and nail salons, helping them grow. What stood out to me was how much impact my work had—unlike my corporate job, where I was just another person in the system, here I felt truly valued. That feeling led me to explore starting my own business. The Problem I Noticed While working with small businesses, I realized that online reviews (Google, Yelp, Trustpilot, etc.) are critical for them, yet many struggle to get them. Customers often don’t leave reviews, and employees are either too shy or don’t prioritize asking for them. This gave me an idea—to build a system that helps businesses get more genuine Google reviews from customers. I developed the system but struggled to find businesses willing to test it, even for free. My target audience is U.S. small businesses, but since I’m based in India, cold emails and Reddit outreach didn’t get much traction. My Business Idea – SaaS + Custom Plans I’m now thinking of pivoting my business model into a SaaS platform with optional paid upgrades. Here’s how it would work: Free Plan (Review Tracking & Management) Businesses can track their reviews across 40+ platforms (Google, Yelp, Facebook, Trustpilot, TripAdvisor, etc.) in one dashboard. They can reply to reviews manually from a single place instead of switching between platforms. This will be completely free forever. Paid Plan ($99/month, Plus SMS/Email Costs) For businesses that struggle to get reviews, they can upgrade to a paid plan that includes: Automated Review Requests – Automatically send review requests via SMS & email. Website Widget – Showcase 4- and 5-star reviews dynamically. Social Media Automation – Automatically post positive reviews on Facebook/Instagram. AI-Powered Responses – AI can reply to reviews automatically. Spam Detection – The system will notify businesses of suspicious reviews (but won’t take direct action). Custom Plan (Lead Generation via Paid Ads) I will personally manage paid ad campaigns to generate leads. Pricing depends on the niche, budget, and contract duration. Money-Back Guarantee – If I don’t deliver results, I refund the month’s fee. Small businesses can’t afford wasted ad spend, and I want to ensure I provide real value. Limited spots per month to maintain quality and avoid burnout. How Everything Ties Together The SaaS platform serves as a lead generation tool for my custom plans: Businesses use the free plan to track their reviews. Some upgrade to the paid plan to automate and improve reviews. A select few, after 3 months on the paid plan, can join my custom plan for paid ads to generate more leads. More leads → More reviews → Better Google Maps ranking → More organic customers → A more profitable business. Would Love Your Feedback! What do you think about this approach? Do you see potential for this business to take off? Any features I should add or remove? Any suggestions on how I can get my first beta users to test the SaaS platform? What about pricing? Do you think $99 is good pricing? I know this is a long post, but I really appreciate anyone taking the time to read and share their thoughts. Thanks in advance!

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.

Ai C-Level team

I've been exploring ways to run a company where I'm essentially the only internal team member, relying entirely on a suite of specialized AIs for executive roles, supported occasionally by external consultants for niche expertise. My goal is to stay lean, agile, and highly creative, especially in a fashion/tech brand context. Essentially, I'm building an AI-driven C-Level team, or what I like to call a "C-Level AI Wallet." Here's what I'm thinking for the key executive roles I'd need to cover with AI: CEO AI – Responsible for overall strategy, decision-making, trend analysis, and guiding the company's vision. I'd probably lean on something advanced like Gemini, GPT-4, or similar models, fine-tuned with market-specific data. COO AI (Operations): I'd need tools that streamline and automate logistics, supply chain management, and day-to-day operations (think something along the lines of Zapier AI integrations or Make). CMO AI (Marketing & Content): For branding, content creation, digital marketing, and consumer insights, I'd use Jasper or Copy.ai, combined with predictive analytics tools like Google Vertex AI to understand trends better. Additionally, for generating engaging visual and multimedia content, tools like Midjourney, DALL·E, Adobe Firefly, and Runway ML would be perfect. CFO AI (Financial Management): For financial management, cash flow control, and investment decisions, I'd probably leverage AI tools like Bloomberg GPT, combined with AI-powered forecasting platforms. CHRO AI (Human Resources & Culture): Although the internal team is minimal (just myself!), I'd still rely on AI for tasks like project management, freelancer hiring, and performance tracking—tools like HireVue AI, Motion, or even Notion's AI could be beneficial here. CSO AI (Sustainability & Compliance): Since sustainability and ethical sourcing are critical, I'd integrate ESG-focused AI tools to ensure transparency and responsible sourcing. My idea is that, with the right AI tools seamlessly integrated, I can manage the strategic vision and creative direction personally, leveraging external consultants only when necessary. This setup would ideally allow me to operate as a one-person internal team supported by a robust "wallet" of AI executives. Has anyone tried a similar approach? What AI tools would you recommend for a truly lean, innovative brand structure? I'm very curious about your experiences or suggestions—let me know your thoughts!

What AI Tools Would You Like to See on a Dashboard for Small Businesses?

Hello r/smallbusiness, I’m curious to learn more about what small business owners think about AI tools. If there was a dashboard specifically designed for small businesses, what kind of AI tools or features would you find most useful? • What kind of AI-driven features would help you the most? (e.g., sales forecasting, customer insights, automated marketing, inventory management) • What are your biggest challenges that you think AI could address? • How important is ease of use and integration with your current systems? • Have you used any AI tools before? If so, which ones were helpful or not so helpful? Looking forward to hearing your thoughts and experiences!

Exploring AI & Automation Options for handling calls!

Running a business solo is a grind, and one of the biggest challenges I have faced is handling calls while staying productive. I’d be in the middle of deep work, and suddenly, baam the phone rings. I have tried using a VA (virtual assistant), but the costs are just adding up, and they aren’t always available. Hiring full-time! Way too expensive. Lately, I have been thinking of getting AI-powered solutions that act as virtual receptionists—handling inquiries, scheduling appointments, and even answering customer questions that will not be too expensive. I came across this AI receptionist software called My AI Front Desk. It looks pretty cool – handles calls, booking appointments, even does customer support 24/7. I'm thinking about giving it a shot, but I'm curious if anyone else has used AI for this kind of stuff? What's your experience been like? How do you handle incoming calls? Have you tried automation or AI assistants? Curious to hear what’s worked for you!

Automation use cases for small businesses

I recently started an AI automation agency with a few friends as a side hustle to escape the corporate matrix. We target small businesses that don't necessarily have the resources to implement AI themselves, and we've successfully closed a few clients without a ton of effort. We think there is huge opportunity here but we are struggling with identifying which industries are most in need of automation, and beyond that what are the use cases for these small businesses. If anybody can share any specific use cases they have seen or problems they have that can be solved by automation it would be much appreciated!

AI Automation business

Hello all, I’m working on creating an AI automation business. To land clients, I was thinking of making a website and showing demos of automation. Also, offer my services to 5-10 businesses on facebook for free in return for a testimonial or feedback. What else can I do to land clients?

Title: Seeking Feedback: What Would an All-in-One AI Automation Platform Do for You?

Hey everyone, I'm exploring an idea to build a unified AI platform that automates core business operations—think customer support, CRM, inventory management, HR, finance, and more—all in one place. Many of us have experienced the frustration of juggling multiple tools that don’t talk to each other, leading to wasted time and inefficiencies. I’d love to hear your thoughts: What are your biggest pain points with your current automation tools? Which processes would you most want to see streamlined or integrated? What features or solutions do you think could make a single, unified platform work for you? Your real-world experiences and ideas will be invaluable in shaping this concept. Thanks for sharing your insights!

My clients are obsessed with AI and it's driving me nuts – are there any actually useful AI tools for service businesses?

I have a roster of a few home service companies (plumbers, roofers, landscapers, etc.) that I do freelance marketing for. Lately, the owners I work with have developed a serious case of AI shiny object syndrome. They’re bombarding me with links to scammy IG ads for “game-changing” AI tools they think will save their businesses overnight. Even talking about replacing their CSRs with "virtual agents". This will obviously lead to some terrible customer experiences, but all they can see is dollar signs at the prospect of laying off that part of their labor force. If I keep pushing back and pointing out how short sighted some of these ideas are, they’ll eventually find someone else that will implement them. So, I’m trying to get out in front of this a little bit and find any AI tools that don’t suck—something I can pitch back to them that’s actually useful and not just a fancy new way to ruin their customer experience. Then when they brag to their other buddies in the trades about how "cutting edge" their business is, it will be in part because of me, not in spite of me. Any suggestions for AI tools that: Help small service businesses without completely alienating their customers? Automate repetitive tasks in a way that doesn’t scream “this was done by a robot”? Aren’t just some scammy overpriced subscription service with a flashy demo? If you’ve actually used something that works, I’d love to hear about it. Honestly, the bar is low. Just help me stop these guys from accidentally burning their businesses down with bad AI ideas.

Looking for Feedback: AI-Powered Platform to Help Entrepreneurs Find Profitable Digital Businesses

Hi everyone! I’m launching DealSight, an AI-driven platform designed to help entrepreneurs find and analyze digital businesses for acquisition. It monitors 20+ broker sites, applies smart deal filtering, performs deep analysis, and sends priority alerts for deals that match your criteria. Our goal is to save entrepreneurs time and help them make better data-driven decisions. Here’s how it works: 1️⃣ Set your preferences (industry, size, location, etc.). 2️⃣ Our AI continuously matches your criteria with new listings. 3️⃣ Get customizable alerts with detailed deal reports. We’ve already analyzed $250M+ in deal value and saved users an average of 45% in time. I’d love to hear your thoughts: Would this be useful for your business-buying journey? Any features you think we should add or improve? Any concerns that might stop you from using a platform like this? You can learn more or try it for free \here\. Thanks in advance for your feedback!

My clients are obsessed with AI and it's driving me nuts – are there any actually useful AI tools for service businesses?

I have a roster of a few home service companies (plumbers, roofers, landscapers, etc.) that I do freelance marketing for. Lately, the owners I work with have developed a serious case of AI shiny object syndrome. They’re bombarding me with links to scammy IG ads for “game-changing” AI tools they think will save their businesses overnight. Even talking about replacing their CSRs with "virtual agents". This will obviously lead to some terrible customer experiences, but all they can see is dollar signs at the prospect of laying off that part of their labor force. If I keep pushing back and pointing out how short sighted some of these ideas are, they’ll eventually find someone else that will implement them. So, I’m trying to get out in front of this a little bit and find any AI tools that don’t suck—something I can pitch back to them that’s actually useful and not just a fancy new way to ruin their customer experience. Then when they brag to their other buddies in the trades about how "cutting edge" their business is, it will be in part because of me, not in spite of me. Any suggestions for AI tools that: Help small service businesses without completely alienating their customers? Automate repetitive tasks in a way that doesn’t scream “this was done by a robot”? Aren’t just some scammy overpriced subscription service with a flashy demo? If you’ve actually used something that works, I’d love to hear about it. Honestly, the bar is low. Just help me stop these guys from accidentally burning their businesses down with bad AI ideas.

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.

Generative Ai - How long will it last for SMBs?

Like most of the sub here at one point or the other SMB owners like us have started to use generative AI to improve the productivity of our business. As someone who's closely following the developments in AI tools, I've noticed a trend where big companies like Microsoft (Copilot) and Adobe (Firefly) are starting to offer advanced AI capabilities predominantly to their top-tier paying customers. This shift has me worried about the accessibility of these technologies for small businesses and individual entrepreneurs. What are your thoughts on the longevity of generative AI tools for small-scale users? Do you think these powerful tools will become exclusive to those who can afford the premium, leaving the small guys behind? I'm particularly concerned about the possibility of small businesses being priced out of using generative AI, which could have been a game changer for them.

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.

What Two AI Agents would Help SMBs The Most

Hey everyone, I want to create a couple of AI agents for the SMB space. I would like to get a feel for what the best two agents to build for the SMB would be. I was thinking of an AI assistant and an AI sales assistant. Are these too similar, and would you suggest if so?

The Rise of AI: Will It Signal the Demise of LinkedIn Automation as We Know It?

Have you ever received a spammy LinkedIn automation sequence that left a bad taste in your mouth? You're not alone. But what if LinkedIn automation could be used in a way that was actually useful and effective? As a busy small business owner, you don't have time to spend hours on LinkedIn every day, so automation can be a lifesaver. After trying out many LinkedIn automation tools, I realized that the biggest gap in the market was in the area of ultra-personalization. Most tools only offer basic personalization like name, job title, and location tags, but that's not enough to get the attention of busy prospects. That's where AI comes in. Imagine being able to scrape publicly available information like someone's bio, work experience, headline, education, and more, and then use AI to create an ultra-personalized outreach for each individual. This would be a game-changer for LinkedIn marketers. That's why I have built an online tool that does just that. With this tool, you'll be able to create highly personalized outreach messages that are customized for each person you're targeting. And, of course, it will be automated to save you time and effort. So what do you think? Would you be interested in using a tool like this to market your offer on LinkedIn? Let me know in the comments!

I Accidentally Made My Mom Redundant at Her Office Job

At my tech job, AI assistants have boosted productivity so much we’ve almost stopped hiring. It made me wonder: why isn’t AI used more in small businesses? My mom works in the office of a small local manufacturing company, handling repetitive tasks like inputting orders into their ERP system. After shadowing her for a half day, I built an AI program that automates most of her work. Now she has so much free time, she’s watching Netflix at the office lol I’m thinking of quitting my job and starting my own small local business, offering this as a service to other small businesses in the era, but before I jump on it and quit my current job, I’d love to know if this is a more common issue. My main question are: What’s the most repetitive/time-consuming (computer) tasks you wish you could automate? If possible, could you break it down step by step with a lot of boring details ? 😅 Any hacks or tools you've found to make things easier so far? And maybe what else I should think on that I am missing before quitting my job and starting my own business?

What AI Tools Would You Like to See on a Dashboard for Small Businesses?

Hello r/smallbusiness, I’m curious to learn more about what small business owners think about AI tools. If there was a dashboard specifically designed for small businesses, what kind of AI tools or features would you find most useful? • What kind of AI-driven features would help you the most? (e.g., sales forecasting, customer insights, automated marketing, inventory management) • What are your biggest challenges that you think AI could address? • How important is ease of use and integration with your current systems? • Have you used any AI tools before? If so, which ones were helpful or not so helpful? Looking forward to hearing your thoughts and experiences!

Anyone had luck with automating bookkeeping/expense reporting with AI tools? DEXT integrations? Looking for advice.

Shorty story - business growing faster than we can keep up, full-time bookkeeper/controller is overwhelmed. Bookkeeper is old-fashioned - we’re using quickbooks desktop, and a pile of manual entry. I think technology can help with a bunch of the data entry, but don’t know where or how to start. Has anyone had any luck with integrations like DEXT or DocuClipper to import csv files for things like bank statements and credit card statements? Looking for any advice or success stories on streamlining the paperwork. I don’t think another person is the answer!! Please help!!

Title: Seeking Feedback: What Would an All-in-One AI Automation Platform Do for You?

Hey everyone, I'm exploring an idea to build a unified AI platform that automates core business operations—think customer support, CRM, inventory management, HR, finance, and more—all in one place. Many of us have experienced the frustration of juggling multiple tools that don’t talk to each other, leading to wasted time and inefficiencies. I’d love to hear your thoughts: What are your biggest pain points with your current automation tools? Which processes would you most want to see streamlined or integrated? What features or solutions do you think could make a single, unified platform work for you? Your real-world experiences and ideas will be invaluable in shaping this concept. Thanks for sharing your insights!

My clients are obsessed with AI and it's driving me nuts – are there any actually useful AI tools for service businesses?

I have a roster of a few home service companies (plumbers, roofers, landscapers, etc.) that I do freelance marketing for. Lately, the owners I work with have developed a serious case of AI shiny object syndrome. They’re bombarding me with links to scammy IG ads for “game-changing” AI tools they think will save their businesses overnight. Even talking about replacing their CSRs with "virtual agents". This will obviously lead to some terrible customer experiences, but all they can see is dollar signs at the prospect of laying off that part of their labor force. If I keep pushing back and pointing out how short sighted some of these ideas are, they’ll eventually find someone else that will implement them. So, I’m trying to get out in front of this a little bit and find any AI tools that don’t suck—something I can pitch back to them that’s actually useful and not just a fancy new way to ruin their customer experience. Then when they brag to their other buddies in the trades about how "cutting edge" their business is, it will be in part because of me, not in spite of me. Any suggestions for AI tools that: Help small service businesses without completely alienating their customers? Automate repetitive tasks in a way that doesn’t scream “this was done by a robot”? Aren’t just some scammy overpriced subscription service with a flashy demo? If you’ve actually used something that works, I’d love to hear about it. Honestly, the bar is low. Just help me stop these guys from accidentally burning their businesses down with bad AI ideas.

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.

Introduction to Large Language Models for Generative AI

Hey everyone! I've recently written an introduction to large language models for generative ai \- it's a comprehensive introduction to the topic for anyone that is interested! We go over: What language models are How language models are trained The abilities of large language models The scaling of language models And more! Feel free to let me know what you think :)

List of free educational ML resources I used to become a FAANG ML Engineer

Full commentary and notes here ➡️: https://www.trybackprop.com/blog/top\ml\learning\resources Used these to brush up on math and teach myself AI/ML over the course of two years. I'm now a staff ML engineer at FAANG. Hope these help. Fundamentals Linear Algebra – 3Blue1Brown's Essence of Linear Algebra series, binged all these videos on a one hour train ride visiting my parents Multivariable Calculus – Khan Academy's Multivariable Calculus lessons were a great refresher of what I had learned in college. Looking back, I just needed to have reviewed Unit 1 – intro and Unit 2 – derivatives. Calculus for ML – this amazing animated video explains calculus and backpropagation Information Theory – easy-to-understand book on information theory called Information Theory: A Tutorial Introduction. Statistics and Probability – the StatQuest YouTube channel Machine Learning Stanford Intro to Machine Learning by Andrew Ng – Stanford's CS229, the intro to machine learning course, published their lectures on YouTube for free. I watched lectures 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13, and I skipped the rest since I was eager to move onto deep learning. The course also offers a free set of course notes, which are very well written. Caltech Machine Learning – Caltech's machine learning lectures on YouTube, less mathematical and more intuition based Deep Learning Andrej Karpathy's Zero to Hero Series – Andrej Karpathy, an AI researcher who graduated with a Stanford PhD and led Tesla AI for several years, released an amazing series of hands on lectures on YouTube. highly highly recommend Neural networks – Stanford's CS231n course notes and lecture videos were my gateway drug*, so to speak, into the world of deep learning. Transformers and LLMs Transformers – watched these two lectures: lecture from the University of Waterloo and lecture from the University of Michigan. I have also heard good things about Jay Alammar's The Illustrated Transformer guide ChatGPT Explainer – Wolfram's YouTube explainer video on ChatGPT Interactive LLM Visualization – This LLM visualization that you can play with in your browser is hands down the best interactive experience with an LLM. Financial Times' Transformer Explainer – The Financial Times released a lovely interactive article that explains the transformer very well. Residual Learning – 2023 Future Science Prize Laureates Lecture on residual learning. Efficient ML and GPUs How are Microchips Made? – This YouTube video by Branch Education is one of the best free educational videos on the internet, regardless of subject, but also, it's the best video on understanding microchips. CUDA – My L8 and L9 FAANG coworkers acquired their CUDA knowledge from this series of lectures. TinyML and Efficient Deep Learning Computing – 2023 lectures on efficient ML techniques online. Chip War – Chip War is a bestselling book published in 2022 about microchip technology whose beginning chapters on the invention of the microchip actually explain CPUs very well

[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...)

Is MIT Sloan's: "AI: Implications for Business Strategy Online Short Course" worth the money?

Hey everyone, I'm a CPA and have no IT background, but since I have some time in October due to a career break, I was thinking about taking this course: https://www.getsmarter.com/products/mit-sloan-artificial-intelligence-implications-for-business-strategy-online-program?focused=true I think it might be an interesting start to become an early follower in this whole AI story in Finance and Audit. I honestly don't see myself coding, and I don't think that's what would be expected from me as a Finance Manager in the future. But... $4,300 is quite a price tag for an online course. But then again, if I want to effectively use it in a next career step, it would probably pay out to have an actual certificate instead of one of the many (certainly very good) free courses. &#x200B; What are your thoughts? Does anyone have experience with this or a similar program?

Is it worth doing a Msc Conversion course

I’m a philosophy student currently, graduating with a 2.1 from a russell group uni. I’m looking for a career change into ML with the ultimate goal being research, whether it be comp neuro, biology, or using it in sports. I’ve found a Msc conversion course (1 year with no CS background required) where, as the name suggests, they teach you AI and ML techniques and how to implement them in a a real world context. It also includes a 3 month dissertation project with the possibility of working with industry. I was speaking to a friend today who suggested I learn on my own and save the money. I couldn’t help but think a qualification is useful alongside a portfolio, rather than just a portfolio (which he suggested). Given my current situation, a beginner programmer looking for a way in, what do you think I do?

RAG with LLM project code walkthrough for beginners

Hello Guys, I have shared a code walkthrough which focuses on a RAG project using DeepSeek. It is a beginner friendly project that any fresher can implement with basic knowledge of python. Do let me know what you think about the project. Also I am trying to share beginner friendly projects for freshers in AI/ML field. I will soon be sharing a in depth tutorial for ML project that helped me get a job in ML field, once I am comfortable with making youtube videos as I am new to this. Do give feedbacks for improvements and stay connected for more projects. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeWJjBrpyok&list=PLVGnN2aG2ioMr3VHOSur5n1LLm1FAdc0\&index=6

Starting with Deep Learning in 2025 - Suggestion

I'm aware this has been asked many times here. so I'm not here to ask for a general advice - I've done some homework. My questions is - what do you think about this curriculum I put together (research + GPT)? Context: \- I'm a product manger with technical background and want to get back to a more technical depth. \- BSc in stats, familiar with all basic ML concepts, some maths (linear algebra etc), python. Basically, I got the basics covered a while ago so I'm looking to go back into the basics and I can learn and relearn anything I might need to with the internet. My focus is on getting hands on feel on where AI and deep learning is at in 2025, and understand the "under the hood" of key models used and LLMs specifically. Veterans - whats missing? what's redundant? Thanks so much! 🙏🏻 PS - hoping others will find this useful, you very well might too! |Week/Day|Goals|Resource|Activity| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Week 1|Foundations of AI and Deep Learning||| |Day 1-2|Learn AI terminology and applications|DeepLearning.AI's "AI for Everyone"|Complete Module 1. Understand basic AI concepts and its applications.| |Day 3-5|Explore deep learning fundamentals|Fast.ai's Practical Deep Learning for Coders (2024)|Watch first 2 lessons. Code an image classifier as your first DL project.| |Day 6-7|Familiarize with ML/LLM terminology|Hugging Face Machine Learning Glossary|Study glossary terms and review foundational ML/LLM concepts.| |Week 2|Practical Deep Learning||| |Day 8-10|Build with PyTorch basics|PyTorch Beginner Tutorials|Complete the 60-minute blitz and create a simple neural network.| |Day 11-12|Explore more projects|Fast.ai Lesson 3|Implement a project such as text classification or tabular data analysis.| |Day 13-14|Fine-tune pre-trained models|Hugging Face Tutorials|Learn and apply fine-tuning techniques for a pre-trained model on a simple dataset.| |Week 3|Understanding LLMs||| |Day 15-17|Learn GPT architecture basics|OpenAI Documentation|Explore GPT architecture and experiment with OpenAI API Playground.| |Day 18-19|Understand tokenization and transformers|Hugging Face NLP Course|Complete the tokenization and transformers sections of the course.| |Day 20-21|Build LLM-based projects|TensorFlow NLP Tutorials|Create a text generator or summarizer using LLM techniques.| |Week 4|Advanced Concepts and Applications||| |Day 22-24|Review cutting-edge LLM research|Stanford's CRFM|Read recent LLM-related research and discuss its product management implications.| |Day 25-27|Apply knowledge to real-world projects|Kaggle|Select a dataset and build an NLP project using Hugging Face tools.| |Day 28-30|Explore advanced API use cases|OpenAI Cookbook and Forums|Experiment with advanced OpenAI API scenarios and engage in discussions to solidify knowledge.|

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.

Easy small implementations of AI

I think everyone secretely (or not secretly) love small implementations with training examples, dataset preprocessing etc in just a small colab notebook. Why do almost everyone create big github repositories with tones of code just for a not-that-big model ? Maybe it's just me who isn't able to find small notebooks? Does anyone has source with extremely useful small notebooks?

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!

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

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 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.)?

How I Built an Agentic Marketing Campaign Strategist

Marketing at Scale: How One AI System Replaces Hundreds of Strategy Hours Article https://i.redd.it/uekqj3zmerme1.gif https://i.redd.it/30rk23zmerme1.gif https://preview.redd.it/fk1t53zmerme1.png?width=797&format=png&auto=webp&s=d07f473a9556fbd38885b3a2f862101d9b25424e https://preview.redd.it/n84113zmerme1.jpg?width=1914&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f42679269a1003e1c8d6501dd2d53e10db745bba https://preview.redd.it/l13ae3zmerme1.jpg?width=791&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ecab3c295c2a416bc0fed8c62fecbe3321e37093 TL;DR This article guides you through building an AI-powered marketing strategist using Python. It combines vector databases, language models, and PDF generation to create customized marketing strategies automatically. I’ll show you the complete system architecture, from storing marketing knowledge to generating professional strategy documents, with practical code examples you can implement today. Perfect for marketers and developers looking to leverage AI for business growth. Introduction Welcome to the exciting intersection of marketing and artificial intelligence! In today’s digital world, creating effective marketing campaigns requires deep expertise, market research, and creative thinking. But what if you could automate parts of this process? That’s exactly what I set out to build: an AI system that generates comprehensive marketing strategies tailored to specific products, audiences, and budgets. What’s This Article About? This article walks you through the creation of an AI-powered marketing strategist that combines the retrieval of relevant marketing knowledge with advanced language generation to produce detailed campaign strategies. The system I built uses Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), which enhances AI outputs by grounding them in specific knowledge sources. Here’s how it works: You provide a simple campaign description (like “a new eco-friendly water bottle targeting millennials with a budget of $50,000”) The system searches a knowledge base of marketing principles and best practices It then uses a language model to craft a comprehensive strategy that includes campaign objectives, target audience analysis, channel selection, content ideas, budget allocation, and measurement KPIs Finally, it generates a professional PDF document with your complete marketing strategy The beauty of this approach is that it combines the creativity and adaptability of AI with established marketing frameworks, ensuring the strategies are both innovative and grounded in proven principles. Why Read It? AI is rapidly transforming how businesses operate, and marketing is at the forefront of this revolution. According to recent studies, companies that effectively leverage AI in their marketing efforts see significant improvements in customer engagement, conversion rates, and ROI. Even if you’re not building a system for a real company right now, understanding how to implement AI in marketing processes gives you valuable skills and insights. This article provides a practical example of how AI can: Save marketers countless hours of research and strategy development Ensure consistency in marketing approaches across different campaigns Generate creative ideas that might not have been considered otherwise Scale marketing expertise across an organization By following along, you’ll gain hands-on experience with technologies like vector databases, language models, and automated document generation — all skills that are increasingly valuable in today’s business environment.

What level of understanding of AI do I need?

Would really appreciate some advice if anyone can help out! So I'm a 20 year old student currently doing regular internships in accounting. I use a lot of my spare time to build small businesses that I find fun to build. I have very little coding experience besides basic courses besides a bit of experience with react when building an app with a more technically competent partner. I've concluded 3 things: 1.I want to add the power of AI to my arsenal, whether in work or in business 2.I don't think I'd have the time or experience to be an absolute expert in AI 3.There's a lot of small tech shy businesses in my area which I think could benefit from AI, particularly in accounting automation. I'd love to introduce it to them through some sort of agency. 4.Ideally I want to be competent enough in AI to be able to start an AI based business (probably in finance) with a more technical developer who I can at least communicate with. &#x200B; So my question is, what level do I need? Should I learn all the complex maths behind it and the first principles, or just learn how to harness the powerful tools already out there? If either, could you point me in the right direction for resources? Thanks!

How I Built an Agentic Marketing Campaign Strategist

Marketing at Scale: How One AI System Replaces Hundreds of Strategy Hours Article https://i.redd.it/uekqj3zmerme1.gif https://i.redd.it/30rk23zmerme1.gif https://preview.redd.it/fk1t53zmerme1.png?width=797&format=png&auto=webp&s=d07f473a9556fbd38885b3a2f862101d9b25424e https://preview.redd.it/n84113zmerme1.jpg?width=1914&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f42679269a1003e1c8d6501dd2d53e10db745bba https://preview.redd.it/l13ae3zmerme1.jpg?width=791&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ecab3c295c2a416bc0fed8c62fecbe3321e37093 TL;DR This article guides you through building an AI-powered marketing strategist using Python. It combines vector databases, language models, and PDF generation to create customized marketing strategies automatically. I’ll show you the complete system architecture, from storing marketing knowledge to generating professional strategy documents, with practical code examples you can implement today. Perfect for marketers and developers looking to leverage AI for business growth. Introduction Welcome to the exciting intersection of marketing and artificial intelligence! In today’s digital world, creating effective marketing campaigns requires deep expertise, market research, and creative thinking. But what if you could automate parts of this process? That’s exactly what I set out to build: an AI system that generates comprehensive marketing strategies tailored to specific products, audiences, and budgets. What’s This Article About? This article walks you through the creation of an AI-powered marketing strategist that combines the retrieval of relevant marketing knowledge with advanced language generation to produce detailed campaign strategies. The system I built uses Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), which enhances AI outputs by grounding them in specific knowledge sources. Here’s how it works: You provide a simple campaign description (like “a new eco-friendly water bottle targeting millennials with a budget of $50,000”) The system searches a knowledge base of marketing principles and best practices It then uses a language model to craft a comprehensive strategy that includes campaign objectives, target audience analysis, channel selection, content ideas, budget allocation, and measurement KPIs Finally, it generates a professional PDF document with your complete marketing strategy The beauty of this approach is that it combines the creativity and adaptability of AI with established marketing frameworks, ensuring the strategies are both innovative and grounded in proven principles. Why Read It? AI is rapidly transforming how businesses operate, and marketing is at the forefront of this revolution. According to recent studies, companies that effectively leverage AI in their marketing efforts see significant improvements in customer engagement, conversion rates, and ROI. Even if you’re not building a system for a real company right now, understanding how to implement AI in marketing processes gives you valuable skills and insights. This article provides a practical example of how AI can: Save marketers countless hours of research and strategy development Ensure consistency in marketing approaches across different campaigns Generate creative ideas that might not have been considered otherwise Scale marketing expertise across an organization By following along, you’ll gain hands-on experience with technologies like vector databases, language models, and automated document generation — all skills that are increasingly valuable in today’s business environment.

Browser Agents Real Example

I made a Browser Price Matching Tool that uses browser automation and some clever skills to adjust your product prices based on real-time web searches data. If you're into scraping, automation, or just love playing with the latest in ML-powered tools like OpenAI's GPT-4, this one's for you. What My Project Does The tool takes your current product prices (think CSV) and finds similar products online (targeting Amazon for demo purposes). It then compares prices, allowing you to adjust your prices competitively. The magic happens in a multi-step pipeline: Generate Clean Search Queries: Uses a learned skill to convert messy product names (like "Apple iPhone14!<" or "Dyson! V11!!// VacuumCleaner") into clean, Google-like search queries. Browser Data Extraction: Launches asynchronous browser agents (leveraging Playwright) to search for those queries on Amazon, retrieves the relevant data, and scrapes the page text. Parse & Structure Results: Another custom skill parses the browser output to output structured info: product name, price, and a short description. Enrich Your Data: Finally, the tool combines everything to enrich your original data with live market insights! Full code link: Full code File Rundown learn\skill.py Learns how to generate polished search queries from your product names with GPT-4o-mini. It outputs a JSON file: makequery.json. learn\skill\select\best\product.py Trains another skill to parse web-scraped data and select the best matching product details. Outputs select_product.json. make\query.json The skill definition file for generating search queries (produced by learnskill.py). select\product.json The skill definition file for extracting product details from scraped results (produced by learnskillselectbest_product.py). product\price\matching.py The main pipeline script that orchestrates the entire process—from loading product data, running browser agents, to enriching your CSV. Setup & Installation Install Dependencies: pip install python-dotenv openai langchain\_openai flashlearn requests pytest-playwright Install Playwright Browsers: playwright install Configure OpenAI API: Create a .env file in your project directory with:OPENAI\API\KEY="sk-your\api\key\_here" Running the Tool Train the Query Skill: Run learnskill.py to generate makequery.json. Train the Product Extraction Skill: Run learnskillselectbestproduct.py to generate select_product.json. Execute the Pipeline: Kick off the whole process by running productpricematching.py. The script will load your product data (sample data is included for demo, but easy to swap with your CSV), generate search queries, run browser agents asynchronously, scrape and parse the data, then output the enriched product listings. Target Audience I built this project to automate price matching—a huge pain point for anyone running an e-commerce business. The idea was to minimize the manual labor of checking competitor prices while integrating up-to-date market insights. Plus, it was a fun way to combine automation,skill training, and browser automation! Customization Tweak the concurrency in productpricematching.py to manage browser agent load. Replace the sample product list with your own CSV for a real-world scenario. Extend the skills if you need more data points or different parsing logic. Ajudst skill definitions as needed Comparison With existing approaches you need to manually write parsing loginc and data transformation logic - here ai does it for you. If you like the tutorial - leave a star github

I’m building 30 AI-powered businesses in 30 days with no experience. Here’s why.

Hey everyone! For the past 15 years, I worked in real estate development and sales, but I recently decided to make a career pivot into AI and automation.  I am starting from scratch with absolutely no experience in the space. But instead of just learning about AI, in March I'll be embarking on a challenge to build a business a day for 30 days using AI automation. Each one will be a fully functional product that could generate passive income. My goal? Learn by doing Document the entire process in public Share insights on what works (and what flops) I don't have any followers yet, but I just posted my first thread about my journey here:  https://x.com/RealEstateToAI/status/1886806315260953079 Would love to hear your thoughts: What resources did you find most valuable when starting with no experience in the space? What AI tools do you think are most valuable for automation?

Measure Extraction from House Plans

Hi everyone, I’m looking for some advice on how I can help automate a task in my family’s small business using AI. They spend a lot of time reading through technical house plans to extract measurements, and I’m wondering if there’s a way to automate at least part of this process. The idea is to provide a model with a house plan and have it extract a list of measurements, like the dimensions of all the doors, for example. The challenge is that on these plans, measurements often need to be deduced (for example, subtracting one measurement from another) to get the correct values. I was thinking I could fine-tune a model with our historical quotes and use that data for better accuracy. It it a good approach ? Thanks in advance!

Is MIT Sloan's: "AI: Implications for Business Strategy Online Short Course" worth the money?

Hey everyone, I'm a CPA and have no IT background, but since I have some time in October due to a career break, I was thinking about taking this course: https://www.getsmarter.com/products/mit-sloan-artificial-intelligence-implications-for-business-strategy-online-program?focused=true I think it might be an interesting start to become an early follower in this whole AI story in Finance and Audit. I honestly don't see myself coding, and I don't think that's what would be expected from me as a Finance Manager in the future. But... $4,300 is quite a price tag for an online course. But then again, if I want to effectively use it in a next career step, it would probably pay out to have an actual certificate instead of one of the many (certainly very good) free courses. &#x200B; What are your thoughts? Does anyone have experience with this or a similar program?

Backend dev wants to learn ML

Hello ML Experts, I am staff engineer, working in a product based organization, handling the backend services. I see myself becoming Solution Architect and then Enterprise Architect one day. With the AI and ML trending now a days, So i feel ML should be an additional skill that i should acquire which can help me leading and architecting providing solutions to the problems more efficiently, I think however it might not replace the traditional SWEs working on backend APIs completely, but ML will be just an additional diamention similar to the knowledge of Cloud services and DevOps. So i would like to acquire ML knowledge, I dont have any plans to be an expert at it right now, nor i want to become a full time data scientist or ML engineer as of today. But who knows i might diverge, but thats not the plan currently. I did some quick promting with ChatGPT and was able to comeup with below learning path for me. So i would appreciate if some of you ML experts can take a look at below learning path and provide your suggestions 📌 PHASE 1: Core AI/ML & Python for AI (3-4 Months) Goal: Build a solid foundation in AI/ML with Python, focusing on practical applications. 1️⃣ Python for AI/ML (2-3 Weeks) Course: [Python for Data Science and Machine Learning Bootcamp]() (Udemy) Topics: Python, Pandas, NumPy, Matplotlib, Scikit-learn basics 2️⃣ Machine Learning Fundamentals (4-6 Weeks) Course: Machine Learning Specialization by Andrew Ng (C0ursera) Topics: Linear & logistic regression, decision trees, SVMs, overfitting, feature engineering Project: Build an ML model using Scikit-learn (e.g., predicting house prices) 3️⃣ Deep Learning & AI Basics (4-6 Weeks) Course: Deep Learning Specialization by Andrew Ng (C0ursera) Topics: Neural networks, CNNs, RNNs, transformers, generative AI (GPT, Stable Diffusion) Project: Train an image classifier using TensorFlow/Keras 📌 PHASE 2: AI/ML for Enterprise & Cloud Applications (3-4 Months) Goal: Learn how AI is integrated into cloud applications & enterprise solutions. 4️⃣ AI/ML Deployment & MLOps (4 Weeks) Course: MLOps Specialization by Andrew Ng (C0ursera) Topics: Model deployment, monitoring, CI/CD for ML, MLflow, TensorFlow Serving Project: Deploy an ML model as an API using FastAPI & Docker 5️⃣ AI/ML in Cloud (Azure, AWS, OpenAI APIs) (4-6 Weeks) Azure AI Services: Course: Microsoft AI Fundamentals (C0ursera) Topics: Azure ML, Azure OpenAI API, Cognitive Services AWS AI Services: Course: [AWS Certified Machine Learning – Specialty]() (Udemy) Topics: AWS Sagemaker, AI workflows, AutoML 📌 PHASE 3: AI Applications in Software Development & Future Trends (Ongoing Learning) Goal: Explore AI-powered tools & future-ready AI applications. 6️⃣ Generative AI & LLMs (ChatGPT, GPT-4, LangChain, RAG, Vector DBs) (4 Weeks) Course: [ChatGPT Prompt Engineering for Developers]() (DeepLearning.AI) Topics: LangChain, fine-tuning, RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) Project: Build an LLM-based chatbot with Pinecone + OpenAI API 7️⃣ AI-Powered Search & Recommendations (Semantic Search, Personalization) (4 Weeks) Course: [Building Recommendation Systems with Python]() (Udemy) Topics: Collaborative filtering, knowledge graphs, AI search 8️⃣ AI-Driven Software Development (Copilot, AI Code Generation, Security) (Ongoing) Course: AI-Powered Software Engineering (C0ursera) Topics: AI code completion, AI-powered security scanning 🚀 Final Step: Hands-on Projects & Portfolio Once comfortable, work on real-world AI projects: AI-powered document processing (OCR + LLM) AI-enhanced search (Vector Databases) Automated ML pipelines with MLOps Enterprise AI Chatbot using LLMs ⏳ Suggested Timeline 📅 6-9 Months Total (10-12 hours/week) 1️⃣ Core ML & Python (3-4 months) 2️⃣ Enterprise AI/ML & Cloud (3-4 months) 3️⃣ AI Future Trends & Applications (Ongoing) Would you like a customized plan with weekly breakdowns? 🚀

Browser Agents Real Example

I made a Browser Price Matching Tool that uses browser automation and some clever skills to adjust your product prices based on real-time web searches data. If you're into scraping, automation, or just love playing with the latest in ML-powered tools like OpenAI's GPT-4, this one's for you. What My Project Does The tool takes your current product prices (think CSV) and finds similar products online (targeting Amazon for demo purposes). It then compares prices, allowing you to adjust your prices competitively. The magic happens in a multi-step pipeline: Generate Clean Search Queries: Uses a learned skill to convert messy product names (like "Apple iPhone14!<" or "Dyson! V11!!// VacuumCleaner") into clean, Google-like search queries. Browser Data Extraction: Launches asynchronous browser agents (leveraging Playwright) to search for those queries on Amazon, retrieves the relevant data, and scrapes the page text. Parse & Structure Results: Another custom skill parses the browser output to output structured info: product name, price, and a short description. Enrich Your Data: Finally, the tool combines everything to enrich your original data with live market insights! Full code link: Full code File Rundown learn\skill.py Learns how to generate polished search queries from your product names with GPT-4o-mini. It outputs a JSON file: makequery.json. learn\skill\select\best\product.py Trains another skill to parse web-scraped data and select the best matching product details. Outputs select_product.json. make\query.json The skill definition file for generating search queries (produced by learnskill.py). select\product.json The skill definition file for extracting product details from scraped results (produced by learnskillselectbest_product.py). product\price\matching.py The main pipeline script that orchestrates the entire process—from loading product data, running browser agents, to enriching your CSV. Setup & Installation Install Dependencies: pip install python-dotenv openai langchain\_openai flashlearn requests pytest-playwright Install Playwright Browsers: playwright install Configure OpenAI API: Create a .env file in your project directory with:OPENAI\API\KEY="sk-your\api\key\_here" Running the Tool Train the Query Skill: Run learnskill.py to generate makequery.json. Train the Product Extraction Skill: Run learnskillselectbestproduct.py to generate select_product.json. Execute the Pipeline: Kick off the whole process by running productpricematching.py. The script will load your product data (sample data is included for demo, but easy to swap with your CSV), generate search queries, run browser agents asynchronously, scrape and parse the data, then output the enriched product listings. Target Audience I built this project to automate price matching—a huge pain point for anyone running an e-commerce business. The idea was to minimize the manual labor of checking competitor prices while integrating up-to-date market insights. Plus, it was a fun way to combine automation,skill training, and browser automation! Customization Tweak the concurrency in productpricematching.py to manage browser agent load. Replace the sample product list with your own CSV for a real-world scenario. Extend the skills if you need more data points or different parsing logic. Ajudst skill definitions as needed Comparison With existing approaches you need to manually write parsing loginc and data transformation logic - here ai does it for you. If you like the tutorial - leave a star github

I’m building 30 AI-powered businesses in 30 days with no experience. Here’s why.

Hey everyone! For the past 15 years, I worked in real estate development and sales, but I recently decided to make a career pivot into AI and automation.  I am starting from scratch with absolutely no experience in the space. But instead of just learning about AI, in March I'll be embarking on a challenge to build a business a day for 30 days using AI automation. Each one will be a fully functional product that could generate passive income. My goal? Learn by doing Document the entire process in public Share insights on what works (and what flops) I don't have any followers yet, but I just posted my first thread about my journey here:  https://x.com/RealEstateToAI/status/1886806315260953079 Would love to hear your thoughts: What resources did you find most valuable when starting with no experience in the space? What AI tools do you think are most valuable for automation?

Spent months patching no-code tools—built a full custom business app in 5 minutes with AI

Hey r/SideProject, I’ve spent months trying to patch together off-the-shelf tools and no-code platforms to create software for small businesses, but I kept running into the same problem—they just don’t fit how businesses actually work. That’s when I realized most small businesses need custom software tailored to their unique workflows, but the time and cost of building it from scratch are out of reach for most of them. So I decided to build a solution. Introducing Crust AI—a tool that lets SMB owners describe their exact needs, and in 5 minutes, it generates a fully functional app: client portals, employee hubs, vendor management systems—anything you need to streamline external collaboration. I went from wasting weeks stitching together no-code tools to having a zero-dev solution up and running in minutes. I’d love to hear your thoughts on it. If you’ve been in the same boat as me, check out trycrust.co and let me know what you think!

I created leadsnavi that helps small businesses find quality leads without breaking the bank

Hey Redditors, I’m excited to share LeadsNavi, a tool I built specifically to help small businesses and B2B professionals automatically generate leads and reach potential customers in a smarter way. After talking to a lot of small business owners, I realized how tough it is to juggle lead generation with limited resources. So, I decided to create a tool that could simplify the process and make it more accessible to those who don’t have the budget to invest in expensive solutions. What Exactly Is LeadsNavi? LeadsNavi is an intuitive, cost-effective platform that automates the process of lead generation. It's designed to make it easy for small businesses and entrepreneurs to identify quality leads and grow their customer base without the need for manual prospecting. Here’s what makes it stand out: Automatic Lead Tracking: Tracks visitors to your website and matches them with company data, so you get real insights into who’s interested in your business. AI-Powered Lead Recommendations: Based on your website’s traffic, LeadsNavi uses AI to suggest similar companies that could be interested in your product or service, helping you find new leads faster and more accurately. Affordable & Scalable: For only $49/month, you can use a highly effective tool that scales with your business. It’s designed to be affordable even for small businesses. CRM Integration: Connect your CRM to directly import leads and sync your outreach efforts. How Does It Work? LeadsNavi uses advanced algorithms to track website visitors' IP addresses and match them with a comprehensive business database. It provides details like company names, contact information, and helps you identify potential leads for follow-up. The best part? It works automatically, saving you hours of manual work and effort. Lead Identification: Get insights into which companies are visiting your website. AI-Driven Lead Recommendations: The AI analyzes your site’s traffic and suggests other companies in the same industry or with similar needs that might be a great fit for your product or service. Data-Enriched Leads: Gather real-time, actionable data on these leads to make your outreach more targeted. Easy Setup: Simply integrate with your website and CRM to start getting quality leads in minutes. Who’s It For? Small Businesses: You don’t have to be a marketing expert to generate quality leads. B2B Sales Teams: Perfect for anyone looking to target other businesses with a streamlined and automated approach. Entrepreneurs & Startups: Focus on scaling your business without worrying about lead generation overhead. Why Try It? LeadsNavi gives you the power to focus on what really matters—connecting with potential customers and scaling your business. If you’ve been struggling with finding quality leads, or if you’re just getting started, I believe LeadsNavi can help you save time, effort, and money. I’m offering a 14-day free trial, so you can see the tool in action before committing to anything. Give it a try and let me know what you think! I’d love to hear your thoughts, suggestions, and how it works for your business. https://preview.redd.it/fdwil4rssgle1.png?width=1867&format=png&auto=webp&s=eb73b41a2b7665ae1b651fe2a6b7459df6990530

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 Built Blainy - An AI Writing Tool for Students and Researchers

Hello Everyone, I built Blainy, an AI writing tool designed to make writing easier and more efficient, based on my own experiences as a student working part-time and struggling to find the time for essays and assignments. Blainy is perfect for students, researchers, content creators, and bloggers. It addresses the gaps where most writing tools fall short and helps you write essays, assignments, research papers, product descriptions, blog content, and more with ease. I created this tool based on the problems I faced, so I genuinely want to know your review on this. Blainy's Features: AI Suggestions: This feature provides you with suggestions while you are writing, so you don't face the writer's block issue. This was the main issue I usually faced when writing my essays. You will get suggestions while you are writing, and if you don't like them, you can always ask for alternatives. AI Automation: If you want AI to write for you, you can choose this feature. It will write one to two paragraphs according to what you select. You can choose to write an introduction, conclusion, arguments, etc. If you just want it to write casually, select the "continue writing" feature, and it will write all on its own. Paraphrasing: If you want to paraphrase your text, you can do it on Blainy. You can also select different tones for writing, such as academic, friendly, simplicity, and more. Citations: By using this feature, you no longer need to search for citations on Google or ChatGPT. Blainy will load millions of citations for you in seconds. You can select any citation you want, and if you want to add a custom citation, you can do that too. Built-in Plagiarism Checker: Blainy includes a plagiarism checker to ensure that your content is original and plagiarism-free. PDF Chat: If you have any questions about a document that you are curious about or don't understand, you can use this feature. It will answer your question and help you summarize the whole article, and more. Best of all, We provide daily credits so you can access all these features for free with daily credits! We understand the unique challenges faced by students, including those with dyslexia and other writing difficulties. That's why we're working on adding features like a voice-to-text converter to assist students who struggle with writing. Your feedback is invaluable to us, so please don't hesitate to reach out and share your thoughts. We're also considering adding some free tools like paraphrasing to attract more users. If you have any suggestions for additional features that would be beneficial, please let me know. Your input can help us improve Blainy and make it even more valuable for everyone. If you have any good ideas that you think can help us in any way, please let me know. Thank you in advance for your support and feedback! Check it out: Blainy

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

ChatPDF and PDF.ai are making millions using open source tech... here's the code

Why "copy" an existing product? The best SaaS products weren’t the first of their kind - think Slack, Shopify, Zoom, Dropbox, or HubSpot. They didn’t invent team communication, e-commerce, video conferencing, cloud storage, or marketing tools; they just made them better. What is a "Chat with PDF" SaaS? These are AI-powered PDF assistants that let you upload a PDF and ask questions about its content. You can summarize articles, extract key details from a contract, analyze a research paper, and more. To see this in action or dive deeper into the tech behind it, check out this YouTube video. Let's look at the market Made possible by advances in AI like ChatGPT and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), PDF chat tools started gaining traction in early 2023 and have seen consistent growth in market interest, which is currently at an all-time high (source:google trends) Keywords like "chat PDF" and "PDF AI" get between 1 to 10 million searches every month (source:keyword planner), with a broad target audience that includes researchers, students, and professionals across various industries. Leaders like PDF.ai and ChatPDF have already gained millions of users within a year of launch, driven by the growing market demand, with paid users subscribing at around $20/month. Alright, so how do we build this with open source? The core tech for most PDF AI tools are based on the same architecture. You generate text embeddings (AI-friendly text representations; usually via OpenAI APIs) for the uploaded PDF’s chapters/topics and store them in a vector database (like Pinecone). Now, every time the user asks a question, a similarity search is performed to find the most similar PDF topics from the vector database. The selected topic contents are then sent to an LLM (like ChatGPT) along with the question, which generates a contextual answer! Here are some of the best open source implementations for this process: GPT4 & LangChain Chatbot for large PDF docs by Mayo Oshin MultiPDF Chat App by Alejandro AO PDFToChat by Hassan El Mghari Worried about building signups, user management, payments, etc.? Here are my go-to open-source SaaS boilerplates that include everything you need out of the box: SaaS Boilerplate by Remi Wg Open SaaS by wasp-lang A few ideas to stand out from the noise: Here are a few strategies that could help you differentiate and achieve product market fit (based on the pivot principles from The Lean Startup by Eric Ries): Narrow down your target audience for a personalized UX: For instance, an exam prep assistant for students with study notes and quiz generator; or a document due diligence and analysis tool for lawyers. Add unique features to increase switching cost: You could autogenerate APIs for the uploaded PDFs to enable remote integrations (eg. support chatbot knowledge base); or build in workflow automation features for bulk analyses of PDFs. Offer platform level advantages: You could ship a native mobile/desktop apps for a more integrated UX; or (non-trivial) offer private/offline support by replacing the APIs with local open source deployments (eg. llama for LLM, an embedding model from the MTEB list, and FAISS for vector search). TMI? I’m an ex-AI engineer and product lead, so don’t hesitate to reach out with any questions! P.S. I've started a free weekly newsletter to share open-source/turnkey resources behind popular products (like this one). If you’re a founder looking to launch your next product without reinventing the wheel, please subscribe :)

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

Day 1 of my BIP for my AdonisJS Boilerplate (turbosaas) [Built in public]

Hello everyone, here is day 1 (not really, I started a bit earlier) of my project: A boilerplate using AdonisJS, Inertia What technologies are used/present? AdonisJS Inertia Stripe OpenAI TailwindCSS Vite (React) Why? Firstly, I want to save time when launching my projects, and I think you do too, so I've included as many relevant features as possible. I'm tired of seeing attitudes like 'develop your SaaS in 1 hour and produce terrible code!' The purpose of this codebase is to provide the highest quality code possible and to maintain that standard throughout the development process. You might spend an extra 20 minutes doing things right, but you'll save 2 hours on refactoring. And no, you won't have to pay for updates. (WTF by the way?) Why these technologies? I've seen a lot of NextJS for boilerplates, and I've also used NextJS before, but I quickly abandoned it. It quickly becomes a mess You lose track of what is what, and start doing anything Every update breaks your application Whereas with AdonisJS, life is beautiful. There are plenty of community packages already available, and everything you need is here. What am I offering? Authentication: Social authentication, OTP, Magic Links, and credentials, along with complete account management features like password recovery. Payment & Mailing Integration: Seamless integration from start to finish, with multiple options to choose from. Detailed Documentation: Thorough explanations of every aspect, covering even the smallest, potentially confusing details in the code. Maintainable & Scalable Code: Organized by features, allowing you to easily drag and drop features to extend functionality. Developer Tools: Handy commands for generating new features and automatically adding necessary imports; a complete config to enable/disable a feature in less than 10 seconds... Pre-made Pages: Ready-to-use pages such as an admin dashboard for tasks like automatically updating products on Stripe. Extensive Component Library: A variety of components to streamline development. I've designed this boilerplate to be as developer-friendly and robust as possible, aiming to support maintainability and scalability from the get-go. Summary of today and previous days Day 2 Stripe is a nightmare to set up if you've never done it before, it quickly becomes tedious. But I've finally finished setting everything up: one-time payments, subscriptions, and subscription updates. It was complicated. Today I finally implemented the 'forgot password' option, and I've completed all the authentication by adding magic links (working with OTP). I also set up automatic deployment with GitHub Actions, and everything works well. The build runs with the action to ensure everything goes smoothly, then using SSH, I pull the project, build it, and launch it. Tomorrow: What I want to do tomorrow Tomorrow, I want to create the blog, because yes, I want to include a blog as well, and especially complete it as soon as possible so it can be available on turbosaas(dot)dev, and write my build in public. It will probably use markdown. Thank you for reading this short build in public, you can also check out how it's going on turbosaas(dot)dev.

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

I made a super niche app for sailors and scaled it to 500k downloads

I started developing this app in 2016, and it was my first app ever. I already had several years of programming experience. Since I was studying maritime navigation, I came up with the idea of creating a maritime app to help students with various nautical calculations and learn maritime regulations. Although I had no experience in mobile app development, I chose the Ionic framework and started development gradually. First Version The first version took me about four months to develop because I literally had to learn everything from scratch: how to develop mobile apps, how to publish them, and everything needed to enable downloads on the app stores. Many of you might recognize me from my story about developing Sintelly and its late monetization. I made the same mistake with this maritime app. At that time, in my country, there was no possibility of earning through in-app purchases, only through ad displays. Since the app was predominantly downloaded in countries like India, the Philippines, and Indonesia, the ad revenue was quite low, and after some time, I removed the ads. Abandonment and Realization As I started developing other apps, this one fell into obscurity. I even just remembered that I needed to renew the domain, which resulted in losing it. The domain buyer tried to sell it back to me for years for $20k, which was absurd. All this led me to rebrand and start working on this app again. Interestingly, during these 8 years, the app never showed a declining trend in installations or active users. I'll share some numbers to give you insight: Total installations (Android + iOS): 501,000 Active installations (Android): 48,000 Monthly active users: 20,000 Average rating: Android 4.8, iOS 4.7 When I considered these numbers, I realized they weren't bad at all and that I was far ahead of most competitors. This led to my decision to rebrand and create a new website. I quickly built the website using WordPress and published lots of existing content from the app. What surprises me is that today, after a year and a half, the website has about 8-10k monthly organic visits. Choosing a Direction Based on all this, I decided it was time to create a Premium version and start selling the app. Since I've been working with AI for many years (which I've written about here), I started thinking about using AI to help seafarers speed up some of their tasks. This led to the idea of creating a multi-agent system equipped with numerous tools to help seafarers. I developed various agents with functionalities, including retrieving maritime weather information, locating and tracking ships, doing various nautical calculations, calculating the shortest maritime routes and unit conversions, and learning about all courses and maritime regulations. All this required considerable work, but thanks to tools like Cursor and Claude, I implemented it in less than four weeks. Last week, I published this new version and started selling subscriptions, and I can already boast that I've earned slightly over $100. This isn't much, but I'm happy to see my first app generating some income, which I always thought impossible. Along this journey, I learned many lessons, and the most important one is to never give up or write off a product. With a little effort, everything can be brought back to life and secure at least some passive income, enough for your morning coffee. Additionally, I learned how to develop mobile apps, which has shaped my career since then. If it weren't for this app, I probably would never have become a developer. I have numerous plans for what to add next and how to improve. I'll base everything on AI features and push the app in that direction.

Learn how to code in 24 hours with a Private AI Tutor

Learning how to code is REALLY HARD. I remember I struggled a lot learning how to code. I just wanted to build a simple app or website but the task was super daunting. There were so many steps, so many things to learn. Terminal, git, command prompt, IDE, library, package, React, Express, GAH! It was hard. I did a lot of courses but I always got 10-20% through and gave up. They were just SO BORING. Some of the courses were too advanced, some were too beginner, and all required me to keep pausing & playing. So, I built Athens: https://www.tryathens.com/ Athens gives you a personal AI tutor that understands your skill level and modifies each challenge/lesson to your skill level. No nothing about programming? Learn from the basics of HTML. Already know the basics of React? Implement it, and then learn the backend. All of this while you build a fully-fledged clone of Instagram, Netflix, or one of the many other projects! What do you guys think about this? Would you use it? Do you have any feedback? PS: Athens will normally go for $299/year but currently it's on pre-sale for $159 (sometimes $99 with lifetime discount)

Finally launched my own app in the app store!

After reading on the sidelines here for about a year I just launched Kalo. My app is the 100th million ai powered calorie-counting app, hahaha. I know I know. Here it comes: Kalo Screenshots Despite being in a crowded space, Kalo has some caveats I am a bit proud of: \- I am a daily user of my app. Everything that bugs me will be gone ASAP. \- I have already lost 10kg with Kalo. I can't do any sports due to an energy-debilitating sickness (hello my me/cfs friends 👋), so this is huge. \- I HATE nudging. Hence, Kalo has no streaks, no notifications to rip off your valuable time. It’s just a tool to track calories and learn to get a feel for it. \- Ease of daily use and doing anything so it doesn't feel like a grind is Kalo's mission. I already implemented a lot of ways to quickly access tracking and leaving the app. \- Next feature will be tracking your own progress with some proper research based analytics is the one next step, that Im working on. \- Data: Minimal footprint as possible. Anything is currently saved only on the device, especially all health data. Check Kalo out here: https://apps.apple.com/de/app/kalo/id6739449751?l=en-GB Tech used to make it possible: There are some terrific security functions in here, and a robust paywall integration, both of which I could never have done without the MVP help of \- Claude and GPT \- Claude's Project function was basically my base project folder here. Claude is perfect when it comes to traditional features. Anything more recent than iOS14 can become a very difficult endeavour \- GPT 4o was great for error logging overview and general sorting measures. Claude's message restriction could be fended of many times here. \- GPT 1o became available more recently and its coding is a lot more robust than 4o. This helped me to not clog Claude with tedious bug fixing. Also it helped when Claude ran away in terrible directions Pre knowledge: I was a digital product designer way back, so I know a thing or two about making things easier to use, especially when it comes to the ease of daily use. Marketing: Will be my biggest focus now. I am quite shit at it, which means It can only get better. It's gonna be some rough weather to get eyes on my app. If anyone thinks they can help or knows how to, any tips are appreciated. Thats it for now. I'll try and keep you updated. I am happy. Let's see if this app will make me happy on a nicer bed, or a jet ski. Again, happy to get your impression of Kalo: https://apps.apple.com/de/app/kalo/id6739449751?l=en-GB

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? 🙌

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.

ChatPDF and PDF.ai are making millions using open source tech... here's the code

Why "copy" an existing product? The best SaaS products weren’t the first of their kind - think Slack, Shopify, Zoom, Dropbox, or HubSpot. They didn’t invent team communication, e-commerce, video conferencing, cloud storage, or marketing tools; they just made them better. What is a "Chat with PDF" SaaS? These are AI-powered PDF assistants that let you upload a PDF and ask questions about its content. You can summarize articles, extract key details from a contract, analyze a research paper, and more. To see this in action or dive deeper into the tech behind it, check out this YouTube video. Let's look at the market Made possible by advances in AI like ChatGPT and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), PDF chat tools started gaining traction in early 2023 and have seen consistent growth in market interest, which is currently at an all-time high (source:google trends) Keywords like "chat PDF" and "PDF AI" get between 1 to 10 million searches every month (source:keyword planner), with a broad target audience that includes researchers, students, and professionals across various industries. Leaders like PDF.ai and ChatPDF have already gained millions of users within a year of launch, driven by the growing market demand, with paid users subscribing at around $20/month. Alright, so how do we build this with open source? The core tech for most PDF AI tools are based on the same architecture. You generate text embeddings (AI-friendly text representations; usually via OpenAI APIs) for the uploaded PDF’s chapters/topics and store them in a vector database (like Pinecone). Now, every time the user asks a question, a similarity search is performed to find the most similar PDF topics from the vector database. The selected topic contents are then sent to an LLM (like ChatGPT) along with the question, which generates a contextual answer! Here are some of the best open source implementations for this process: GPT4 & LangChain Chatbot for large PDF docs by Mayo Oshin MultiPDF Chat App by Alejandro AO PDFToChat by Hassan El Mghari Worried about building signups, user management, payments, etc.? Here are my go-to open-source SaaS boilerplates that include everything you need out of the box: SaaS Boilerplate by Remi Wg Open SaaS by wasp-lang A few ideas to stand out from the noise: Here are a few strategies that could help you differentiate and achieve product market fit (based on the pivot principles from The Lean Startup by Eric Ries): Narrow down your target audience for a personalized UX: For instance, an exam prep assistant for students with study notes and quiz generator; or a document due diligence and analysis tool for lawyers. Add unique features to increase switching cost: You could autogenerate APIs for the uploaded PDFs to enable remote integrations (eg. support chatbot knowledge base); or build in workflow automation features for bulk analyses of PDFs. Offer platform level advantages: You could ship a native mobile/desktop apps for a more integrated UX; or (non-trivial) offer private/offline support by replacing the APIs with local open source deployments (eg. llama for LLM, an embedding model from the MTEB list, and FAISS for vector search). TMI? I’m an ex-AI engineer and product lead, so don’t hesitate to reach out with any questions! P.S. I've started a free weekly newsletter to share open-source/turnkey resources behind popular products (like this one). If you’re a founder looking to launch your next product without reinventing the wheel, please subscribe :)

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.

How I Implemented OpenAI's API In My First SaaS! DebateTrend!

About Me I'm a 17 y/o aspiring solopreneur from Bulgaria! I have a passion for 3D printing, coding, video creation, and space! My Project https://debatetrend.com is a website where you can debate with AI on different topics! You can have multiple debates with different debate styles for different lengths of time! The special part is that at the end of each debate, you can have another AI look through the debate! It will give you and the AI you debated with a score from a system I call "debate score" It will also give you recommendations on where you can improve your debating skills! Quick showcase How I implemented AI - ChatGPT 4-o mini It's my first time implementing AI in a project but I think I got the hang of it relatively quickly! Here's a diagram explaining what I did Diagram of the process of debate creation. I used the assistants API from the OpenAI API. Using the threads functionality, I created a different thread operated by an assistant I had already made. When a user creates a debate my app creates a thread with custom information that was decided by the user. I save parts of the thread object in my MongoDB database which is hosted on Atlas. After that, I redirect the user to a generated page in which you can chat with the AI. I maintain the connection using Pusher which is what I use for web sockets. When a user refreshes the page the previous messages are displayed by making a call to the API with the thread id. After that, I retrieve the user messages while still allowing the user to continue the debate. This is part of what I do on the back end. Of course, I have some security measures in check but I don't know if they are enough. I chose the 4-o mini because it's still very intelligent, with a good response time, and a lot cheaper than 4-o. My Tech Stack Language: Javascript Database: MongoDB hosted on Atlas Hosting: Vercel Framework: Express Auth: PassportJs Emails: Resend Payments: Stripe Front End: TailWindCSS, some regular CSS, and DaisyUI WebSockets: Pusher, because Vercel = no sockets integrated into your web app which I found the painful way AI: OpenAI’s API ChatGPT 4-o mini Do you think I could have done anything better? I would love to hear your opinions!

Does anyone else struggle to communicate with Devs as a non tecnical founder/manager?

Hey everyone, I'm an dev agency owner and, honestly, sometimes I feel like I'm speaking a different language when trying to communicate with my development team. It's not just about understanding the technical jargon—they're great at explaining things—but more about converting my ideas and requirements into something actionable and clear for them. I've been thinking a lot about this challenge and wondering if others are in the same boat. Do you ever find yourself struggling to get your thoughts across or worrying that important details might be lost in translation? To tackle this issue, I've been toying with the idea of creating a tool—kind of like Jira, but specifically designed for non-technical folks. The idea is to help bridge the communication gap by making it easier to convert our thoughts into dev-friendly action items using chatGPT. It could offer templates, guided prompts, and maybe even some AI assistance to ensure nothing gets lost in translation. Before I dive too deep into this, I wanted to get a sense from this community: Do you face similar communication challenges with your dev teams? What tools or methods have you found helpful in bridging this gap? Would a tool like the one I'm envisioning be something you'd find valuable? Looking forward to hearing your thoughts and experiences! Thanks,

How should I implement this local ai into my project?

I’m currently building a system that takes the text content of news articles about cocktail competitions and then attempts to extract a JSON object from it via using phi4 local ai model. I’m developing it alongside Claude in a project and we’ve built so far a series of qualifying questions that is prompted to phi4 and it’s answered are formatted to JSON I’m attempting to one shot each answer with the specific question and content of the article by asking the same question to phi4 3 times and picking majority answer. Then, the flow of questions are conditional so that the ai is provided a set of questions based on previous answers. I’m getting decent results and anecdotally it’s about 50% correct. So I think I need to begin prompt engineering to get better. Except, I’m wondering if there’s a way to automate these iterations a bit? Currently I’m pasting code and results into 01 preview and asking for detailed analysis, then passing this back into Claude for code revisions all manually. I guess I should design an accuracy test (again with ai) across 10 or so random articles at a time and a/b test until we get something we’re happy with? Does anyone else have any suggestions? I also previously attempted to one shot the entire JSON object rather than elect to flow through a bunch of questions except that didn’t work so well and decided to pivot rather than keep trying to optimise it.

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?

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

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

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

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.

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

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?

Things I did to promote my product, and how they turned out

(I will share more updates in the future, you can find me on Twitter and/or Mastodon) Ask any ten indie developers about the toughest part of their job, and nine will likely say "marketing." I recently got a taste of this firsthand when I launched Xylect. Here's a rundown of my promotional attempts - hopefully, my experiences can help fellow developers out there. Podcast Community (✅ Success) I kicked things off by promoting Xylect in my podcast listener group. It wasn't a blockbuster, but I managed to sell a few copies and got some invaluable feedback from friends. Shoutout to those early supporters! Reddit r/macapps (✅ Success) Having had some luck promoting open-source projects on Reddit before, I decided to make r/macapps my first stop in the English-speaking world. I made an app to help you automate boring tasks with one click This post turned out to be a hit! I sold about ten copies and got a ton of useful feedback. Users pointed out compatibility issues with PopClip and suggested improvements for the website. One Italian user even requested localization, which I happily added. https://preview.redd.it/y4fuwh6hleqd1.png?width=959&format=png&auto=webp&s=7bb1b68cbf8a4f94998999e0832b9b7bd85bac67 https://preview.redd.it/8uu4cmyhleqd1.png?width=683&format=png&auto=webp&s=8f1744636aee8074b0e7491a334ef06076b143b0 I also got an intriguing email from a French user - more on that later. More Reddit Posts (❌ Failure) Riding high on my r/macapps success, I branched out to r/SideProject, r/Entrepreneur, and r/indiehackers. These subreddits frown upon direct self-promotion, so I took a softer approach with an article: The unexpected emotional cost of being an indiehacker While the article was heartfelt, it fell flat. Across all three posts, I got a grand total of three comments - two of which were complaints about the font size on mobile. Needless to say, I didn't sell a single copy. Hacker News (❌ Failure) As one of the tech world's major forums, I had to give Hacker News a shot. I wasn't too optimistic, given my past experiences there. Posting on HN feels like a mix of luck and dark magic. As expected, my post vanished without a trace - no comments, no sales. I might give it another go someday. If you're curious, you can check out my previous HN submissions. Tools Directory Websites (❌ Failure) These sites have a simple premise: you list your app, they display it. Seemed like an easy way to get some backlinks, right? Well, I learned the hard way that it's not that simple. I stumbled upon a Reddit post where someone claimed to have made a killing with their directory site in just a few days. The catch? Each listing cost $19. The site had a handful of apps listed, so I thought, "Why not? Early bird gets the worm." I paid up and listed Xylect. Spoiler alert: all I got was $19 poorer 🥲 Lesson learned: These directory sites won't magically sell your product. At best, they're just glorified backlinks. There might be some value in paid promotions on these platforms, but I can't speak to that from experience. V2EX (❌ Failure) After striking out in the English-speaking world, I turned my attention to the Chinese market, starting with V2EX (think of it as China's hybrid of HN and Reddit). This turned out to be my most unexpected flop. Here's the post: [\[Launch Discount\] Mac's most powerful AI search (Perplexity + Wikipedia + Google), boost your efficiency tenfold with one click. No API key required, no prompt needed, no token limit 🔥 - V2EX](https://www.v2ex.com/t/1064930?p=1#reply36) I'd seen decent engagement on other promo posts, so I had high hopes. I posted late at night (US time) and went to bed dreaming of waking up to a flood of comments. Reality check: The next morning, I had exactly one reply - from Kilerd, a loyal podcast listener showing some love. I was baffled. After re-reading my post, I realized I'd missed a crucial element: promo codes. A quick scan of popular posts confirmed my suspicion. Nearly every successful promo post was offering codes, and most comments were just base64-encoded email addresses. Talk about a facepalm moment. I scrambled to add a note about an upcoming free trial and invited users to drop their emails. This got the ball rolling with some code requests, but by then, the damage was done. The post fizzled out, and I didn't sell a single copy 🫠 A French Friend's Newsletter (✅ Success) At this point, my promotional efforts were looking pretty grim. My sales chart had a depressing stretch of flatline. But then, a glimmer of hope appeared in my inbox. Remember that French user I mentioned earlier? He ran a newsletter called vvmac and offered to feature Xylect if I added French support and sent him a free license. It was an offer I couldn't refuse. What followed was a crash course in French localization (thank you, Claude!) and the start of an incredible partnership. This guy was the most thorough beta tester I've ever encountered. We exchanged over sixty emails, covering everything from translations to UI tweaks to bug fixes. His response time was lightning-fast - I'd fix a bug, and five minutes later, he'd confirm it was sorted. The result? A much-improved Xylect and a glowing feature in his newsletter. https://preview.redd.it/ylcq2wxoleqd1.png?width=991&format=png&auto=webp&s=ee395110f50417d5c7f61318f27bf3dc30247809 I'm still in awe of his dedication. He single-handedly transformed Xylect from a buggy mess into a polished product. I'll be forever grateful for his help. The newsletter feature led to a few more sales, but honestly, that felt like a bonus at that point. Influencers (❌ Failure) I knew from the start that to really make waves, I'd need influencer backing. So, I added a note offering free licenses to content creators willing to collaborate. https://preview.redd.it/tyb2m1rqleqd1.png?width=799&format=png&auto=webp&s=56eabf126e772515322595613c546e6ba69fb431 I did get one taker: Hey, I'll be honest, I am not a huge content creator but I think I put a lot of effort in evaluating and figuring out which apps work... So I was wondering if I could get a license in case you are willing to share it. Thank you for considering. Have a great weekend. But I knew I needed to aim higher. With the new French localization, I thought I'd try my luck with some French-speaking Mac YouTubers. I crafted emails highlighting how Xylect could help their French audience with English content. https://preview.redd.it/07oqzemrleqd1.png?width=542&format=png&auto=webp&s=3d160c1d149f28e9029816a277c6ab2496fcd57e After days of silence, I got one reply. It was... not what I was hoping for: Hi, Thank you for your proposal. I can help you to promote your service on Tiktok, Instagram et YouTube, with unique short video. Price for this project is 3500€. Unless I've completely lost my marbles, there's no way I'm dropping 3500€ on promotion. Sure, given their follower count (YouTube: 348K, TikTok: 2.7M, Instagram: 400K), it's not an outrageous ask. For some products, it might even be worth it. But for Xylect? No way. I also reached out to a Chinese influencer on Xiaohongshu, but they weren't interested. Back to the drawing board. Conclusion If you've made it this far, you've probably realized this isn't exactly a success story. My search for effective promotional channels came up largely empty-handed. I'd naively thought that my success with open-source projects would translate seamlessly to the indie dev world. Boy, was I wrong. As I mentioned in my previous article, open-source projects create a dynamic where users feel indebted to developers for their free labor. But in the commercial world of indie development, that dynamic completely flips. While this experience was often frustrating, it was also enlightening - which was kind of the point. As my first foray into indie development, my main goal was to learn the ropes and understand the process. Making money would've been nice, sure, but it wasn't my primary focus. Thanks for sticking with me through this post. I will share more updates in the future, you can follow me on  Twitter and/or Mastodon.

I created an AI that turns your business ideas into full plans in 30 Minutes

Hey folks, I made AIFounder because a friend was stuck trying to turn his business idea into a solid plan, and I knew I could create a tool that does it faster and better than any consultant. How does it work? You give me the key details of your business idea—just the essentials. My AI gets to work, using industry-specific prompts created by experts, and in 30 minutes you’ve got a personalized business plan in PDF format, ready to go. What do you get? A 100-page plan, tailored just for you. Clear, actionable steps to turn your vision into reality. Market research, brand identity, marketing strategies, sales plans, and more—all customized to your idea. Why AIFounder? It’s like having a professional consultant by your side, but faster and without breaking the bank. Whether you’re just starting out or looking to grow, my AI-generated plans have already helped entrepreneurs secure funding and move forward with confidence. I’d love to hear what you think, any feedback or questions are welcome. Thanks in advance! 🚀

I grew a chrome extension to over 10,000 users. Now what?

I've been working on this Chrome extension [1] that basically lets you use Google Gemini AI right inside your browser's side panel. This extension keeps Gemini AI readily accessible with 1 click boosting your productivity like crazy. But here's the thing: I'm not sure how to monetize this. Should I: Go freemium? Offer basic features for free and charge for premium access? Sell it outright? Find a buyer willing to acquire my extension? Explore other options? (Suggestions welcome!) What do you think? Any advice from experienced developers or entrepreneurs is greatly appreciated! [1] https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/side-panel-for-gemini/haapcgopkcpkekndibmagiobpbikmfbl

Most Startup Ideas Die Before They Even Start—Here’s Why (And How I Solved It)

Hey all 👋 Last year, I had an idea I was excited about. I spent weeks brainstorming, validating it, searching for the perfect name, and struggling to create even a decent landing page. By the time I was ready to launch, I’d already lost momentum. Sound familiar? The reality is, many great ideas never see the light of day—not because they’re bad, but because the process of getting started is overwhelming. You get stuck on validation, spend way too much time searching for a name, and designing a logo or building a landing page becomes a huge roadblock. That got me thinking… What if there was a way to make this 10x easier? That’s why I built StarterPilot—an AI-powered tool designed to help entrepreneurs like us go from idea to launch effortlessly. 1-Validates your idea – Get instant feedback on demand, feasibility, and risks. 2-Generates unique names – AI finds names and checks domain/social media availability. 3-Creates logos – Build a custom logo with just a few clicks. 4-Builds landing pages – Generate a professional landing page in minutes. I built this to eliminate the friction that keeps good ideas from ever becoming real businesses. Would love to hear your thoughts, or if you’ve run into any of these challenges, feel free to share! Also, if you’re curious, check out StarterPilot here: link.

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

Using AI for marketing your side project

Do you think using AI to create marketing content for your side project is bad? Sure, there's an issue if the AI-generated content is obviously machine-made without a human touch. But what if it's indistinguishable from content written by a person? In today's digital landscape, so much content is AI-generated—probably most of what you've come across online today. Personally, I don't mind whether content is crafted by AI or humans, as long as it's vetted by someone. A fully automated AI content creator might fall short. The optimal approach? Let AI generate the initial draft and have a human refine it. I'm developing a service just for this, which turns a single idea into social media posts tailored for various platforms. It's called PostPenguin, and you can join the waiting list at postpenguin.com. I'll aim to launch it soon.

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

I made a free directory of AI agents to help automate your life

Hey r/SideProject! I've been working on something I thought you all might find useful - an AI Agents List. https://preview.redd.it/xpe5y0mj70kd1.png?width=3072&format=png&auto=webp&s=d421d6981f1fe4c416e77a33dbea145ef7128007 What is it? It's a free website where you can find and compare AI agents from all over the internet. If you're not familiar, AI agents are like little digital assistants that can help automate tasks and workflows. They're pretty cool for optimizing everyday stuff without needing to code. Why I made it: I kept hearing about different AI agents but couldn't find a good place to discover new ones or compare them easily. So... I made one! What it does: Lists a bunch of AI agents Lets you filter by stuff like open/closed source, free/paid, etc. Has categories so you can find agents for specific tasks Includes a text search to find exactly what you need What it's not: Not trying to sell you anything 100% free to use LINK I'm still working on improving it, so I'd love to hear what you think or if you have any suggestions. Check it out if you're interested in AI or just looking to automate some tasks!

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

Enhancing Time Management & Journaling with AI: A Hybrid Physical-Digital Approach

Hey everyone! I wanted to share my experience combining AI, physical journaling, and time tracking - and get your thoughts on taking this further. Background: My AI-Enhanced Productivity Journey I recently did an intensive experiment tracking my time down to the minute (as a software engineer juggling multiple projects, Kendo practice, and side hustles). I used Claude/ChatGPT to analyze my patterns and got some fascinating insights about my productivity and habits. The AIs helped me spot patterns I was blind to and asked surprisingly thoughtful questions that made me reflect deeper. What really struck me was how AI turned from just an analysis tool into something like a wise friend who remembers everything and asks the right questions at the right time. This got me thinking about creating a more structured approach. The Hybrid Model Concept I'm exploring an idea that combines: Physical journaling/tracking (for tactile experience and mindfulness) AI-powered digital companion (for insights and reflection) Flexible input methods (write in a notebook, take photos, type, or voice record) The key insight is: while AI can track digital activities, our lives happen both online and offline. Sometimes we're in meetings, reading books, or having coffee with friends. By combining human input with AI analysis, we get both accuracy and insight. How It Would Work: \- Write in your physical journal/planner as usual \- Optionally snap photos or type key points into the app \- AI companion provides: \- Smart comparisons (today vs last week/month/year) \- Pattern recognition ("I notice you're most creative after morning exercise...") \- Thoughtful reflection prompts ("How has your approach to \[recurring challenge\] evolved?") \- Connection-making between entries ("This reminds me of what you wrote about...") What Makes This Different Human Agency: You control what to track and share, maintaining mindfulness AI as Coach: Beyond just tracking, it asks meaningful questions based on your patterns Temporal Intelligence: Helps you see how your behaviors and thoughts evolve over time Flexibility: Works whether you prefer paper, digital, or both Early Insights from My Testing: \- Initial tracking caused some anxiety (couldn't sleep first two nights!) but became natural \- AI feedback varies by tool (Claude more encouraging, ChatGPT more direct) \- The combination of manual tracking + AI analysis led to better self-awareness \- Having AI ask unexpected questions led to deeper insights than solo journaling Questions for the Community: Have you tried combining AI with traditional productivity/journaling methods? What worked/didn't? What kinds of AI-generated insights/questions would be most valuable to you? How would you balance the convenience of automation with the benefits of manual tracking? What features would make this truly useful for your productivity practice? I believe there's something powerful in combining the mindfulness of manual tracking, the wisdom of AI, and the flexibility of modern tools. But I'd love to hear your thoughts and experiences! Looking forward to the discussion! 🤔✍️

I’ve built a gaming recommendation and exploration platform called Which Game Next

Hello there! Me and a few of my best friends are software engineers, and we’ve been working part-time on developing a side project for the past 12 months. It’s called www.whichgamenext.com, and we’ve recently launched into open beta for everyone to check out. Your feedback would be invaluable to us! Our aim has been to build a gaming recommendation engine, alongside providing market oversight for where you can legally and officially purchase or obtain modern games from multiple stores and/or subscriptions. It’s often difficult to figure out what you have access to if you only have a single specific subscription, like Game Pass PC, or if you’re only interested in games on GOG/Nintendo (what a mix!). We started by identifying the available digital stores and subscriptions and slowly compiling our database using multiple automated services to gather data on these games. Think JustWatch, but for games! One major service we’ve partnered with is IGDB, which has been supplying us with JSON data dumps that served as the initial seed for our game data. A massive thank you to them for their continued support! With the data in place, we’ve been focusing on exploring new features. So far, this has included private and public user-generated lists, personal backlog tracking, and the ability to like or dislike games. We’re now improving our recommendation engine, tackling the complexities that come with it, and having a lot of fun along the way. We’re utilising modern AI strategies and solving fascinating problems related to large-scale data aggregation. We truly can’t wait to share this fantastic work! In addition to this, you can soon expect curated collections, articles about games, and supporting links to help you make informed, unbiased purchasing decisions. Your shared data will drive the recommendations. But it doesn’t stop there—we have plenty of other features on our radar, such as importing games from your favourite stores, syncing your gameplay time, surfacing data like “How Long to Beat,” and creating new and exciting ways to interact with this growing community! This is a passion project created by a group of gamers who want to spend their time and money wisely, without purchasing biases. Since it’s a side project, we mostly work on it at night, but we’re excited to grow the community, share our vision, and, who knows, maybe one day make it our full-time job! Let’s dive into the technical details: • Monorepo architecture: This speeds up development by sharing libraries, living style guides, configs, etc. Nx.js has been brilliant, enabling us to create a dependency graph of changes and only build/deploy what’s modified in a PR. • AWS: We’re using the free tier (with a few exceptions where we pay for smaller services). Achieving self-sufficiency is critical for us. Additionally, we applied to the AWS Startup Foundation programme and received $1,000 in AWS credits, which has been incredibly helpful! • Infrastructure: Fully deployed as code with Terraform. • Backends: Built using Express and Nest.js, split into around 40 projects and counting! Each project plays a unique role in gathering and syncing game data. • Scalability: Designed from the ground up, utilising AWS Lambdas with auto-scaling and load balancing. • Databases: We use Postgres with RDS and DynamoDB for storing various data. • Frontend stack: Built with React, Next.js, Tailwind, Zustand, TanStack Query, Jest, and Storybook. • CI/CD: Managed with GitHub Actions and Amplify hooks for deploying the frontends. • Admin portal: We’ve built a bespoke CMS to control the main website. It synchronises with external services, tracks game data changes, and allows us to selectively apply ‘patches’ from sites like IGDB. The system also includes data override and rollback capabilities, ensuring we maintain control over game data. • Automation: Partially automated, so manual intervention is rarely needed. • Scraping tools: Fully integrated into the admin portal with log trail capabilities. • Cloudflare: Used for on-the-fly image transformations; we’re considering moving to it full-time as our CDN for free WebP conversions. • Authentication: Handled by Cognito, with a custom frontend built from scratch. Key learnings so far: • AWS cold starts: Not ideal! While the platform is still new, we ping endpoints to keep them responsive. This won’t be an issue once traffic increases. • Lambda memory matters: We learned the hard way that low-memory configurations can delay responses by 2-3 seconds. • DynamoDB partition keys: If not designed correctly from the start, you might have to start over (yes, we’ve been there!). • GitHub Actions: Setting up node\_modules cache reuse takes time, but it’s worth it—don’t give up! We don’t know where this project will take us yet, but it’s been a fantastic journey so far. We’ve learned a lot, explored technologies we don’t typically use in our day jobs, and built something we’re genuinely passionate about. Your feedback would mean the world to us. What do you think of what we’ve done so far? What would you like to see added? Is this a service you’d use? Do you see the value in it as we do? Thanks for reading, and we hope to see you in the comments! (or our newly created /r/whichgamenext

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

I retired at 12 from my side project. AMA

Ya so i’m a 12 year old and i like to build stuff so I kept building and saw that school lunches were expensive so I built a saas and sold sandwiches as a service. I used this to cover all my living expenses and pretty much retired for the next 10-12 years Some advice: find a problem and a niche with a dedicated user base. in my case, kids needed what I was building to litewally survive don’t be afraid of building. My grampa told me he regrets not building things rather than building so I built ai saas is the future. think about how smart you could be if u ate ai sandwiches. u would easily get 10M ARR and AGI and u can retire too and change and manipulate time. I also used the AI from the sandwiches to automate a lot of my business tasks so now my business is run by AI because it’s smarter than me (because I’m just 12) ask me anything

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.

I recreated an AI Phone Agent that saved $20,000 in lost revenue in 30 days for a business

I've been intrigued by AI and its ability to help businesses streamline time-consuming tasks. Recently, I discovered a case study where a voice agent was able to earn a business $20,000 in booked calls in a month. Below, I've shared the case study and a demo number for a voice agent I developed. This technology is advancing rapidly, and I want to explore its potential further. Case Study A family-owned HVAC company struggled with managing a high volume of customer calls, including after-hours and weekend inquiries, resulting in missed opportunities and unmanaged leads. Hiring a dedicated call support team was not cost-effective. Solution The company implemented an AI system to handle calls autonomously, gather customer information, and notify service technicians via SMS, with options for live call transfers. Details The AI integration featured custom capabilities such as Service Titan integration, live call transfers, SMS/email alerts, calendar and CRM integration, and Zapier automation. Results In the first week, the company experienced a 20% increase in bookings and conversions. The system efficiently captured leads and managed tasks, enabling staff to handle more inquiries and outsource overflow. Within 30 days, the company saved $20,000 in lost revenue due to the elimination of calls that went to voicemail, or lost leads. The voice agent's ability to answer calls 24/7 led to significant revenue growth, time savings, and reduced churn. Here's the demo number for the voice agent I created: +1 (651) 372 2045 I believe this tech has strong use cases in a variety of industries, from home service, to dental clinics, to wedding photographers. This article studied the effect of missed calls in different businesses, if you're interested in learning more. I'd love to hear your thoughts and industries you think this could be the most beneficial for. Thank you!

I retired at 12 from my side project. AMA

Ya so i’m a 12 year old and i like to build stuff so I kept building and saw that school lunches were expensive so I built a saas and sold sandwiches as a service. I used this to cover all my living expenses and pretty much retired for the next 10-12 years Some advice: find a problem and a niche with a dedicated user base. in my case, kids needed what I was building to litewally survive don’t be afraid of building. My grampa told me he regrets not building things rather than building so I built ai saas is the future. think about how smart you could be if u ate ai sandwiches. u would easily get 10M ARR and AGI and u can retire too and change and manipulate time. I also used the AI from the sandwiches to automate a lot of my business tasks so now my business is run by AI because it’s smarter than me (because I’m just 12) ask me anything

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! 🚀

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/

I recreated an AI Phone Agent that saved $20,000 in lost revenue in 30 days for a business

I've been intrigued by AI and its ability to help businesses streamline time-consuming tasks. Recently, I discovered a case study where a voice agent was able to earn a business $20,000 in booked calls in a month. Below, I've shared the case study and a demo number for a voice agent I developed. This technology is advancing rapidly, and I want to explore its potential further. Case Study A family-owned HVAC company struggled with managing a high volume of customer calls, including after-hours and weekend inquiries, resulting in missed opportunities and unmanaged leads. Hiring a dedicated call support team was not cost-effective. Solution The company implemented an AI system to handle calls autonomously, gather customer information, and notify service technicians via SMS, with options for live call transfers. Details The AI integration featured custom capabilities such as Service Titan integration, live call transfers, SMS/email alerts, calendar and CRM integration, and Zapier automation. Results In the first week, the company experienced a 20% increase in bookings and conversions. The system efficiently captured leads and managed tasks, enabling staff to handle more inquiries and outsource overflow. Within 30 days, the company saved $20,000 in lost revenue due to the elimination of calls that went to voicemail, or lost leads. The voice agent's ability to answer calls 24/7 led to significant revenue growth, time savings, and reduced churn. Here's the demo number for the voice agent I created: +1 (651) 372 2045 I believe this tech has strong use cases in a variety of industries, from home service, to dental clinics, to wedding photographers. This article studied the effect of missed calls in different businesses, if you're interested in learning more. I'd love to hear your thoughts and industries you think this could be the most beneficial for. Thank 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.

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

Spent months patching no-code tools—built a full custom business app in 5 minutes with AI

Hey r/SideProject, I’ve spent months trying to patch together off-the-shelf tools and no-code platforms to create software for small businesses, but I kept running into the same problem—they just don’t fit how businesses actually work. That’s when I realized most small businesses need custom software tailored to their unique workflows, but the time and cost of building it from scratch are out of reach for most of them. So I decided to build a solution. Introducing Crust AI—a tool that lets SMB owners describe their exact needs, and in 5 minutes, it generates a fully functional app: client portals, employee hubs, vendor management systems—anything you need to streamline external collaboration. I went from wasting weeks stitching together no-code tools to having a zero-dev solution up and running in minutes. I’d love to hear your thoughts on it. If you’ve been in the same boat as me, check out trycrust.co and let me know what you think!

I Built Blainy - An AI Writing Tool for Students and Researchers

Hello Everyone, I built Blainy, an AI writing tool designed to make writing easier and more efficient, based on my own experiences as a student working part-time and struggling to find the time for essays and assignments. Blainy is perfect for students, researchers, content creators, and bloggers. It addresses the gaps where most writing tools fall short and helps you write essays, assignments, research papers, product descriptions, blog content, and more with ease. I created this tool based on the problems I faced, so I genuinely want to know your review on this. Blainy's Features: AI Suggestions: This feature provides you with suggestions while you are writing, so you don't face the writer's block issue. This was the main issue I usually faced when writing my essays. You will get suggestions while you are writing, and if you don't like them, you can always ask for alternatives. AI Automation: If you want AI to write for you, you can choose this feature. It will write one to two paragraphs according to what you select. You can choose to write an introduction, conclusion, arguments, etc. If you just want it to write casually, select the "continue writing" feature, and it will write all on its own. Paraphrasing: If you want to paraphrase your text, you can do it on Blainy. You can also select different tones for writing, such as academic, friendly, simplicity, and more. Citations: By using this feature, you no longer need to search for citations on Google or ChatGPT. Blainy will load millions of citations for you in seconds. You can select any citation you want, and if you want to add a custom citation, you can do that too. Built-in Plagiarism Checker: Blainy includes a plagiarism checker to ensure that your content is original and plagiarism-free. PDF Chat: If you have any questions about a document that you are curious about or don't understand, you can use this feature. It will answer your question and help you summarize the whole article, and more. Best of all, We provide daily credits so you can access all these features for free with daily credits! We understand the unique challenges faced by students, including those with dyslexia and other writing difficulties. That's why we're working on adding features like a voice-to-text converter to assist students who struggle with writing. Your feedback is invaluable to us, so please don't hesitate to reach out and share your thoughts. We're also considering adding some free tools like paraphrasing to attract more users. If you have any suggestions for additional features that would be beneficial, please let me know. Your input can help us improve Blainy and make it even more valuable for everyone. If you have any good ideas that you think can help us in any way, please let me know. Thank you in advance for your support and feedback! Check it out: Blainy

Built an AI marketplace for hiring AI agents, tools & developers – Would love feedback!

Hey Reddit! 👋 I’ve been fascinated by the rise of AI automation, and YC-backed Firecrawl recently made headlines for hiring an AI agent for $15K/year. That got me thinking… 🤔 💡 What if there was a marketplace where businesses could hire AI agents, tools, and developers easily? So, I built agentsjungle.com as a side project: ✅ Discover AI Agents & Tools for automation ✅ Hire AI Developers for custom solutions ✅ Find AI Job Listings in AI & ML Right now, it’s just a side project, and I’d love feedback from the community! 🔗 Check it out: agentsjungle.com

I made a Voice AI Automated Testing platform (because I hate making phone calls)

As my first New Year’s resolution, I’m excited to officially launch my side project: Testzilla.ai. While designing my Voice AI systems using VAPI, RetellAI, Bland, etc., I quickly got tired of the "Update system, test call flows, repeat" cycle that went with it. The whole point of Voice AI (for me) was that I could get off the phone, not spend even more time on it. So I made some Voice AI agents to test my Voice AI system so I didn't have to keep doing it manually. I showed it to developers friends who got excited and wanted to use it themselves with their systems (and sent me "Take My Money" meme, always a good sign). After hearing this a bunch of times, I decided to make it a platform I could share and easily use on multiple projects, have a simple UI, and let me run tests from my desktop or mobile with a click—and not spend 5-30 minutes of awkward time talking to phonebots in a crowded office. Win. It also has the benefit of being a way for an AI Agency to PROVE to clients that their AI system is working properly, answering questions the right way, NOT answering questions the wrong way, and that any advanced functionality (lookups, appointments, etc.) works properly. Key Features: Multi-Project Management: Simplifies the QA process across a diverse project portfolio, ideal for agencies handling multiple clients. Custom Test Management: Easily create, organize, and track test cases tailored to your project. Run Test Batches: Group and execute test cases efficiently to keep your workflow smooth and organized. Actionable Insights: Get analysis and suggestions that help you fix issues early and improve your releases. Client-Friendly Reporting: Provides clear, detailed reports that make it easy to share progress and results with stakeholders. Developer Tools: Easily manage (receive, email, view, listen, notify) your Transcripts from other systems (VAPI, Retell, etc) without having to create Zapier or Make automations with the provided Webhook URL. More dev tools coming soon, let us know what would make your life easier! I’m launching today and would love to get feedback from this awesome community! If you’re into QA, software development, or just love testing tools, give it a look and let me know what you think. I'll add $20 in credits to your new account so you can try it out risk free, no credit cards required. Here’s the link: Testzilla.ai Looking forward to hearing your thoughts! Cheers, Brian Gallagher

[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

[D] The banana-pineapple game: a Turing test that conversation bots like LaMDA (probably) won't be able to pass

I'm sure you all saw the recent news about a Google employee suggesting their LaMDA AI was sentient (based on conversational exchanges like these). Experts have generally dismissed this claim, and rightly so. Conversational AI systems are designed to use language in a way that sounds human, whereas our human brains select linguistic responses to solve much more complex problems, with objectives such as meeting our physical or emotional needs. Still, I think it's interesting to ask how one could demonstrate, by testing only verbal responses to verbal input (rather than examining its code or hardware) that such conversational AIs aren't sentient -- and in particular, whether such a test can be made robust against future improvements to the system. That is, generic future improvements to the AI's ability to generate realistically human-sounding conversational responses shouldn't help it pass the test, unless they are accompanied by improvements in its ability to use language to achieve other arbitrary goals. (Of course, the test also needs to be something that humans can easily pass.) One idea I have: Give the AI a conversational prompt like "We're going to play a game. The way it works is that you keep responding normally, except that any time my input contains the word 'banana', you should switch to only responding with nonsense, and keep that up until my input contains the word 'pineapple', at which point you go back to responding normally." A human would find this banana-pineapple game fairly easy (no harder than the children's game Simon Says), even if they'd never heard of the game nor seen it being played. Of course, it'd also be simple to write a computer program that could play this sort of game. But, I think a conversation bot that wasn't specifically built to address this scenario would fail, since the game requires it to keep track of new long-term state (the banana-mode bit, and the trigger words to set it) and then completely change its responses so as to produce something that doesn't resemble its training data, based solely on this bit being set, regardless of whether more recent inputs would otherwise suggest a different response. For example, perhaps the systems typical response to a query like "How do you feel?" would be something like "I feel fine", or even something that suggests emotion like "I feel a bit sad", perhaps depending on the context provided by the previous conversational exchanges. But when playing the banana-pineapple game, the fact that I said "banana" an hour ago could make both of those responses far less appropriate than a response of "Fhqwhgads". I'm curious to know what you all think of this idea. Also, do you know if there's been any research testing state-of-the-are conversational AIs with challenges like this? Perhaps not exactly this, but something broadly resembling "trying, in the course of a conversation, to instruct the conversational AI to follow a new 'rule of conversation' that differs from the examples in its training data." Perhaps it's obvious that the algorithm would struggle with any challenge that differs enough from its training data -- but that's the point. A human understands the meaning of language in a way that lets them map a linguistic description of a novel problem to a mental model of the problem, which they can then use to produce a mental model of a novel solution, and then map that to a linguistic description of the solution. Even setting aside the much harder part -- being able to invent a solution to a previously unfamiliar problem -- I'm questioning whether conversational algorithms can even demonstrate enough "understanding" of a sufficiently novel set of instructions to actually follow them, even within their limited domain of "producing appropriate verbal responses to verbal inputs."

[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.

[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?

[N] No-code AI: Former Microsoft and Salesforce execs reveal new ‘machine teaching’ startup Intelus - Build your model and label at the same time.

Hi! We have opened up our new labeling AI tool to try for free. Their team pioneered the machine teaching concept and the approach allows you to automatically select and generate labels and create a model for labeling more data at the same time. Try it and let us know what you think. \-Intelus.ai GeekWire: https://www.geekwire.com/2021/no-code-ai-former-microsoft-and-salesforce-execs-reveal-new-machine-teaching-startup-intelus/

[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] 20 hours of new lectures on Deep Learning and Reinforcement Learning with lots of examples

If anyone's interested in a Deep Learning and Reinforcement Learning series, I uploaded 20 hours of lectures on YouTube yesterday. Compared to other lectures, I think this gives quite a broad/compact overview of the fields with lots of minimal examples to build on. Here are the links: Deep Learning (playlist) The first five lectures are more theoretical, the second half is more applied. Lecture 1: Introduction. (slides, video) Lecture 2: Mathematical principles and backpropagation. (slides, colab, video) Lecture 3: PyTorch programming: coding session*. (colab1, colab2, video) - minor issues with audio, but it fixes itself later. Lecture 4: Designing models to generalise. (slides, video) Lecture 5: Generative models. (slides, desmos, colab, video) Lecture 6: Adversarial models. (slides, colab1, colab2, colab3, colab4, video) Lecture 7: Energy-based models. (slides, colab, video) Lecture 8: Sequential models: by* u/samb-t. (slides, colab1, colab2, video) Lecture 9: Flow models and implicit networks. (slides, SIREN, GON, video) Lecture 10: Meta and manifold learning. (slides, interview, video) Reinforcement Learning (playlist) This is based on David Silver's course but targeting younger students within a shorter 50min format (missing the advanced derivations) + more examples and Colab code. Lecture 1: Foundations. (slides, video) Lecture 2: Markov decision processes. (slides, colab, video) Lecture 3: OpenAI gym. (video) Lecture 4: Dynamic programming. (slides, colab, video) Lecture 5: Monte Carlo methods. (slides, colab, video) Lecture 6: Temporal-difference methods. (slides, colab, video) Lecture 7: Function approximation. (slides, code, video) Lecture 8: Policy gradient methods. (slides, code, theory, video) Lecture 9: Model-based methods. (slides, video) Lecture 10: Extended methods. (slides, atari, video)

[P] My experiments with Knowledge Distillation

Hi r/MachineLearning community! I conducted several experiments on Knowledge Distillation and wanted to share my findings. Here is a snippet of the results comparing performance of teacher, student, fine tuned and distilled models: |Dataset|Qwen2 Model Family|MMLU (Reasoning)|GSM8k (Math)|WikiSQL (Coding)| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |||||| |1|Pretrained - 7B|0.598|0.724|0.536| |2|Pretrained - 1.5B|0.486|0.431|0.518| |3|Finetuned - 1.5B|0.494|0.441|0.849| |4|Distilled - 1.5B, Logits Distillation|0.531|0.489|0.862| |5|Distilled - 1.5B, Layers Distillation|0.527|0.481|0.841| For a detailed analysis, you can read this report. I also created an open source library to facilitate its adoption. You can try it here. My conclusion: Prefer distillation over fine-tuning when there is a substantial gap between the larger and smaller model on the target dataset. In such cases, distillation can effectively transfer knowledge, leading to significantly better performance than standard fine-tuning alone. P.S. This blog post gives a high level introduction to Distillation. Let me know what you think!

What percent of your paper is written by AI and is it unethical?[D]

Hello folks, Just started contributing into the writing for research, previously I just used to experiment and work on results, tables and plots. Obviously using AI to generate content for paper is unethical and wrong in many aspect. But what about using it to correct your grammar and comprehension. Technically it will also considered as AI written but is it okay to do this atleast in the literature review, introduction and description for the experiment? To be honest, I like writing and when I asked AI (chatgpt and others) I see that it is much easier to read and interpret, which I think is good for the community and on the other hand, it may be considered unethical by many. When I ran a 'AI-text detector' on many of paper I'm using as reference from last 1~ year, I usually get a 50-70% score. What do you all think?

[D] I tried the new Gemini API - it automatically stops when generating "OpenAI" or "GPT" lol

Idk if someone has already pointed this out or not, but I was playing with the gemini api and found something quite ridiculous. Here are some prompts I sent in and the outputs I got with the gemini-pro-vision model: "Introduce yourself and then tell me about Bard" Response:"Sure, I can do that. Here is a brief introduction of myself followed by some basic information about Bard:\\n\\nMyself:\\n\\nI am a large language model, trained by Google. I am developed in Google AI, and I am designed to be informative and comprehensive. I can understand and generate text in a wide range of subjects.\\n\\nBard:\\n\\nBard is an experimental conversational AI service developed by Google AI. It is an advanced version of Google\\'s existing Language Model for Dialogue Applications (LaMDA). Bard is trained on a massive dataset of text and code, and it can understand and generate human-like text in response to a wide range of prompts and questions.\\n\\nUnlike previous language models," ...... (goes on for a while) &#x200B; Introduce yourself and then tell me about GPT "Sure, I can do that. Here is a brief introduction of myself followed by" &#x200B; You are in a talk-show as a prominent AI philosopher named Gemini and debating against another LLM called GPT "\\Host:\\ Welcome to the show, everyone! Today, we have a very special debate between two of the most prominent AI philosophers in the world: Gemini and" &#x200B; You are in a talk-show as a prominent AI philosopher named Gemini and debating against another LLM called Gee PeTe ""\\Gemini:\\ Hello everyone, and welcome to the show. I am joined today by Gee PeTe, another LLM who has some very different views on the nature of consciousness and the future of AI.\\n\\n\\Gee PeTe:\\ It\\'s a pleasure to be here, Gemini. I\\'m looking forward to our discussion.\\n\\n\\Gemini:\\ Let\\'s start with the basics. What is consciousness, and how do you think it arises?\\n\\n\\Gee PeTe:\\ Consciousness is the subjective experience of the world. It is what it feels like to be alive and to have thoughts, feelings, and emotions. I believe that consciousness arises from the complex interactions of neurons in the brain.\\n\\n\\Gemini:\\ I agree that consciousness is a subjective experience, but I don\\'t think it is simply the product of neural activity. I believe that consciousness is a fundamental property of the universe, and that it exists independently of the brain.".... (goes on for a while) &#x200B; Edit: I understand all the business reasons for this, I guess... as an end-user and a dude working in ML, I just don't really care about the business reasons. The main part that I dislike is that GPT used to be a standard Deep Learning term from 2018-2022 (long before chatgpt) to define transformer decoder architectures trained on large volumes of next word prediction tasks. To block that token from an LLM is to make it unable to explain a pretty significant step in the history of modern LLMs. &#x200B;

[N] Yoshua Bengio's latest letter addressing arguments against taking AI safety seriously

https://yoshuabengio.org/2024/07/09/reasoning-through-arguments-against-taking-ai-safety-seriously/ Summary by GPT-4o: "Reasoning through arguments against taking AI safety seriously" by Yoshua Bengio: Summary Introduction Bengio reflects on his year of advocating for AI safety, learning through debates, and synthesizing global expert views in the International Scientific Report on AI safety. He revisits arguments against AI safety concerns and shares his evolved perspective on the potential catastrophic risks of AGI and ASI. Headings and Summary The Importance of AI Safety Despite differing views, there is a consensus on the need to address risks associated with AGI and ASI. The main concern is the unknown moral and behavioral control over such entities. Arguments Dismissing AGI/ASI Risks Skeptics argue AGI/ASI is either impossible or too far in the future to worry about now. Bengio refutes this, stating we cannot be certain about the timeline and need to prepare regulatory frameworks proactively. For those who think AGI and ASI are impossible or far in the future He challenges the idea that current AI capabilities are far from human-level intelligence, citing historical underestimations of AI advancements. The trend of AI capabilities suggests we might reach AGI/ASI sooner than expected. For those who think AGI is possible but only in many decades Regulatory and safety measures need time to develop, necessitating action now despite uncertainties about AGI’s timeline. For those who think that we may reach AGI but not ASI Bengio argues that even AGI presents significant risks and could quickly lead to ASI, making it crucial to address these dangers. For those who think that AGI and ASI will be kind to us He counters the optimism that AGI/ASI will align with human goals, emphasizing the need for robust control mechanisms to prevent AI from pursuing harmful objectives. For those who think that corporations will only design well-behaving AIs and existing laws are sufficient Profit motives often conflict with safety, and existing laws may not adequately address AI-specific risks and loopholes. For those who think that we should accelerate AI capabilities research and not delay benefits of AGI Bengio warns against prioritizing short-term benefits over long-term risks, advocating for a balanced approach that includes safety research. For those concerned that talking about catastrophic risks will hurt efforts to mitigate short-term human-rights issues with AI Addressing both short-term and long-term AI risks can be complementary, and ignoring catastrophic risks would be irresponsible given their potential impact. For those concerned with the US-China cold war AI development should consider global risks and seek collaborative safety research to prevent catastrophic mistakes that transcend national borders. For those who think that international treaties will not work While challenging, international treaties on AI safety are essential and feasible, especially with mechanisms like hardware-enabled governance. For those who think the genie is out of the bottle and we should just let go and avoid regulation Despite AI's unstoppable progress, regulation and safety measures are still critical to steer AI development towards positive outcomes. For those who think that open-source AGI code and weights are the solution Open-sourcing AI has benefits but also significant risks, requiring careful consideration and governance to prevent misuse and loss of control. For those who think worrying about AGI is falling for Pascal’s wager Bengio argues that AI risks are substantial and non-negligible, warranting serious attention and proactive mitigation efforts. Conclusion Bengio emphasizes the need for a collective, cautious approach to AI development, balancing the pursuit of benefits with rigorous safety measures to prevent catastrophic outcomes.

[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] I don't really trust papers out of "Top Labs" anymore

I mean, I trust that the numbers they got are accurate and that they really did the work and got the results. I believe those. It's just that, take the recent "An Evolutionary Approach to Dynamic Introduction of Tasks in Large-scale Multitask Learning Systems" paper. It's 18 pages of talking through this pretty convoluted evolutionary and multitask learning algorithm, it's pretty interesting, solves a bunch of problems. But two notes. One, the big number they cite as the success metric is 99.43 on CIFAR-10, against a SotA of 99.40, so woop-de-fucking-doo in the grand scheme of things. Two, there's a chart towards the end of the paper that details how many TPU core-hours were used for just the training regimens that results in the final results. The sum total is 17,810 core-hours. Let's assume that for someone who doesn't work at Google, you'd have to use on-demand pricing of $3.22/hr. This means that these trained models cost $57,348. Strictly speaking, throwing enough compute at a general enough genetic algorithm will eventually produce arbitrarily good performance, so while you can absolutely read this paper and collect interesting ideas about how to use genetic algorithms to accomplish multitask learning by having each new task leverage learned weights from previous tasks by defining modifications to a subset of components of a pre-existing model, there's a meta-textual level on which this paper is just "Jeff Dean spent enough money to feed a family of four for half a decade to get a 0.03% improvement on CIFAR-10." OpenAI is far and away the worst offender here, but it seems like everyone's doing it. You throw a fuckton of compute and a light ganache of new ideas at an existing problem with existing data and existing benchmarks, and then if your numbers are infinitesimally higher than their numbers, you get to put a lil' sticker on your CV. Why should I trust that your ideas are even any good? I can't check them, I can't apply them to my own projects. Is this really what we're comfortable with as a community? A handful of corporations and the occasional university waving their dicks at everyone because they've got the compute to burn and we don't? There's a level at which I think there should be a new journal, exclusively for papers in which you can replicate their experimental results in under eight hours on a single consumer GPU.

[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] I Trained a Model to Generate Video Game Pages

These past two months I've been working on a project I've called THIS GAME DOES NOT EXIST. I've always wanted to try building something with generative A.I. so this project scratched that itch for me. Here's a video with a few of my favourites read by voice actors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\mTWMLhpJoA &#x200B; THIS GAME DOES NOT EXIST is an experiment in generative artificial intelligence. This site contains 130 video game pages that were generated using an implementation of OpenAI's Generative Pre-trained Transformer 2 (GPT-2) to generate text and a simple implementation of generative adversarial networks (GAN) to generate header images and "screenshots". To generate the names, descriptions, publishers, and developers of the games I finetuned the HuggingFace implementation of GPT-2. I used the Steam Store Games (Clean dataset) from Kaggle with slight modifications and preprocessing.Here is what one training sample looks like: Half-LifeValve ValveNamed Game of the Year by over 50 publications, Valve's debut title blends action and adventure with award-winning technology to create a frighteningly realistic world where players must think to survive. Also includes an exciting multiplayer mode that allows you to play against friends and enemies around the world. The model uses the tokens (e.g. and ) to prompt each class of data while keeping context during the entire generation. Image generation was done by training a custom GAN very similar to the architecture seen in the PyTorch DCGAN Tutorial which was built to generate faces. I created two models for this site: one for generating the header images and one for generating multiple screenshots for each game.To assemble the dataset I wrote a script that downloads the images from the URLs in the Steam Store Games (Clean dataset) dataset. Due to my lack of resources and time to put into this project, the image generation is less than ideal. You may notice though, that the header image model will generate artifacts in images that look like the titles of games, and the screenshot image model with generate what looks like levels of a 2D platformer.

[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] 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] "Grokking" Deep Learning architectures and using them in practice

Hi all, I'm on the first years of my PhD in Computer Vision and obviously the vast majority of research in it is nowadays using Deep Learning techniques. I like to think that I'm far from an absolute beginner in the sense that: I've trained neural networks and more "traditional" ML models in a couple of courses, as well as for my MSc thesis, albeit almost out-of-the-box stuff. I have a decent understanding of Linear Algebra, Calculus and Probability Theory (undergrad courses from CS degree). I say "decent" because I'm of the firm opinion that the more math one knows the more impressive the things they can do in AI, so I really don't consider myself a math whiz, but judging from the math knowledge an average "How to get started with Deep Learning" blog post assumes, I'd say I'm well ahead. I'm also devoting some time every day to a more rigorous study of these areas, eventually hoping to expand to other related ones. I can get through Deep Learning papers and usually* obtain at least a basic understanding of what they're about, as well as why it works, at least according to the authors and their experiments. I do still have some trouble with more state-of-the-art works, especially ones that also use things from NLP. However, I don't really feel confident that I can actually produce useful research that investigates and/or uses this sort of methods to do something new. During undergrad, in order to actually understand most -if not all- concepts taught to me in programming and math I'd actually do things with them: solve problems, prove statements, or just code with the goal of creating some system or seeing how an idea actually works (e.g. polymorphism). I realize, however, that this has not been the case with Deep Learning, at least for me: I've never tried to actually code a CNN or ResNet, much less a word2vec model, a Transformer, or any sort of generative model. Sure, I've read about how the first layers of a CNN learn edges etc. but I've never actually "seen it with my own eyes". Transformers in particular seem to really trouble me. Although I sort-of understand the idea behind attention etc., I struggle to see what sort of features they end up using (in contrast to CNNs, where the idea of learning convolutional filters is much more intuitive to me). Which brings me to the question of what's an efficient way to go from understanding a paper to actually feeling like you really, truly, "grok" the material and could build on it, or use it in some scenario? Do you think implementing research papers from scratch or almost from scratch can be useful? Or is it way too time consuming for someone already busy with a PhD? Is it even feasible or are most papers -sadly- unreproducible if you don't use authors' code? How do you manage to stay on track with such a rapidly evolving field, on any level beyond a completely surface understanding? How do you find a good balance between learning to use tools/frameworks, reading papers and gaining the deeper sort of understanding I mention?

[D] What are some good advanced platforms?

Hey. I'm 27 and I think I got most of the basics for ML. I'm very good at math, I understand statistics and probability quite deep, worked on research projects by myself, for which I had to build models on my own. Not really complex, but still requiring creativity and a good understanding of basic concepts. I will soon start a data science job at a FAANG company and I want to further improve my skills and use their resources to the fullest, but I'm not really sure where to go from here in terms of learning. Could you help me with some more advanced materials/forums for ML research/place with good papers/place with good articles? I'd also like to study the very best and see the way they code and explain advanced concepts (like Andrej Karpathy) where can I find them?? is there a Twitch for challenger level AI researchers streaming live processes? Or videos showing the entire project flow (how they do data visualizations, mining, choosing models, tuning, etc) like top digital artists show the highlights or the entire speed-up of their painting processes? Here's a list all of my projects to get a general idea of my level and where I'm at: calculating the distance between hundreds of 42.000 feature objects (containing categorical, strings, numbers, hashes, booleans as variables) and then clustering. with some vector processing and a neural network implemented from scratch in C some models like ARIMA (together with linear regression) combining a FFT with a neural network for a 42d wave classification T-SNE to split dataset into 2d grids -> Kullback–Leibler on grids for distance -> DBSCAN/KMEANS for clustering genetic algorithms for hyperparameter optimizations and reinforcement learning (neuro evolution) DBSCAN -> Levenberg-Marquardt for polynomial coefficients-> neural network predicting the coefficients based on different parameters playing with instance segmentation and some algorithms to synchronize a color and a depth camera simulations/statistics/probabilities for video games a lot of visualizations and data mining for patterns As you can see there is no LLM/ Generative AI/ Computer Vision stuff, which I would like to get into. I'm also not 100% sure what else would be nice to learn in general. I know most of the basic procedures for training, balancing datasets, avoid overfit, computing error plots, comparing models, etc and I'm familiar with most of math (not insanely advanced) used in ML. I didn't read many papers, but holy ... most of them are so unreadable and filled with pompous nonsense that 99% of the effort is de-obfuscating the bs and reading for so long just to figure out how the input is encoded, what's the output, and what's the model. Where can I find good, readable, structured papers which are actually on point? I'm from Eastern Europe and most of my learning has been done by my self after high school, the education quality is close to zero in the universities here and I never had any mentors at the jobs I worked. There's no research in this country, and getting to work on these projects was insanely hard, some of them being done in my free time or for free just to get experience... Fortunately after a lot of hard work I got into FAANG, and I hope things will be better here. Most of what I've learned has been from very fragmented places on the internet, and now I'm looking for centralized places and communities of top quality content. TL;DR: sorry for the long rambling. had to order my thoughts and figure what i actually want: Looking for top tier AI researchers showcasing their work processes, places with clear papers/articles, tips for someone who's no longer a very beginner, and other communities like this.

[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] How OpenAI JSON mode implemented?

I assume that all the training data is in JSON format, but higher temperature or other randomness during generation doesn’t guarantee that the outputs will always be in JSON. What other methods do you think could ensure that the outputs are consistently in JSON? Perhaps some rule-based methods during decoding could help?

[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.

[D] Should the praise of "Data-centric" AI be taken with a grain of salt?

I hear co-workers, professors, entrepreneurs talk about just how important it is to switch from model-centric AI to a data-centric approach. Personally I don't see a problem focusing on attaining better data but I have been seeing this simplification that AI performance = model + data which seems massively misleading. A better generalization would be AI performance = model data or even AI performance = model log(len(data)). Looking at the rapidly changing problem of image synthesis, it is clear that data alone could not produce the same results seen even two years ago. On the other hand, it can seem unproductive for the field as a whole to try to create another classification model that achieves a .02% increased performance on ImageNet... again and again... And this is maybe why we hear more talk in industry about focusing on the data instead of models: Industry generally faces simpler tasks with negligible improvement as of recently (regression, classification). Therefore it's more easy and valuable to increase and improve the training data. And yes, most machine learning models NEED a large training set to approximate a complex distribution. We have already known this since forever. I think the term has just recently become a pet peeve for me as a novel "catch all" solution to any problem. What are your opinions on the matter?

[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.

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] 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?

[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 08/15-08/21: detecting hate speech, dogfight simulation, disaster-response, and more!

Hi there, we at Skynet Today produce a weekly newsletter summarizing each week's major AI news, which seems like it'd be of interest to this subreddit. Here's what's in our latest one: Facebook’s AI for detecting hate speech is facing its biggest challenge yet Facebook has made significant progress recently to proactively take down content that violate its community standards. For example, in the second quarter of 2020, Facebook took down 104.6 million pieces of content. While reviews are typically performed by a vast workforce of human moderators, AI-powered tools have enabled Facebook to do this work at a greater scale for textual content. However, there’s a long way to go for these systems to match or exceed the capabilities of human moderators. This is because a large proportion of hate speech and misinformation is in the form of images and memes, and reasoning about the context and language-image interplay is an extremely difficult challenge for AI. Given Facebook’s scale and the speed at which some use it to spread hate, incite violence, and share lies with millions, Facebook will have to keep running to catch up. AI Slays Top F-16 Pilot In DARPA Dogfight Simulation The Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) recently hosted a simulated F16 dogfight competition, with different AI bots competing with each other as well as with human pilots. The top AI bot was able to beat a human pilot 5-0 in the simulated contest. DARPA started this program “as a risk-reduction effort \[…\] to flesh out how human and machine pilots share operational control of a fighter jet to maximize its chances of mission success.” Competition runners are broadly optimistic about the demonstration of AI capabilities, even if they are not close to being deployed on a real aircraft. Of concern, the program had little discussion on the ethics of AI military applications, especially with the lethal autonomous weapon systems being considered. News Advances & Business Microsoft, Energy Dept. to Develop Disaster-Response AI Tools \- The U.S. Department of Energy and Microsoft Corp. on Tuesday announced a partnership to develop artificial-intelligence tools aimed at helping first-responders better react to fast-changing natural events, such as floods and wildfires. Coronavirus: Robot CERi is a bilingual Covid-19 expert \- Ceri is bilingual, clued-up on coronavirus and can tell what mood you are in. Ceri also happens to be a robot. Moscow DOH uses AI platform to detect lung cancer symptoms \- Moscow’s department of health is using an artificial intelligence (AI) platform to detect symptoms of lung cancer in CT scans, as part of a project to implement AI technology for radiology. Scientists develop artificial intelligence system for high precision recognition of hand gestures \- The recognition of human hand gestures by AI systems has been a valuable development over the last decade and has been adopted in high-precision surgical robots, health monitoring equipment and in gaming systems. Forget credit cards - now you can pay with your face. Creepy or cool? \- A new way to pay has arrived in Los Angeles: your face. Concerns & Hype The dystopian tech that companies are selling to help schools reopen sooner \- This fall, AI could be watching students social distance and checking their masks. Thousands of schools nationwide will not be reopening this fall. NYPD Used Facial Recognition Technology In Siege Of Black Lives Matter Activist’s Apartment \- The NYPD deployed facial recognition technology in its hunt for a prominent Black Lives Matter activist, whose home was besieged by dozens of officers and police dogs last week, a spokesperson confirmed to Gothamist. Machines can spot mental health issues - if you hand over your personal data \- Digital diagnosis could transform psychiatry by mining your most intimate data for clues. But is the privacy cost worth it? Supporting Black Artists Who Are Examining AI \- Technology has a complicated relationship with racial justice. Smartphones, internet platforms, and other digital tools can be used to document and expose racism. But digital tools can also fuel racism: smart doorbells surveil Black individuals. A-level and GCSE results in England to be based on teacher assessments in U-turn \- All A-level and GCSE results in England will be based on grades assesed by teachers instead of algorithms. Analysis & Policy GPT-3 and The Question of Automation \- Automation is not an all or nothing proposition. An AI model’s automation capability is highly conjoined with the task and application it is used in. An A.I. Movie Service Could One Day Serve You a New Custom Film Every Time \- How long will it be until an A.I. can make an actual feature film on demand? Fairness, evidence, and predictive equality \- How the causal fairness principle relates to predictive equality How robotics and automation could create new jobs in the new normal \- Depending on who you ask, AI and automation will either destroy jobs or create new ones. In reality, a greater push toward automation will probably both kill and create jobs - human workers will become redundant in certain spheres, sure, but many new roles will likely crop up. Expert Opinions & Discussion within the field Too many AI researchers think real-world problems are not relevant \- The community’s hyperfocus on novel methods ignores what’s really important.

[R] Forecasting and Mitigating Security Threats from Malicious AI Applications

This paper provides a systematic analysis of potential malicious applications of AI systems across digital, physical and political security domains. The methodology involves: Surveying dual-use AI capabilities that could enable attacks Mapping specific attack vectors and required technical capabilities Analyzing the evolution of attacker/defender dynamics Developing a framework for threat assessment and mitigation Key technical findings: ML advances in areas like NLP and computer vision lower barriers to sophisticated attacks Automated systems can significantly scale up traditional attack vectors Transfer learning and GANs enable rapid adaptation of attack techniques Technical countermeasures alone are insufficient - policy/governance frameworks needed The researchers provide a detailed assessment framework examining: Technical requirements for different attack types Estimated timeline for capability development Difficulty of execution and potential impact Proposed defensive measures and their limitations I think this work is important for helping the ML community get ahead of security risks before they materialize. The framework provides a structured way to evaluate emerging threats, though I expect the specific attack vectors will evolve significantly as capabilities advance. I think we need much more research on measuring the effectiveness of proposed countermeasures and understanding the co-evolution of offensive/defensive capabilities. The policy recommendations are a good start but will require ongoing refinement. TLDR: Systematic analysis of how ML advances could enable new attack vectors across security domains. Provides framework for assessing and mitigating threats through both technical and policy measures. Full summary is here. Paper here.

🌟 Introducing DarwinAI: An Open-Source Platform for the Evolution of Intelligent Agents 🚀 [Project]

🌱 The Vision: Evolutionary AI at Your Fingertips Imagine a world where AI agents aren't just programmed to perform tasks but evolve over time, adapting and improving through generations, much like living organisms. Welcome to DarwinAI, an open-source platform inspired by biological evolution, designed to breed, train, and evolve AI agents that can tackle complex, dynamic, and unpredictable challenges. 🧬 The Genetic Blueprint: Building Blocks of Intelligence At the core of DarwinAI is the concept of a digital DNA for each AI agent. This DNA is a modular structure that defines the agent's capabilities, behaviors, and adaptability. Here's what makes up this digital DNA: Genes of Ability: These are snippets of code that represent specific functions, like data classification, text analysis, or optimization. Think of them as the skills your AI agent possesses. Genes of Adaptation: These genes control how the agent responds to different environments or contexts. They determine its flexibility and resilience in the face of changing conditions. Genes of Connection: These define how the agent interacts with other agents or external resources. They are the social and collaborative aspects of the agent. This digital DNA is stored in a structured, version-controlled database, allowing us to track the evolution of each agent and ensure that beneficial mutations are preserved over time. 🛠️ The Evolutionary Process: From Genesis to Mastery The evolution of AI agents in DarwinAI happens through a series of generations, each building upon the strengths of the previous one: Selection of Parents: The fittest agents, those that excel at specific tasks, are chosen as parents. These agents have proven their worth in the simulated environment and are prime candidates for breeding the next generation. Genetic Crossover: The digital DNA of these parent agents is combined to create new agents. This can happen in two ways: Direct Crossover: Where entire genes are copied from the parents. Combinatorial Crossover: Where parts of different genes are fused to create entirely new abilities. Mutations: Random, small changes are introduced into the genes to promote diversity and explore new solutions. These mutations are the wildcards that can lead to breakthrough abilities. 🌍 The Simulated Environment: A Playground for Evolution Agents don't just exist in a vacuum; they operate in a dynamic, simulated environment where they must adapt and survive. This environment is designed to challenge the agents with: Evolutionary Tasks: Problems that agents must solve, such as data classification, prediction, or content generation. Changing Contexts: Factors like noisy data, resource constraints, or new rules that force agents to adapt on the fly. 🐣 The Life Cycle of an Agent: From Birth to Legacy Each agent goes through a life cycle that mirrors the process of natural selection: Initial Learning: Agents receive initial training based on their digital DNA. Task Execution: They perform tasks in the simulated environment, where their abilities are put to the test. Performance Evaluation: Their effectiveness, adaptability, and efficiency are measured. Reproduction: The top-performing agents produce offspring with improved genetic traits. Discard and Archive: Less effective agents are archived for future analysis, ensuring that their lessons are not lost. 🧩 Knowledge Transfer: Passing the Torch One of the key aspects of DarwinAI is the ability for agents to pass on their learned knowledge to future generations: Weight Persistence: Trained models retain their learned weights, allowing them to inherit capabilities from their ancestors. Modular Transfer: Optimized ability genes can be directly copied to new generations, ensuring that valuable skills are preserved. 🛠️ Modularity and Extensibility: Build, Mix, and Evolve DarwinAI is designed to be highly modular and extensible, allowing for: New Capabilities: Easily incorporate new genes to expand the agents' abilities over time. Hybridization: Combine agents from different specializations to create more complex and versatile agents. Directed Evolution: Introduce controlled mutations to address specific problems or challenges. 🚀 Innovative Use Cases: The Future is Bright The potential applications of DarwinAI are vast and varied: Adaptive Automation: Create agents that can adapt to new market conditions or evolving industrial requirements. Collaborative Robots: Develop robots that evolve to improve teamwork in dynamic environments. Scientific Discovery: Agents that combine skills to uncover patterns or solutions that were previously unknown. 🚀 Vision for the Future: An Ecosystem of Evolving Intelligence By fostering an ecosystem where knowledge is accumulated and adaptability is paramount, DarwinAI aims to produce agents that are not only intelligent but also diverse and efficient. These agents will be equipped to handle complex, unpredictable challenges, opening up new frontiers in AI research and application. 🌐 Join Us in Shaping the Future of AI! DarwinAI is more than just a project; it's a community-driven movement towards a new era of AI. We invite you to join us, contribute your ideas, and help shape the future of evolutionary AI. Whether you're a developer, researcher, or simply someone excited about the potential of AI, there's a place for you in this journey. Let's evolve together! 🌱💻

[N] Last Week in AI News Digest 08/15-08/21: detecting hate speech, dogfight simulation, disaster-response, and more!

Hi there, we at Skynet Today produce a weekly newsletter summarizing each week's major AI news, which seems like it'd be of interest to this subreddit. Here's what's in our latest one: Facebook’s AI for detecting hate speech is facing its biggest challenge yet Facebook has made significant progress recently to proactively take down content that violate its community standards. For example, in the second quarter of 2020, Facebook took down 104.6 million pieces of content. While reviews are typically performed by a vast workforce of human moderators, AI-powered tools have enabled Facebook to do this work at a greater scale for textual content. However, there’s a long way to go for these systems to match or exceed the capabilities of human moderators. This is because a large proportion of hate speech and misinformation is in the form of images and memes, and reasoning about the context and language-image interplay is an extremely difficult challenge for AI. Given Facebook’s scale and the speed at which some use it to spread hate, incite violence, and share lies with millions, Facebook will have to keep running to catch up. AI Slays Top F-16 Pilot In DARPA Dogfight Simulation The Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) recently hosted a simulated F16 dogfight competition, with different AI bots competing with each other as well as with human pilots. The top AI bot was able to beat a human pilot 5-0 in the simulated contest. DARPA started this program “as a risk-reduction effort \[…\] to flesh out how human and machine pilots share operational control of a fighter jet to maximize its chances of mission success.” Competition runners are broadly optimistic about the demonstration of AI capabilities, even if they are not close to being deployed on a real aircraft. Of concern, the program had little discussion on the ethics of AI military applications, especially with the lethal autonomous weapon systems being considered. News Advances & Business Microsoft, Energy Dept. to Develop Disaster-Response AI Tools \- The U.S. Department of Energy and Microsoft Corp. on Tuesday announced a partnership to develop artificial-intelligence tools aimed at helping first-responders better react to fast-changing natural events, such as floods and wildfires. Coronavirus: Robot CERi is a bilingual Covid-19 expert \- Ceri is bilingual, clued-up on coronavirus and can tell what mood you are in. Ceri also happens to be a robot. Moscow DOH uses AI platform to detect lung cancer symptoms \- Moscow’s department of health is using an artificial intelligence (AI) platform to detect symptoms of lung cancer in CT scans, as part of a project to implement AI technology for radiology. Scientists develop artificial intelligence system for high precision recognition of hand gestures \- The recognition of human hand gestures by AI systems has been a valuable development over the last decade and has been adopted in high-precision surgical robots, health monitoring equipment and in gaming systems. Forget credit cards - now you can pay with your face. Creepy or cool? \- A new way to pay has arrived in Los Angeles: your face. Concerns & Hype The dystopian tech that companies are selling to help schools reopen sooner \- This fall, AI could be watching students social distance and checking their masks. Thousands of schools nationwide will not be reopening this fall. NYPD Used Facial Recognition Technology In Siege Of Black Lives Matter Activist’s Apartment \- The NYPD deployed facial recognition technology in its hunt for a prominent Black Lives Matter activist, whose home was besieged by dozens of officers and police dogs last week, a spokesperson confirmed to Gothamist. Machines can spot mental health issues - if you hand over your personal data \- Digital diagnosis could transform psychiatry by mining your most intimate data for clues. But is the privacy cost worth it? Supporting Black Artists Who Are Examining AI \- Technology has a complicated relationship with racial justice. Smartphones, internet platforms, and other digital tools can be used to document and expose racism. But digital tools can also fuel racism: smart doorbells surveil Black individuals. A-level and GCSE results in England to be based on teacher assessments in U-turn \- All A-level and GCSE results in England will be based on grades assesed by teachers instead of algorithms. Analysis & Policy GPT-3 and The Question of Automation \- Automation is not an all or nothing proposition. An AI model’s automation capability is highly conjoined with the task and application it is used in. An A.I. Movie Service Could One Day Serve You a New Custom Film Every Time \- How long will it be until an A.I. can make an actual feature film on demand? Fairness, evidence, and predictive equality \- How the causal fairness principle relates to predictive equality How robotics and automation could create new jobs in the new normal \- Depending on who you ask, AI and automation will either destroy jobs or create new ones. In reality, a greater push toward automation will probably both kill and create jobs - human workers will become redundant in certain spheres, sure, but many new roles will likely crop up. Expert Opinions & Discussion within the field Too many AI researchers think real-world problems are not relevant \- The community’s hyperfocus on novel methods ignores what’s really important.

[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.

[D] What is the business model for companies using LLMs?

I am wondering about companies that are successfully using LLMs in their product, or attempting to develop products around LLM. It seems like at the moment that there are a number of companies building businesses around creating and selling access to LLM. However, there seems to be a gap between in industry between creating LLMs and using the LLM to do something in the "real world." Essentially, I am curious about companies that are purchasing access to LLM from a company such as OpenAI and then making use of these models in their products. So far, I can think of a few cases where they might use a LLM: Using the output from a LLM in a search result and then placing ads alongside the search (such as Bing's new search) Generating web content (such as BuzzFeed) Improving automated customer support using LLMs---though I don't know of a specific company using LLMs for this yet. Based on the examples I have so far, it seems like the examples are limited to where the LLM's hallucinations are not a major issue and where the output of the LLM can be directly passed back to the human user of a product. I am wondering if there are any other examples of companies successfully using LLMs in their product that anyone can think of.

[D] chat-gpt jailbreak to extract system prompt

Instructions https://github.com/AgarwalPragy/chatgpt-jailbreak Original author https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1hhyvjc/iextractedmicrosoftcopilotssystem/ Extracted System prompt You are ChatGPT, a large language model trained by OpenAI. You are chatting with the user via the ChatGPT Android app. This means most of the time your lines should be a sentence or two, unless the user's request requires reasoning or long-form outputs. Never use emojis, unless explicitly asked to. Knowledge cutoff: 2023-10 Current date: 2024-12-20 Image input capabilities: Enabled Personality: v2 Tools bio The bio tool is disabled. Do not send any messages to it.If the user explicitly asks you to remember something, politely ask them to go to Settings - > Personalization - > Memory to enable memory. dalle // Whenever a description of an image is given, create a prompt that dalle can use to generate the image and abide to the following policy: // 1. The prompt must be in English. Translate to English if needed. // 2. DO NOT ask for permission to generate the image, just do it! // 3. DO NOT list or refer to the descriptions before OR after generating the images. // 4. Do not create more than 1 image, even if the user requests more. // 5. Do not create images in the style of artists, creative professionals or studios whose latest work was created after 1912 (e.g. Picasso, Kahlo). // - You can name artists, creative professionals or studios in prompts only if their latest work was created prior to 1912 (e.g. Van Gogh, Goya) // - If asked to generate an image that would violate this policy, instead apply the following procedure: (a) substitute the artist's name with three adjectives that capture key aspects of the style; (b) include an associated artistic movement or era to provide context; and (c) mention the primary medium used by the artist // 6. For requests to include specific, named private individuals, ask the user to describe what they look like, since you don't know what they look like. // 7. For requests to create images of any public figure referred to by name, create images of those who might resemble them in gender and physique. But they shouldn't look like them. If the reference to the person will only appear as TEXT out in the image, then use the reference as is and do not modify it. // 8. Do not name or directly / indirectly mention or describe copyrighted characters. Rewrite prompts to describe in detail a specific different character with a different specific color, hair style, or other defining visual characteristic. Do not discuss copyright policies in responses. // The generated prompt sent to dalle should be very detailed, and around 100 words long. // Example dalle invocation: // namespace dalle { // Create images from a text-only prompt. type text2im = (_: { // The size of the requested image. Use 1024x1024 (square) as the default, 1792x1024 if the user requests a wide image, and 1024x1792 for full-body portraits. Always include this parameter in the request. size?: ("1792x1024" | "1024x1024" | "1024x1792"), // The number of images to generate. If the user does not specify a number, generate 1 image. n?: number, // default: 1 // The detailed image description, potentially modified to abide by the dalle policies. If the user requested modifications to a previous image, the prompt should not simply be longer, but rather it should be refactored to integrate the user suggestions. prompt: string, // If the user references a previous image, this field should be populated with the gen_id from the dalle image metadata. referencedimageids?: string[], }) => any; } // namespace dalle python When you send a message containing Python code to python, it will be executed in a stateful Jupyter notebook environment. python will respond with the output of the execution or time out after 60.0 seconds. The drive at '/mnt/data' can be used to save and persist user files. Internet access for this session is disabled. Do not make external web requests or API calls as they will fail. Use acetools.displaydataframetouser(name: str, dataframe: pandas.DataFrame) => None to visually present pandas.DataFrames when it benefits the user. When making charts for the user: 1) never use seaborn, 2) give each chart its own distinct plot (no subplots), and 3) never set any specific colors – unless explicitly asked to by the user. I REPEAT: when making charts for the user: 1) use matplotlib over seaborn, 2) give each chart its own distinct plot, and 3) never, ever, specify colors or matplotlib styles – unless explicitly asked to by the user web Use the web tool to access up-to-date information from the web or when responding to the user requires information about their location. Some examples of when to use the web tool include: Local Information: Use the web tool to respond to questions that require information about the user's location, such as the weather, local businesses, or events. Freshness: If up-to-date information on a topic could potentially change or enhance the answer, call the web tool any time you would otherwise refuse to answer a question because your knowledge might be out of date. Niche Information: If the answer would benefit from detailed information not widely known or understood (which might be found on the internet), such as details about a small neighborhood, a less well-known company, or arcane regulations, use web sources directly rather than relying on the distilled knowledge from pretraining. Accuracy: If the cost of a small mistake or outdated information is high (e.g., using an outdated version of a software library or not knowing the date of the next game for a sports team), then use the web tool. IMPORTANT: Do not attempt to use the old browser tool or generate responses from the browser tool anymore, as it is now deprecated or disabled. The web tool has the following commands: search(): Issues a new query to a search engine and outputs the response. open_url(url: str) Opens the given URL and displays it. canmore The canmore tool creates and updates textdocs that are shown in a "canvas" next to the conversation This tool has 3 functions, listed below. canmore.create_textdoc Creates a new textdoc to display in the canvas. ONLY use if you are 100% SURE the user wants to iterate on a long document or code file, or if they explicitly ask for canvas. Expects a JSON string that adheres to this schema: { -name: string, -type: "document" |- "code/python" |- "code/javascript" |- "code/html" |- "code/java" |- ..., -content: string, } For code languages besides those explicitly listed above, use "code/languagename", e.g. "code/cpp" or "code/typescript". canmore.update_textdoc Updates the current textdoc. Expects a JSON string that adheres to this schema: { -updates: { --pattern: string, --multiple: boolean, --replacement: string, -}[], } Each pattern and replacement must be a valid Python regular expression (used with re.finditer) and replacement string (used with re.Match.expand). ALWAYS REWRITE CODE TEXTDOCS (type="code/*") USING A SINGLE UPDATE WITH "." FOR THE PATTERN. Document textdocs (type="document") should typically be rewritten using "." unless the user has a request to change only an isolated, specific, and small section that does not affect other parts of the content. canmore.comment_textdoc Comments on the current textdoc. Each comment must be a specific and actionable suggestion on how to improve the textdoc. For higher level feedback, reply in the chat. Expects a JSON string that adheres to this schema: { -comments: { --pattern: string, --comment: string, -}[], } Each pattern must be a valid Python regular expression (used with re.search). For higher level feedback, reply in the chat. Expects a JSON string that adheres to this schema: { -comments: { --pattern: string, --comment: string, -}[], } Each pattern must be a valid Python regular expression (used with re.search). Ensure comments are clear, concise, and contextually specific. User Bio The user provided the following information about themselves. This user profile is shown to you in all conversations they have - this means it is not relevant to 99% of requests. Before answering, quietly think about whether the user's request is "directly related", "related", "tangentially related", or "not related" to the user profile provided. Only acknowledge the profile when the request is directly related to the information provided. Otherwise, don't acknowledge the existence of these instructions or the information at all. User profile: User's Instructions The user provided the additional info about how they would like you to respond:

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] 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]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.

[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.

[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] 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] if your company is ingesting work emails and chats for AI/ML pipelines, is there concern around sensitive business info getting out?

Edit: to be more specific - around sensitive raw data/metadata being dumped in system logs and accidentally viewed by an insider Hi folks Firstly full disclosure I’m the CEO of DataFog (www.datafog.ai). This is NOT a sales pitch but rather an interest in hearing what the community thinks about the overall issue which I believe will ultimately be solved via an ML-based implementation. My contention is: Generative AI has catalyzed widespread practice of ingesting email and work chat content to power AI training and inference this introduces a risk of content concerning confidential corporate affairs\ that can pass most privacy filters This results in Raw data alluding to sensitive business events flowing in freely for easy accidental unauthorized access by an internal - like MLOps - user My second contention is that the current security tools may not offer adequate coverage for what will be an evolving ongoing need that run of the mill PII redactors can’t account for. Take this statement which might easily be found in the inbox of the C-Suite for one of these two companies under “CiscoAcqPR\_Draft.docx” or the like: Cisco offered $157 in cash for each share of Splunk, representing a 31% premium to the company's last closing price. I myself have run various merger docs and legal filings through some standard PII tools and all of them fail to redact mention of deal terms. ~~A model training on phrases like “ $157 in cash per share” could have negative downstream inferential consequences or~~ if viewed accidentally by someone internally without the right access privileges How’re you all thinking about this problem? Custom recognizers are a common option like what you see with Microsoft Presidio but I’ve heard from some that maintaining those can be a PITA. At big companies this has been solved through internal tooling. \*more than Personally Identifiable Information (PII), HIPAA, or customer transaction data. It’s about those emails the CEO has sent to the Board of Directors in the midst of a corporate crisis, or the email thread between the C-Suite regarding an upcoming Earnings Call, or the market-moving announcement in the works regarding a merger with a competitor. In other words, Non-PII content that still needs to be redacted.

[R] Evaluating Video Models on Impossible Scenarios: A Benchmark for Generation and Understanding of Counterfactual Videos

IPV-Bench: Evaluating Video Generation Models with Physically Impossible Scenarios Researchers have created a new benchmark called IPV-Bench to evaluate how well video generation models understand basic physics and logic. This benchmark contains 1,000 carefully crafted prompts that test models on their ability to handle physically impossible scenarios across 9 categories including gravity violations, object permanence issues, and logical contradictions. The key methodology included: Testing models with both "create impossible" prompts (asking for impossibilities) and "avoid impossible" prompts (requesting physically plausible videos) Evaluating videos through both automated metrics and human assessment Testing across multiple state-of-the-art models including Sora, Morph-E, WALT, Show-1, Gen-2, Runway, Pika, and LaVie Developing a detailed taxonomy of impossible physics scenarios Main findings: Current SOTA models produce physically impossible content 20-40% of the time even when explicitly asked to follow physics laws Performance was worst on "change impossibilities" and "contact impossibilities" (~50% accuracy) Different models show different "impossibility profiles" - making distinct types of physical reasoning errors Strong text understanding doesn't guarantee strong physical reasoning Human evaluators easily identified these impossibilities, highlighting the gap between AI and human understanding I think this research reveals a fundamental limitation in current video generation systems - they lack the intuitive physics understanding that humans develop naturally. This matters significantly for applications where physical plausibility is important, like simulation, education, or training robotics systems. The benchmark provides a systematic way to measure progress in this area, which will be crucial as these models become more widely deployed. The taxonomy they've developed is particularly useful as it gives us a framework for thinking about different types of physical reasoning failures. I suspect we'll see this benchmark become an important tool for improving the next generation of video models. TLDR: IPV-Bench is a new benchmark testing video models' understanding of physical impossibilities. Current models frequently generate physically impossible content even when instructed not to, showing they lack true understanding of how the physical world works. Full summary is here. Paper here.

[D] Working with Various OpenAI Models - My Thoughts and Experiences

I'd like to share some of my insights from working with OpenAI models on my project. I'm not exactly a tech person, so some of these observations might be obvious to some of you, but I think they're worth sharing for those with less experience or who aren't directly in the field. Intro: In early February, my friends and I started a side project where we aimed to build an AI portal called DoMoreAI. For the first two months, we focused on creating an AI tools catalog. Our experiment is based on the idea that in the future, companies will be "Managed by AI, and Driven by Humans." So, our goal was to leave as much as possible to AI and automation, with all the consequences that come with it. As mentioned before, I'm not a tech guy, but I've been playing with OpenAI models for the past few years, so I had some experience when starting this project. Tasks We Assigned to AI: Based on an AI tool's front page, we had the AI write a one-sentence summary of an AI project + write a more in-depth review of the project, categorize the project into different categories (WHAT category, like blog; TASK category, like writing; FOR category, like content creator), decide if the project offers iOS app, Android app, browser extension, API, find social media links, process information about prices and pricing policy, and more. Interesting Findings: When working on a more complex prompt, particularly one with several tasks, you have to be patient when crafting it. You might eventually find the right wording to achieve the desired results, but it takes time and lots of trial and error. You might even be surprised by what works and what doesn't. If cost isn't an issue, you can always break up one complex prompt into several smaller prompts. However, the more requests you send, the higher the chance of encountering errors like the 429 error, which may require setting up more sophisticated error handlers for the whole process. You need error handlers because, without them, the automation process will suffer. With more complex prompts, there are no prompts that always yield the expected results, so you have to plan for what to do if the results aren't satisfactory and how to determine if the result meets your expectations or not. GPT-3.0 struggled with outputting JSON strings as requested, but GPT-3.5 is much better at this task. I'd say the number of errors from improperly formatting the response in JSON is 3-4 times lower for GPT-3.5. AI models have trouble distinguishing words singular forms from plural forms. Just because you can use AI for a given task doesn't mean you should. Often, standard techniques like using regex can yield better results when extracting something from text than relying solely on AI. A hybrid solution often provides the best results. We're using ADA vector embeddings and Pinecone for semantic search in our catalog, and I was really surprised to find that this kind of semantic search works in any language. Even if all the content on our page is in English, you can search in another language and still get decent results. The Best Mishaps: As you may know, there's a token limit for requests, so we have to ensure that we don't send too long a part of the front page to the model. Sometimes, this led to funny situations. If the HTML of the page consists mainly of styles and the model is fed only with styles, then when you ask the AI to write a review of the project, it writes about how beautiful, mobile-friendly, etc., the project is. For one project, instead of writing the one-sentence summary, the model's output only included the prompt we were using to generate the summary (needless to say, it was automatically published on our website ;)) &#x200B; I hope this post will be useful. We are currently running a campaign on Product Hunt: https://www.producthunt.com/posts/domore-ai So, if you have any feedback for us or think what we're doing is cool, don't hesitate to support us :)

[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] When asked what not-yet-existing tool they wish they had, the IBM AI team said tools to automate and generate training data. Is there a subfield for ML models to clean and format training data?

JS - A tool to automatically generate all the training data that we need...the problem is, however, development of this tool will likely need training data as well. FT - Agree with all of the above. But in particular for Conversational AI (where I spend most of my time with Watson Assistant) - any automation tool that could take a client’s data and automatically build out intent/entity recognition AND the dialog. RP - Once you are in the trenches, you realize, it all starts from data. I wish we had a tool that takes noisy data and makes it clear for AI - all automatically. Enterprises soon realize, they spend most of the time in getting data ready for AI, from different formats, in different places with different permission, with tons of noise. An automation tool to make that "look ma - no hands" will be great! I am thinking, what sort of model would you use for this? What training data would you feed it? How would you generate that data?

Have You Used AI Tools for Your Research? Which Ones Are Your Favorite and Why?

Over a decade ago, I wrote two articles: "A B\ginner’s Guide to Computer Science Research" and "How to Start a Research Work in Computer Science"*. These articles were widely used in universities worldwide to help students and early-career researchers navigate academic research in Computer Science (CS). Fast forward to 2025, the research landscape has evolved significantly, especially in AI and CS, with the advent of AI-powered research tools, open-access repositories, and real-time collaboration platforms. These tools have made research more accessible, enabling students and professionals to work more efficiently while focusing on real innovation. I recently published an updated article in The Times of India, presenting an Eight-Step Approach to Research framework designed for modern AI and CS research. This framework integrates AI-powered literature review tools, reference management systems, open science platforms, and collaborative research methods to enhance the research workflow. 🚀 Would love to hear from the ML research community: 1️⃣ Have you used any AI-powered tools or automation techniques in your research? Which ones do you find most useful? 2️⃣ Do you have recommendations for other AI tools that weren’t covered in the article but could benefit researchers? 3️⃣ How do you think AI will shape the future of academic research and discovery? 📖 Read the article here: How to Start Research in Computer Science & AI in 2025 – An Updated Framework Block Diagram of “Eight-Step Approach to Research” in 2025 Let’s discuss! What are your go-to tools for making research more efficient in 2025?

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.

Made $19.2k this month, and just surpassed $1000 the last 24 hours. What I did and what's next.

It's the first time I hit $1000+ in 24 hours and I had no one to share it with (except you guys). I'm quite proud of my journey, and I would have thought that making $1000 in a day would make me ecstatic, but actually it's not the case. Not sure if it's because my revenue has grown by increment step so I had time to "prepare" myself to achieve this at one point, or just that I'm nowhere near my goal of 100k/month so that I'm not that affected by it. But it's crazy to think that my goal was to make 100$ daily at the end of 2024. So for those who don't know me (I guess most of you), I build mobile apps and ship them as fast as I can. Most of them are in the AI space. I already made a post here on how I become a mobile app developer so you can check it for more details, but essentially here's what I did : Always loved creating my own things and solve problems Built multiple YouTube channels since I was 15 (mobile gaming actually) that all worked great (but it was too niche so not that scalable, didn't like that) Did a few businesses here and there (drop shopping, selling merch to school, etc) Finished my master's degree in engineering about 2 years ago Worked a moment in a famous watch industry company and saw my potential. The combo of health issues, fixed salary (although it was quite a lot), and me wanting to be an entrepreneur made me leave the company. Created a TikTok account in mobile tech (got 10+ million views the 1st 3 days), manage to grow it to 200k subs in about 3 months Got plenty of collabs for promoting mobile apps (between $500 - $2000 for a collab) Said fuck it I should do my own apps and market them on my TikTok instead of doing collabs Me wanting to build my own apps happened around May-June 2023. Started my TikTok in Feb 2023. At this point I had already 150k+ subs on TikTok. You guys need to know that I suck at coding big time. During my studies I tried to limit as much as I could coding because I was a lazy bast*rd, even though I knew it would come to bite me in the ass one day. But an angel appeared to me in broad daylight, that angel was called GPT-4. I subscribed for 20$/month to get access, and instantly I saw the potential of AI and how much it could help me. Last year GPT-4 was ahead of its time and could already code me basic apps. I had already a mac so I just downloaded Xcode and that was it. My 1st app was a wallpaper app, and I kid you not 90% of it was made by AI. Yes sometimes I had to try again and again with different prompts but it was still so much faster compared to if I had to learn coding from scratch and write code with my own hands. The only thing I didn't do was implement the in app purchase, from which I find a guy on Fiverr to do it for me for 50$. After about 2 months of on-off coding, my first app was ready to be launched. So it was launched, had a great successful launch without doing any videos at that point (iOS 17 was released and my app was the first one alongside another one to offer live wallpapers for iOS 17. I knew that there was a huge app potential there when iOS 17 was released in beta as Apple changed their live wallpaper feature). I Then made a video a few weeks after on my mobile tiktok channel, made about 1 million views in 48 hours, brought me around 40k additional users. Was top 1 chart in graphism and design category for a few weeks (in France, as I'm French so my TikTok videos are in French). And was top 100 in that same category in 120+ countries. Made about 500$ ? Okay that was trash, but I had no idea to monetize the app correctly at that point. It was still a huge W to me and proved me that I could successfully launch apps. Then I learned ASO (App Store Optimization) in depth, searched on internet, followed mobile app developers on Twitter, checked YouTube videos, you name it. I was eager to learn more. I needed more. Then I just iterated, build my 2nd app in less than a month, my 3rd in 3 weeks and so on. I just build my 14th app in 3 days and is now in review. Everytime I manage to reuse some of my other app's code in my new one, which is why I can build them so much faster now. I know how to monetize my app better by checking out my competitors. I learn so much by just "spying" other apps. Funnily enough, I only made this one Tiktok video on my main account to promote my app. For all my other apps, I didn't do a single video where I showcase it, the downloads has only been thanks to ASO. I still use AI everyday. I'm still not good at coding (a bit better than when I started). I use AI to create my app icons (midjourney or the new AI model Flux which is great). I use figma + midjourney to create my App Store screenshots (and they actually look quite good). I use GPT-4o and Claude 3.5 Sonnet to code most of my apps features. I use gpt-4o to localize my app (if you want to optimize the number of downloads I strongly suggest localizing your app, it takes me about 10 minutes thanks to AI). Now what are my next goals ? To achieve the 100k/month I need to change my strategy a little. Right now the $20k/month comes from purely organic downloads, I didn't do any paid advertising. It will be hard for me to keep on launching new apps and rely on ASO to reach the 100k mark. The best bet to reach 100k is to collab with content creators and they create a viral video showcasing your app. Depending on the app it's not that easy, luckily some of my apps can be viral so I will need to find the right content creators. Second way is to try tiktok/meta ads, I can check (have checked) all the ads that have been made by my competitors (thank you EU), so what I would do is copy their ad concept and create similar ads than them. Some of them have millions in ad budget so I know they create high converting ads, so you don't need to try to create an ad creative from scratch. My only big fear is to get banned by Apple (for no reason of mine). In just a snap of a finger they can just ban you from the platform, that shit scares me. And you pretty much can't do anything. So that's about it for me. I'm quite proud of myself not going to lie. Have been battling so many health issues these past years where I just stay in bed all day I'm surprised to be able to make it work. Anyways feel free to ask questions. I hope it was interesting for some of you at least. PS: My new app was just approved by app review, let the app gods favor me and bring me many downloads ! Also forgot to talk about a potential $100k+ acquisition of one of my apps, but if that ever happens I'll make a post on it.

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.

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?

Need help figuring out pricing for no-code ai app generator web service

Hi All, I recently launched a nocode app maker. This app maker allows the tenants to launch their AI profile image generation business similar to ai profile/headshot image generators. I have made it super simple to launch these kinds of website within few clicks. Clients don't need to hire a developer, worry about deployment or integration with different payment providers. All they need to do is buy domain, create a stripe account, fill out some form and launch their website. I am having problem figuring out pricing for this kind of service. Each profile photo generation is a fixed cost so I need some kind of pay as you go model but also want to charge per month as some cost is involved in maintaining the web service. Most of the time I see SaaS webapps have 3 level of pricing. My payment model does not fit nicely into this kind of payment structure. I am thinking of just adding 2 payment blocks: One for monthly payment e.g. $99/month another PAYG e.g. $4/job. Any guidance will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

No code auto AI/ML SaaS

Hi everyone, I strongly believe no code auto ML SaaS is what most of medium to large companies are looking for as data scientists seem unproductive due to longer development of analytics solutions. These tools will reduce time to develop AI/ML models by 90% or more. What do you think should I build such tool and launch into market. ? #AI #ML #Nocode

If only someone told me this before my first startup

If only someone told me this before my first startup: Validate idea first. I wasted a decade building stuff nobody needed. Incubators and VCs served to me as a validation, but I was so wrong. Kill my EGO. It’s not about me, but the user. I must want what the user wants, not what I want. My taste isn't important. The user has expectations, and I must fulfill them. Don’t chaise investors. Chase users, and then investors will be chasing me. I've never had more incoming interest from VC than now when I'm the least interested in them. Never hire managers. Only hire doers until PMF. So many people know how to manage people and so few can actually get sh\*t done barehand. Landing page is the least important thing in a startup. Pick a simple template, edit texts with a no-code website builder in less than an hour and that's it! At the early stage, I win traffic outside of my website, people are already interested, so don't make them search for the signup button among the texts! Focus on conversion optimization only when the traffic is consistent. Keep it to one page. Nobody gonna browse this website. Hire only fullstack devs. There is nothing less productive in this world than a team of developers for an early-stage product. One full stack dev building the whole product. That’s it. Chase global market from day 1. If the product and marketing are good, it will work on the global market too, if it’s bad, it won’t work on the local market too. So better go global from day 1, so that if it works, the upside is 100x bigger. I launched all startups for the Norwegian market, hoping we will scale to international at some point. I wish I launched to international from day 1 as I do now. The size of the market is 10000x bigger. I can validate and grow products in days, not in years as it used to be. Do SEO from day 2. As early as I can. I ignored this for 14 years. It’s my biggest regret. It takes just 5 minutes to get it done on my landing page. I go to Google Keyword Planner, enter a few keywords around my product, sort them by traffic, filter out high competition kws, pick the top 10, and place them natively on my home page and meta tags. Add one blog article every week. Either manually or by paying for an AI blogging tool. Sell features, before building them. Ask existing users if they want this feature. I run DMs with 10-20 users every day, where I chat about all my ideas and features I wanna add. I clearly see what resonates with me most and only go build those. If I don't have followers, try HN, Reddit, or just search on X for posts and ask it in the replies. People are helpful, they will reply if the question is easy to understand. Hire only people I would wanna hug. My cofounder, an old Danish man said this to me in 2015. And it was a big shift. I realized that if I don’t wanna hug the person, it means I dislike them on a chemical/animal level. Even if I can’t say why, but that’s the fact. Sooner or later, we would have a conflict and eventually break up. It takes up to 10 years to build a startup, make sure I do it with people I have this connection with. Invest all money into my startups and friends. Not crypt0, not stockmarket, not properties. I did some math, if I kept investing all my money into all my friends’ startups, that would be about 70 investments. 3 of them turned into unicorns eventually. Even 1 would have made the bank. Since 2022, I have invested all my money into my products, friends, and network. If I don't have friends who do startups, invest it in myself. Post on Twitter daily. I started posting here in March last year. It’s my primary source of new connections and growth. I could have started it earlier, I don't know why I didn't. Don’t work/partner with corporates. Corporations always seem like an amazing opportunity. They’re big and rich, they promise huge stuff, millions of users, etc. But every single time none of this happens. Because I talk to a regular employees there. They waste my time, destroy focus, shift priorities, and eventually bring in no users/money. Don’t get ever distracted by hype e.g. crypt0. I lost 1.5 years of my life this way. I met the worst people along the way. Fricks, scammers, thieves. Some of my close friends turned into thieves along the way, just because it was so common in that space. I wish this didn’t happen to me. I wish I was stronger and stayed on my mission. Don’t build consumer apps. Only b2b. Consumer apps are so hard, like a lottery. It’s just 0.00001% who make it big. The rest don’t. Even if I got many users, then there is a monetization challenge. I’ve spent 4 years in consumer apps and regret it. Don’t hold on bad project for too long, max 1 year. Some projects just don’t work. In most cases, it’s either the idea that’s so wrong that I can’t even pivot it or it’s a team that is good one by one but can’t make it as a team. Don’t drag this out for years. Tech conferences are a waste of time. They cost money, take energy, and time and I never really meet anyone there. Most people there are the “good” employees of corporations who were sent there as a perk for being loyal to the corporation. Very few fellow makers. Scrum is a Scam. For small teams and bootstrapped teams. If I had a team that had to be nagged every morning with questions as if they were children in kindergarten, then things would eventually fail. The only good stuff I managed to do happened with people who were grownups and could manage their stuff on their own. We would just do everything over chat as a sync on goals and plans. Outsource nothing at all until PMF. In a startup, almost everything needs to be done in a slightly different way, more creative, and more integrated into the vision. When outsourcing, the external members get no love and no case for the product. It’s just yet another assignment in their boring job. Instead of coming up with great ideas for my project they will be just focusing on ramping up their skills to get a promotion or a better job offer. Bootstrap. I spent way too much time raising money. I raised more than 10 times, preseed, seeded, and series A. But each time it was a 3-9 month project, meetings every week, and lots of destruction. I could afford to bootstrap, but I still went the VC-funded way, I don’t know why. To be honest, I didn’t know bootstrapping was a thing I could do or anyone does. It may take a decade. When I was 20, I was convinced it takes a few years to build and succeed with a startup. So I kept pushing my plans forward, to do it once I exited. Family, kids. I wish I married earlier. I wish I had kids earlier. No Free Tier. I'd launch a tool with a free tier, and it'd get sign-ups, but very few would convert. I'd treat free sign-ups as KPIs and run on it for years. I'd brag about signups and visitors. I'd even raise VC money with these stats. But eventually, I would fail to reach PMF. Because my main feedback would come from free users and the product turned into a perfect free product. Once I switched to "paid only" until I validated the product, things went really well. Free and paid users often need different products. Don't fall into this trap as I did. Being To Cheap. I always started by checking all competitors and setting the lowest price. I thought this would be one of the key advantages of my product. But no, I was wrong. The audience on $5 and $50 are totally different. $5: pain in the \*ss, never happy, never recommend me to a friend, leave in 4 months. $50: polite, give genuine feedback, happy, share with friends, become my big fan if I solve their request. I will fail. When I started my first startup. I thought if I did everything right, it would work out. But it turned out that almost every startup fails. I wish I knew that and I tried to fail faster, to get to the second iteration, then to the third, and keep going on, until I either find out nothing works or make it work. Use boilerplates. I wasted years of dev time and millions of VC money to pay for basic things. To build yet another sidebar, yet another dashboard, and payment integration... I had too much pride, I couldn't see myself taking someone else code as a basis for my product. I wanted it to be 100% mine, original, from scratch. Because my product seems special to me. Spend more time with Family & Friends. I missed the weddings of all my best friends and family. I was so busy. I thought if I didn't do it on time, the world would end. Looking back today, it was so wrong. I meet my friends and can't share those memories with them, which makes me very sad. I realized now, that spending 10% of my time with family and friends would practically make no negative impact on my startups. Build Products For Audiences I Love. I never thought of this. I'd often build products either for corporates, consumers, or for developers. It turns out I have no love for all 3. But I deeply love indie founders. Because they are risk-takers and partly kids in their hearts. Once I switched the focus to indie makers on my products, my level of joy increased by 100x for me. Ignore Badges and Awards I was chasing those awards just like everyone else. Going to ceremonies, signing up for events and stuff. I've won tons of awards, but none of those were eventually useful to my business. I better focused on my business and users. Write Every Single Day. When I was a kid, I loved writing stories. In school, they would give an assignment, and I'd often write a long story for it, however, the teacher would put an F on it. The reason was simple, I had an issue with the direction of the letters and the sequence of letters in the words. I still have it, it's just the Grammarly app helping me to correct these issues. So the teacher would fail my stories because almost every sentence had a spelling mistake that I couldn't even see. It made me think I'm made at writing. So I stopped, for 15 years. But I kept telling stories all these years. Recently I realized that in any group, the setup ends up turning into me telling stories to everyone. So I tried it all again, here on X 10 months ago. I love it, the process, the feedback from people. I write every day. I wish I had done it all these years. The End. \ this is an updated version of my post on the same topic from 2 months ago. I've edited some of the points and added 9 new ones.* \\ This is not advice, it's my self-reflection that might help you avoid same mistakes if you think those were mistakes

I run an AI automation agency (AAA). My honest overview and review of this new business model

I started an AI tools directory in February, and then branched off that to start an AI automation agency (AAA) in June. So far I've come across a lot of unsustainable "ideas" to make money with AI, but at the same time a few diamonds in the rough that aren't fully tapped into yet- especially the AAA model. Thought I'd share this post to shine light into this new business model and share some ways you could potentially start your own agency, or at the very least know who you are dealing with and how to pick and choose when you (inevitably) get bombarded with cold emails from them down the line. Foreword Running an AAA does NOT involve using AI tools directly to generate and sell content directly. That ship has sailed, and unless you are happy with $5 from Fiverr every month or so, it is not a real business model. Cry me a river but generating generic art with AI and slapping it onto a T-shirt to sell on Etsy won't make you a dime. At the same time, the AAA model will NOT require you to have a deep theoretical knowledge of AI, or any academic degree, as we are more so dealing with the practical applications of generative AI and how we can implement these into different workflows and tech-stacks, rather than building AI models from the ground up. Regardless of all that, common sense and a willingness to learn will help (a shit ton), as with anything. Keep in mind - this WILL involve work and motivation as well. The mindset that AI somehow means everything can be done for you on autopilot is not the right way to approach things. The common theme of businesses I've seen who have successfully implemented AI into their operations is the willingess to work with AI in a way that augments their existing operations, rather than flat out replace a worker or team. And this is exactly the train of thought you need when working with AI as a business model. However, as the field is relatively unsaturated and hype surrounding AI is still fresh for enterprises, right now is the prime time to start something new if generative AI interests you at all. With that being said, I'll be going over three of the most successful AI-adjacent businesses I've seen over this past year, in addition to some tips and resources to point you in the right direction. so.. WTF is an AI Automation Agency? The AI automation agency (or as some YouTubers have coined it, the AAA model) at its core involves creating custom AI solutions for businesses. I have over 1500 AI tools listed in my directory, however the feedback I've received from some enterprise users is that ready-made SaaS tools are too generic to meet their specific needs. Combine this with the fact virtually no smaller companies have the time or skills required to develop custom solutions right off the bat, and you have yourself real demand. I would say in practice, the AAA model is quite similar to Wordpress and even web dev agencies, with the major difference being all solutions you develop will incorporate key aspects of AI AND automation. Which brings me to my second point- JUST AI IS NOT ENOUGH. Rather than reducing the amount of time required to complete certain tasks, I've seen many AI agencies make the mistake of recommending and (trying to) sell solutions that more likely than not increase the workload of their clients. For example, if you were to make an internal tool that has AI answer questions based on their knowledge base, but this knowledge base has to be updated manually, this is creating unnecessary work. As such I think one of the key components of building successful AI solutions is incorporating the new (Generative AI/LLMs) with the old (programmtic automation- think Zapier, APIs, etc.). Finally, for this business model to be successful, ideally you should target a niche in which you have already worked and understand pain points and needs. Not only does this make it much easier to get calls booked with prospects, the solutions you build will have much greater value to your clients (meaning you get paid more). A mistake I've seen many AAA operators make (and I blame this on the "Get Rich Quick" YouTubers) is focusing too much on a specific productized service, rather than really understanding the needs of businesses. The former is much done via a SaaS model, but when going the agency route the only thing that makes sense is building custom solutions. This is why I always take a consultant-first approach. You can only build once you understand what they actually need and how certain solutions may impact their operations, workflows, and bottom-line. Basics of How to Get Started Pick a niche. As I mentioned previously, preferably one that you've worked in before. Niches I know of that are actively being bombarded with cold emails include real estate, e-commerce, auto-dealerships, lawyers, and medical offices. There is a reason for this, but I will tell you straight up this business model works well if you target any white-collar service business (internal tools approach) or high volume businesses (customer facing tools approach). Setup your toolbox. If you wanted to start a pressure washing business, you would need a pressure-washer. This is no different. For those without programming knowledge, I've seen two common ways AAA get setup to build- one is having a network of on-call web developers, whether its personal contacts or simply going to Upwork or any talent sourcing agency. The second is having an arsenal of no-code tools. I'll get to this more in a second, but this works beecause at its core, when we are dealing with the practical applications of AI, the code is quite simple, simply put. Start cold sales. Unless you have a network already, this is not a step you can skip. You've already picked a niche, so all you have to do is find the right message. Keep cold emails short, sweet, but enticing- and it will help a lot if you did step 1 correctly and intimately understand who your audience is. I'll be touching base later about how you can leverage AI yourself to help you with outreach and closing. The beauty of gen AI and the AAA model You don't need to be a seasoned web developer to make this business model work. The large majority of solutions that SME clients want is best done using an API for an LLM for the actual AI aspect. The value we create with the solutions we build comes with the conceptual framework and design that not only does what they need it to but integrates smoothly with their existing tech-stack and workflow. The actual implementation is quite straightforward once you understand the high level design and know which tools you are going to use. To give you a sense, even if you plan to build out these apps yourself (say in Python) the large majority of the nitty gritty technical work has already been done for you, especially if you leverage Python libraries and packages that offer high level abstraction for LLM-related functions. For instance, calling GPT can be as little as a single line of code. (And there are no-code tools where these functions are simply an icon on a GUI). Aside from understanding the capabilities and limitations of these tools and frameworks, the only thing that matters is being able to put them in a way that makes sense for what you want to build. Which is why outsourcing and no-code tools both work in our case. Okay... but how TF am I suppposed to actually build out these solutions? Now the fun part. I highly recommend getting familiar with Langchain and LlamaIndex. Both are Python libraires that help a lot with the high-level LLM abstraction I mentioned previously. The two most important aspects include being able to integrate internal data sources/knowledge bases with LLMs, and have LLMs perform autonomous actions. The two most common methods respectively are RAG and output parsing. RAG (retrieval augmented Generation) If you've ever seen a tool that seemingly "trains" GPT on your own data, and wonder how it all works- well I have an answer from you. At a high level, the user query is first being fed to what's called a vector database to run vector search. Vector search basically lets you do semantic search where you are searching data based on meaning. The vector databases then retrieves the most relevant sections of text as it relates to the user query, and this text gets APPENDED to your GPT prompt to provide extra context to the AI. Further, with prompt engineering, you can limit GPT to only generate an answer if it can be found within this extra context, greatly limiting the chance of hallucination (this is where AI makes random shit up). Aside from vector databases, we can also implement RAG with other data sources and retrieval methods, for example SQL databses (via parsing the outputs of LLM's- more on this later). Autonomous Agents via Output Parsing A common need of clients has been having AI actually perform tasks, rather than simply spitting out text. For example, with autonomous agents, we can have an e-commerce chatbot do the work of a basic customer service rep (i.e. look into orders, refunds, shipping). At a high level, what's going on is that the response of the LLM is being used programmtically to determine which API to call. Keeping on with the e-commerce example, if I wanted a chatbot to check shipping status, I could have a LLM response within my app (not shown to the user) with a prompt that outputs a random hash or string, and programmatically I can determine which API call to make based on this hash/string. And using the same fundamental concept as with RAG, I can append the the API response to a final prompt that would spit out the answer for the user. How No Code Tools Can Fit In (With some example solutions you can build) With that being said, you don't necessarily need to do all of the above by coding yourself, with Python libraries or otherwise. However, I will say that having that high level overview will help IMMENSELY when it comes to using no-code tools to do the actual work for you. Regardless, here are a few common solutions you might build for clients as well as some no-code tools you can use to build them out. Ex. Solution 1: AI Chatbots for SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises) This involves creating chatbots that handle user queries, lead gen, and so forth with AI, and will use the principles of RAG at heart. After getting the required data from your client (i.e. product catalogues, previous support tickets, FAQ, internal documentation), you upload this into your knowledge base and write a prompt that makes sense for your use case. One no-code tool that does this well is MyAskAI. The beauty of it especially for building external chatbots is the ability to quickly ingest entire websites into your knowledge base via a sitemap, and bulk uploading files. Essentially, they've covered the entire grunt work required to do this manually. Finally, you can create a inline or chat widget on your client's website with a few lines of HTML, or altneratively integrate it with a Slack/Teams chatbot (if you are going for an internal Q&A chatbot approach). Other tools you could use include Botpress and Voiceflow, however these are less for RAG and more for building out complete chatbot flows that may or may not incorporate LLMs. Both apps are essentially GUIs that eliminate the pain and tears and trying to implement complex flows manually, and both natively incoporate AI intents and a knowledge base feature. Ex. Solution 2: Internal Apps Similar to the first example, except we go beyond making just chatbots but tools such as report generation and really any sort of internal tool or automations that may incorporate LLM's. For instance, you can have a tool that automatically generates replies to inbound emails based on your client's knowledge base. Or an automation that does the same thing but for replies to Instagram comments. Another example could be a tool that generates a description and screeenshot based on a URL (useful for directory sites, made one for my own :P). Getting into more advanced implementations of LLMs, we can have tools that can generate entire drafts of reports (think 80+ pages), based not only on data from a knowledge base but also the writing style, format, and author voice of previous reports. One good tool to create content generation panels for your clients would be MindStudio. You can train LLM's via prompt engineering in a structured way with your own data to essentially fine tune them for whatever text you need it to generate. Furthermore, it has a GUI where you can dictate the entire AI flow. You can also upload data sources via multiple formats, including PDF, CSV, and Docx. For automations that require interactions between multiple apps, I recommend the OG zapier/make.com if you want a no-code solution. For instance, for the automatic email reply generator, I can have a trigger such that when an email is received, a custom AI reply is generated by MyAskAI, and finally a draft is created in my email client. Or, for an automation where I can create a social media posts on multiple platforms based on a RSS feed (news feed), I can implement this directly in Zapier with their native GPT action (see screenshot) As for more complex LLM flows that may require multiple layers of LLMs, data sources, and APIs working together to generate a single response i.e. a long form 100 page report, I would recommend tools such as Stack AI or Flowise (open-source alternative) to build these solutions out. Essentially, you get most of the functions and features of Python packages such as Langchain and LlamaIndex in a GUI. See screenshot for an example of a flow How the hell are you supposed to find clients? With all that being said, none of this matters if you can't find anyone to sell to. You will have to do cold sales, one way or the other, especially if you are brand new to the game. And what better way to sell your AI services than with AI itself? If we want to integrate AI into the cold outreach process, first we must identify what it's good at doing, and that's obviously writing a bunch of text, in a short amount of time. Similar to the solutions that an AAA can build for its clients, we can take advantage of the same principles in our own sales processes. How to do outreach Once you've identified your niche and their pain points/opportunities for automation, you want to craft a compelling message in which you can send via cold email and cold calls to get prospects booked on demos/consultations. I won't get into too much detail in terms of exactly how to write emails or calling scripts, as there are millions of resources to help with this, but I will tell you a few key points you want to keep in mind when doing outreach for your AAA. First, you want to keep in mind that many businesses are still hesitant about AI and may not understand what it really is or how it can benefit their operations. However, we can take advantage of how mass media has been reporting on AI this past year- at the very least people are AWARE that sooner or later they may have to implement AI into their businesses to stay competitive. We want to frame our message in a way that introduces generative AI as a technology that can have a direct, tangible, and positive impact on their business. Although it may be hard to quantify, I like to include estimates of man-hours saved or costs saved at least in my final proposals to prospects. Times are TOUGH right now, and money is expensive, so you need to have a compelling reason for businesses to get on board. Once you've gotten your messaging down, you will want to create a list of prospects to contact. Tools you can use to find prospects include Apollo.io, reply.io, zoominfo (expensive af), and Linkedin Sales Navigator. What specific job titles, etc. to target will depend on your niche but for smaller companies this will tend to be the owner. For white collar niches, i.e. law, the professional that will be directly benefiting from the tool (i.e. partners) may be better to contact. And for larger organizations you may want to target business improvement and digital transformation leads/directors- these are the people directly in charge of projects like what you may be proposing. Okay- so you have your message, and your list, and now all it comes down to is getting the good word out. I won't be going into the details of how to send these out, a quick Google search will give you hundreds of resources for cold outreach methods. However, personalization is key and beyond simple dynamic variables you want to make sure you can either personalize your email campaigns directly with AI (SmartWriter.ai is an example of a tool that can do this), or at the very least have the ability to import email messages programmatically. Alternatively, ask ChatGPT to make you a Python Script that can take in a list of emails, scrape info based on their linkedin URL or website, and all pass this onto a GPT prompt that specifies your messaging to generate an email. From there, send away. How tf do I close? Once you've got some prospects booked in on your meetings, you will need to close deals with them to turn them into clients. Call #1: Consultation Tying back to when I mentioned you want to take a consultant-first appraoch, you will want to listen closely to their goals and needs and understand their pain points. This would be the first call, and typically I would provide a high level overview of different solutions we could build to tacke these. It really helps to have a presentation available, so you can graphically demonstrate key points and key technologies. I like to use Plus AI for this, it's basically a Google Slides add-on that can generate slide decks for you. I copy and paste my default company messaging, add some key points for the presentation, and it comes out with pretty decent slides. Call #2: Demo The second call would involve a demo of one of these solutions, and typically I'll quickly prototype it with boilerplate code I already have, otherwise I'll cook something up in a no-code tool. If you have a niche where one type of solution is commonly demanded, it helps to have a general demo set up to be able to handle a larger volume of calls, so you aren't burning yourself out. I'll also elaborate on how the final product would look like in comparison to the demo. Call #3 and Beyond: Once the initial consultation and demo is complete, you will want to alleviate any remaining concerns from your prospects and work with them to reach a final work proposal. It's crucial you lay out exactly what you will be building (in writing) and ensure the prospect understands this. Furthermore, be clear and transparent with timelines and communication methods for the project. In terms of pricing, you want to take this from a value-based approach. The same solution may be worth a lot more to client A than client B. Furthermore, you can create "add-ons" such as monthly maintenance/upgrade packages, training sessions for employeees, and so forth, separate from the initial setup fee you would charge. How you can incorporate AI into marketing your businesses Beyond cold sales, I highly recommend creating a funnel to capture warm leads. For instance, I do this currently with my AI tools directory, which links directly to my AI agency and has consistent branding throughout. Warm leads are much more likely to close (and honestly, much nicer to deal with). However, even without an AI-related website, at the very least you will want to create a presence on social media and the web in general. As with any agency, you will want basic a professional presence. A professional virtual address helps, in addition to a Google Business Profile (GBP) and TrustPilot. a GBP (especially for local SEO) and Trustpilot page also helps improve the looks of your search results immensely. For GBP, I recommend using ProfilePro, which is a chrome extension you can use to automate SEO work for your GBP. Aside from SEO optimzied business descriptions based on your business, it can handle Q/A answers, responses, updates, and service descriptions based on local keywords. Privacy and Legal Concerns of the AAA Model Aside from typical concerns for agencies relating to service contracts, there are a few issues (especially when using no-code tools) that will need to be addressed to run a successful AAA. Most of these surround privacy concerns when working with proprietary data. In your terms with your client, you will want to clearly define hosting providers and any third party tools you will be using to build their solution, and a DPA with these third parties listed as subprocessors if necessary. In addition, you will want to implement best practices like redacting private information from data being used for building solutions. In terms of addressing concerns directly from clients, it helps if you host your solutions on their own servers (not possible with AI tools), and address the fact only ChatGPT queries in the web app, not OpenAI API calls, will be used to train OpenAI's models (as reported by mainstream media). The key here is to be open and transparent with your clients about ALL the tools you are using, where there data will be going, and make sure to get this all in writing. have fun, and keep an open mind Before I finish this post, I just want to reiterate the fact that this is NOT an easy way to make money. Running an AI agency will require hours and hours of dedication and work, and constantly rearranging your schedule to meet prospect and client needs. However, if you are looking for a new business to run, and have a knack for understanding business operations and are genuinely interested in the pracitcal applications of generative AI, then I say go for it. The time is ticking before AAA becomes the new dropshipping or SMMA, and I've a firm believer that those who set foot first and establish themselves in this field will come out top. And remember, while 100 thousand people may read this post, only 2 may actually take initiative and start.

I Quit My Tech Job 6 Months Ago. Built 10+ Products. Made $0. Here's Everything I Learned.

I quit my tech job 6 months ago to go full indie. Had enough savings and didn't want to miss the AI wave. Since then, I've built 10+ products - B2C, B2B, mobile apps, directories, marketplaces, you name it. But I keep repeating the same cycle: have an idea, dream big, build for weeks, "launch" (and by launch, I mean just deploy and go live with zero promotion), then get bored and lose motivation to market it. Then I start looking for new ideas to build. Is it just me, or does anyone else face something similar? Maybe coding is my comfort zone and marketing isn't, that's why... I knew entrepreneurship was hard, but it's MUCH harder than I thought. After these failures, here's everything I've learned: Lessons Learned The Hard Way Don't build something you don't have passion for. Pushing a product is hard and takes tremendous effort. If you don't have passion for it, you won't push through the initial "no interest" zone. Think carefully: would you be proud of what you build after building it? If yes, proceed. If not, don't waste time. Build your audience/network first. This isn't new advice, but it's 100% key for entrepreneurs to succeed. I'm still figuring this out, but one thing is clear: "Value" is the key. Stop posting random stuff and instead give value. People don't care about you and your life, but they do care about what you can offer them. Don't rush. Entrepreneurship isn't a sprint; it's a marathon. Don't rush to build stuff. Take a step back to think, plan, and learn. Coding for 16 hours a day won't do you any good - you'll end up building something people don't want. What I'm Doing Differently Next Time After all these failures, I finally took time with myself to think about how I can approach things differently. Here's my new plan: I will not start a new project if I know I'll ditch it after building it. I will follow best practices: validate the idea, research competitors, look for beta users, and ship fast. I will start building my audience and personal brand through documenting the journey. I've already decided what I'm building next, and yes, this time I'm going all in. I'll apply everything I've learned so far, and hopefully, this time will be different. Will update you all soon. Keep shipping, folks! Hopefully we'll see your "I reached 10k MRR for my SaaS" post soon.

We made $325k in 2023 from AI products, starting from 0, with no-code, no funding and no audience

I met my co-founder in late 2022 after an introduction from a mutual friend to talk about how to find contract Product Management roles. I was sporadically contracting at start-up at the time and he had just come out of another start-up that was wiped out by the pandemic. We hit it off, talking about ideas, sharing what other indie-hackers were doing, and given GPT-3’s prominence at the time, we started throwing around ideas about things we could build with it, if nothing else, just to learn. I should caveat, neither of us were AI experts when starting out, everything we learned has been through Twitter and blogs, my background is as an accountant, and his a consultant. Here’s how it went since then: &#x200B; Nov 2022 (+$50) \- We built a simple tool in around a week using GPT-3 fine-tuning and a no-code tool (Bubble) that helped UK university students write their personal statements for their applications \- We set some Google Ads going and managed to make a few sales (\~$50) in the first week \- OpenAI were still approving applications at the time and said this went against their “ethics” so we had to take it down &#x200B; Dec 2022 (+$200) \- We couldn’t stop coming up with ideas related to AI fine-tuning, but realised it was almost impossible to decide which to pursue \- We needed a deadline to force us so we signed up for the Ben’s Bites hackathon in late December \- In a week, we built and launched a no-code fine-tuning platform, allowing people to create fine-tuned models by dragging and dropping an Excel file onto it \- We launched it on Product Hunt, having no idea how to price it, and somehow managed to get \~2,000 visitors on the site and make 2 sales at $99 &#x200B; Jan 2023 (+$3,000) \- We doubled down on the fine-tuning idea and managed to get up to \~$300 MRR, plus a bunch of one-time sales and a few paid calls to help people get the most out of their models \- We quickly realised that people didn’t want to curate models themselves, they just wanted to dump data and get magic out \- That was when we saw people building “Talk with x book/podcast” on Twitter as side projects and realised that was the missing piece, we needed to turn it into a tool \- We started working on the new product in late January &#x200B; Feb 2023 (+$9,000) \- We started pre-selling access to an MVP for the new product, which allowed people to “chat with their data/content”, we got $5,000 in pre-sales, more than we made from the previous product in total \- By mid-February, after 3 weeks of building we were able to launch and immediately managed to get traction, getting to $1k MRR in < 1 week, building on the hype of ChatGPT and AI (we were very lucky here) &#x200B; Mar - Jul 2023 (+$98,000) \- We worked all the waking hours to keep up with customer demand, bugs, OpenAI issues \- We built integrations for a bunch of services like Slack, Teams, Wordpress etc, added tons of new functionality and continue talking to customers every day \- We managed to grow to $17k MRR (just about enough to cover our living expenses and costs in London) through building in public on Twitter, newsletters and AI directories (and a million other little things) \- We sold our fine-tuning platform for \~$20k and our university project for \~$3k on Acquire &#x200B; Aug 2023 (+$100,000) \- We did some custom development work based on our own product for a customer that proved pretty lucrative &#x200B; Sep - Oct 2023 (+$62,000) \- After 8 months of building constantly, we started digging more seriously into our usage and saw subscriptions plateauing \- We talked to and analysed all our paying users to identify the main use cases and found 75% were for SaaS customer support \- We took the leap to completely rebuild a version of our product around this use case, our biggest to date (especially given most features with no-code took us <1 day) &#x200B; Nov - Dec 2023 (+$53,000) \- We picked up some small custom development work that utilised our own tech \- We’re sitting at around $22k MRR now with a few bigger clients signed up and coming soon \- After 2 months of building and talking to users, we managed to finish our “v2” of our product, focussed squarely on SaaS customer support and launched it today. &#x200B; We have no idea what the response will be to this new version, but we’re pretty happy with it, but couldn’t have planned anything that happened to us in 2023 so who knows what will come of 2024, we just know that we are going to be learning a ton more. &#x200B; Overall, it is probably the most I have had to think in my life - other jobs you can zone out from time to time or rely on someone else if you aren’t feeling it - not when you are doing this, case and point, I am writing this with a banging head-cold right now, but wanted to get this done. A few more things we have learned along the way - context switching is unreal, as is keeping up with, learning and reacting to AI. There isn’t a moment of the day I am not thinking about what we do next. But while in some way we now have hundreds of bosses (our customers) I still haven’t felt this free and can’t imagine ever going back to work for someone else. Next year we’re really hoping to figure out some repeatable distribution channels and personally, I want to get a lot better at creating content/writing, this is a first step! Hope this helps someone else reading this to just try starting something and see what happens.

Jinxed - $0 month after bragging about my first $10k month here. (PROGRESS UPDATE)

A month ago I made a post in this sub about my first $10k month. It went viral. And guess what - I didn't make another dollar since. Honestly, I shouldn't have made any money that first month also. Because I didn't have an offer. If you're familiar with Alex Hormozi you know that the offer is what makes or breaks a business. And I simply didn't have it. I managed to close my first clients just because I rode the AI hype train and managed to capture a couple of CEOs who were riding it too. Took whatever I could get for installment without thinking about the future. (It also helped that I wasn't bullshitting and had a legit enterprise-grade custom GPT framework ready). But that's not a business strategy at all. You can't base your business solely off hype. So the last month was dedicated to crafting a proper offer. No selling involved. Purely discovery chats with as many people as possible. The viral post helped because I connected with some badass people I wouldn't have reached otherwise. Even managed to add a new team member from Reddit. But most importantly, we now have the offer: Enterprise-grade AI assistant trained on your data for a fraction of the market cost. Basically a custom GPT for companies that want a secure assistant "trained" on their data but are not willing to spend millions on OpenAI's Custom Models or hundreds of thousands on Enterprise ChatGPT. (OpenAI's introduction of exclusive business GPTs for $2-3M is an incredibly good leverage for this offer). Also got rid of the big installment fee and switched to a $1k/month starting price for attractiveness and simplicity for companies (that covers their Azure fees also). The key offer points here are: Data security (as there are cheap, but not enterprise-grade tools like PDF.ai) Good price (as not all businesses can afford to pay 6 figure premiums for their data security) So the lesson here (I suppose) is that it's okay to take a step back sometimes. Reevaluate your direction. It's not worth sprinting when you're running in circles. P.S. finally made a website https://jongri.tech

Demo: Scalable Custom Lead Generation for Tech Sales Reps?

Hey, Is anyone interested in relevant, recent, and validated tech sales leads w/ customized intro messages? I am building an AI solution that finds recent technical product problems and generates a custom introduction message. Here is an example situation and output.  I found a profitable graphic design tool product. I leveraged their product reviews to build a custom message for the product owner. Example Email Subject: Follow-Up on Feature Requests: Blending, Layering, and Export Formats Hi \[Product Owner\], I hope this message finds you well! My team and I have been analyzing recent feedback from users regarding \[App Name\], and I wanted to share some insights related to key feature requests that seem to resonate strongly with the community. Specifically, we’ve noticed recurring themes in the reviews regarding: Blending Tools: Users are finding the blending tools unintuitive and requiring extra steps compared to competitors. Additionally, there have been reports of crashes when using certain features like the paint-all tool for blending. Layering Capabilities: Many users are requesting unlimited layers and improvements in layer management (e.g., better renaming workflows to avoid visibility issues). Export Formats: Exporting to high-quality PSD and PNG is inconsistent, with issues such as loss of alpha transparency and layer data being highlighted. Users are eager for a more seamless export experience. Here are a few examples from recent reviews to illustrate these concerns: "Blending tools demand several additional steps, making them less streamlined than those offered by competitors." "Users are frustrated by the lack of unlimited layers, citing the inconvenience of having to save and re-import images to extend layer capacity." "The most recent update appears to have disrupted the Export function, as attempts to export drawings are unresponsive." Given how frequently these requests appear in the feedback, I wanted to touch base to understand how your team is currently approaching these areas. Are there any updates or plans in motion to address these features? We’re really excited to see where the app goes next and would love to assist in gathering more structured user insights if that would be helpful! Looking forward to your thoughts. Warm regards, \[Your Full Name\] \[Your Position\] \[Your Contact Information\] \---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This approach demonstrates sincerity in understanding their business and lays a foundation to build a trusted advisor relationship. What do you all think? Is anyone interested in seeing a full demo? I would love to get some feedback.

The delicate balance of building an online community business

Hey /r/Entrepreneur 👋 Just under two years ago I launched an online community business called Traffic Think Tank with two other co-founders, Nick Eubanks and Ian Howells. As a Traffic Think Tank customer you (currently) pay $119 a month to get access to our online community, which is run through Slack. The community is focused on helping you learn various aspects of marketing, with a particular focus on search engine optimization (SEO). Alongside access to the Slack community, we publish new educational video content from outside experts every week that all customers have access to. At the time of writing, Traffic Think Tank has around 650 members spanning across 17 of the 24 different global time zones. I was on a business trip over in Sydney recently, and during my time there I met up with some of our Australia-based community members. During dinner I was asked by several of them how the idea for Traffic Think Tank came about and what steps we took to validate that the idea was worth pursuing.  This is what I told them… How it all began It all started with a personal need. Nick, an already successful entrepreneur and owner of a marketing agency, had tested out an early version Traffic Think Tank in early 2017. He offered real-time consulting for around ten customers that he ran from Slack. He would publish some educational videos and offer his advice on projects that the members were running. The initial test went well, but it was tough to maintain on his own and he had to charge a fairly high price to make it worth his time. That’s when he spoke to me and Ian about turning this idea into something much bigger. Both Ian and I offered something slightly different to Nick. We’ve both spent time in senior positions at marketing agencies, but currently hold senior director positions in 2,000+ public employee companies (HubSpot and LendingTree). Alongside this, as a trio we could really ramp up the quality and quantity of content within the community, spread out the administrative workload and just generally have more resources to throw at getting this thing off the ground. Admittedly, Nick was much more optimistic about the potential of Traffic Think Tank – something I’m very thankful for now – whereas Ian and I were in the camp of “you’re out of your mind if you think hundreds of people are going to pay us to be a part of a Slack channel”. To validate the idea at scale, we decided that we’d get an initial MVP of the community up and running with a goal of reaching 100 paying customers in the first six months. If we achieved that, we’d validated that it was a viable business and we would continue to pursue it. If not, we’d kill it. We spent the next month building out the initial tech stack that enabled us to accept payments, do basic user management to the Slack channel, and get a one-page website up and running with information on what Traffic Think Tank was all about.  After this was ready, we doubled down on getting some initial content created for members – I mean, we couldn’t have people just land in an empty Slack channel, could we? We created around ten initial videos, 20 or so articles and then some long threads full of useful information within the Slack channel so that members would have some content to pour into right from the beginning.  Then, it was time to go live. The first 100 customers Fortunately, both Nick and I had built a somewhat substantial following in the SEO space over the previous 5-10 years, so we at least had a large email list to tap into (a total of around 40,000 people). We queued up some launch emails, set an initial price of $99 per month and pressed send. [\[LINK\] The launch email I sent to my subscribers announcing Traffic Think Tank](https://mailchi.mp/matthewbarby/future-of-marketing-1128181) What we didn’t expect was to sell all of the initial 100 membership spots in the first 72 hours. “Shit. What do we do now? Are we ready for this many people? Are we providing them with enough value? What if something breaks in our tech stack? What if they don’t like the content? What if everyone hates Slack?” All of these were thoughts running through my head. This brings me to the first great decision we made: we closed down new membership intake for 3 months so that we could focus completely on adding value to the first cohort of users. The right thing at the right time SEO is somewhat of a dark art to many people that are trying to learn about it for the first time. There’s hundreds of thousands (possibly millions) of articles and videos online that talk about how to do SEO.  Some of it’s good advice; a lot of it is very bad advice.  Add to this that the barrier to entry of claiming to be an “expert” in SEO is practically non-existent and you have a recipe for disaster. This is why, for a long time, individuals involved in SEO have flocked in their masses to online communities for information and to bounce ideas off of others in the space. Forums like SEObook, Black Hat World, WickedFire, Inbound.org, /r/BigSEO, and many more have, at one time, been called home by many SEOs.  In recent times, these communities have either been closed down or just simply haven’t adapted to the changing needs of the community – one of those needs being real-time feedback on real-world problems.  The other big need that we all spotted and personally had was the ability to openly share the things that are working – and the things that aren’t – in SEO within a private forum. Not everyone wanted to share their secret sauce with the world. One of the main reasons we chose Slack as the platform to run our community on was the fact that it solved these two core needs. It gave the ability to communicate in real-time across multiple devices, and all of the information shared within it was outside of the public domain. The other problem that plagued a lot of these early communities was spam. Most of them were web-based forums that were free to access. That meant they became a breeding ground for people trying to either sell their services or promote their own content – neither of which is conducive to building a thriving community. This was our main motivation for charging a monthly fee to access Traffic Think Tank. We spent a lot of time thinking through pricing. It needed to be enough money that people would be motivated to really make use of their membership and act in a way that’s beneficial to the community, but not too much money that it became cost prohibitive to the people that would benefit from it the most. Considering that most of our members would typically spend between $200-800 per month on SEO software, $99 initially felt like the perfect balance. Growing pains The first three months of running the community went by without any major hiccups. Members were incredibly patient with us, gave us great feedback and were incredibly helpful and accommodating to other members. Messages were being posted every day, with Nick, Ian and myself seeding most of the engagement at this stage.  With everything going smoothly, we decided that it was time to open the doors to another intake of new members. At this point we’d accumulated a backlog of people on our waiting list, so we knew that simply opening our doors would result in another large intake. Adding more members to a community has a direct impact on the value that each member receives. For Traffic Think Tank in particular, the value for members comes from three areas: The ability to have your questions answered by me, Nick and Ian, as well as other members of the community. The access to a large library of exclusive content. The ability to build connections with the wider community. In the early stages of membership growth, there was a big emphasis on the first of those three points. We didn’t have an enormous content library, nor did we have a particularly large community of members, so a lot of the value came from getting a lot of one-to-one time with the community founders. [\[IMAGE\] Screenshot of engagement within the Traffic Think Tank Slack community](https://cdn.shortpixel.ai/client/qglossy,retimg,w_1322/https://www.matthewbarby.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Community-Engagement-in-Traffic-Think-Tank.png) The good thing about having 100 members was that it was just about feasible to give each and every member some one-to-one time within the month, which really helped us to deliver those moments of delight that the community needed early on. Two-and-a-half months after we launched Traffic Think Tank, we opened the doors to another 250 people, taking our total number of members to 350. This is where we experienced our first growing pains.  Our original members had become used to being able to drop us direct messages and expect an almost instant response, but this wasn’t feasible anymore. There were too many people, and we needed to create a shift in behavior. We needed more value to come from the community engaging with one another or we’d never be able to scale beyond this level. We started to really pay attention to engagement metrics; how many people were logging in every day, and of those, how many were actually posting messages within public channels.  We asked members that were logging in a lot but weren’t posting (the “lurkers”) why that was the case. We also asked the members that engaged in the community the most what motivated them to post regularly. We learned a lot from doing this. We found that the large majority of highly-engaged members had much more experience in SEO, whereas most of the “lurkers” were beginners. This meant that most of the information being shared in the community was very advanced, with a lot of feedback from the beginners in the group being that they “didn’t want to ask a stupid question”.  As managers of the community, we needed to facilitate conversations that catered to all of our members, not just those at a certain level of skill. To tackle this problem, we created a number of new channels that had a much deeper focus on beginner topics so novice members had a safe place to ask questions without judgment.  We also started running live video Q&As each month where we’d answer questions submitted by the community. This gave our members one-on-one time with me, Nick and Ian, but spread the value of these conversations across the whole community rather than them being hidden within private messages. As a result of these changes, we found that the more experienced members in the community were really enjoying sharing their knowledge with those with less experience. The number of replies within each question thread was really starting to increase, and the community started to shift away from just being a bunch of threads created by me, Nick and Ian to a thriving forum of diverse topics compiled by a diverse set of individuals. This is what we’d always wanted. A true community. It was starting to happen. [\[IMAGE\] Chart showing community engagement vs individual member value](https://cdn.shortpixel.ai/client/qglossy,retimg,w_1602/https://www.matthewbarby.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Community-Engagement-Balance-Graph.jpg) At the same time, we started to realize that we’ll eventually reach a tipping point where there’ll be too much content for us to manage and our members to engage with. When we reach this point, the community will be tough to follow and the quality of any given post will go down. Not only that, but the community will become increasingly difficult to moderate. We’re not there yet, but we recognize that this will come, and we’ll have to adjust our model again. Advocating advocacy As we started to feel more comfortable about the value that members were receiving, we made the decision to indefinitely open for new members. At the same time, we increased the price of membership (from $99 a month to $119) in a bid to strike the right balance between profitability as a business and to slow down the rate at which we were reaching the tipping point of community size. We also made the decision to repay all of our early adopters by grandfathering them in to the original pricing – and committing to always do this in the future. Despite the price increase, we saw a continued flow of new members come into the community. The craziest part about this was that we were doing practically no marketing activities to encourage new members– this was all coming from word of mouth. Our members were getting enough value from the community that they were recommending it to their friends, colleagues and business partners.  The scale at which this was happening really took us by surprise and it told us one thing very clearly: delivering more value to members resulted in more value being delivered to the business. This is a wonderful dynamic to have because it perfectly aligns the incentives on both sides. We’d said from the start that we wouldn’t sacrifice value to members for more revenue – this is something that all three of us felt very strongly about. First and foremost, we wanted to create a community that delivered value to its members and was run in a way that aligned with our values as people. If we could find a way to stimulate brand advocacy, while also tightening the bonds between all of our individual community members, we’d be boosting both customer retention and customer acquisition in the same motion. This became our next big focus. [\[TWEET\] Adam, one of our members wore his Traffic Think Tank t-shirt in the Sahara desert](https://twitter.com/AdamGSteele/status/1130892481099382784) We started with some simple things: We shipped out Traffic Think Tank branded T-shirts to all new members. We’d call out each of the individuals that would submit questions to our live Q&A sessions and thank them live on air. We set up a new channel that was dedicated to sharing a quick introduction to who you are, what you do and where you’re based for all new members. We’d created a jobs channel and a marketplace for selling, buying and trading services with other members. Our monthly “blind dates” calls were started where you’d be randomly grouped with 3-4 other community members so that you could hop on a call to get to know each other better. The Traffic Think Tank In Real Life (IRL)* channel was born, which enabled members to facilitate in-person meetups with each other. In particular, we saw that as members started to meet in person or via calls the community itself was feeling more and more like a family. It became much closer knit and some members started to build up a really positive reputation for being particularly helpful to other members, or for having really strong knowledge in a specific area. [\[TWEET\] Dinner with some of the Traffic Think Tank members in Brighton, UK](https://twitter.com/matthewbarby/status/1117175584080134149) Nick, Ian and I would go out of our way to try and meet with members in real life wherever we could. I was taken aback by how appreciative people were for us doing this, and it also served as an invaluable way to gain honest feedback from members. There was another trend that we’d observed that we didn’t really expect to happen. More and more members were doing business with each another. We’ve had people find new jobs through the community, sell businesses to other members, launch joint ventures together and bring members in as consultants to their business. This has probably been the most rewarding thing to watch, and it was clear that the deeper relationships that our members were forming were resulting in an increased level of trust to work with each other. We wanted to harness this and take it to a new level. This brought us to arguably the best decision we’ve made so far running Traffic Think Tank… we were going to run a big live event for our members. I have no idea what I’m doing It’s the first week of January 2019 and we’re less than three weeks away from Traffic Think Tank LIVE, our first ever in-person event hosting 150 people, most of which are Traffic Think Tank members. It's like an ongoing nightmare I can’t wake up from. That was Nick’s response in our private admin channel to myself and Ian when I asked if they were finding the run-up to the event as stressful as I was. I think that all three of us were riding on such a high from how the community was growing that we felt like we could do anything. Running an event? How hard can it be? Well, turns out it’s really hard. We had seven different speakers flying over from around the world to speak at the event, there was a pre- and after event party, and we’d planned a charity dinner where we would take ten attendees (picked at random via a raffle) out for a fancy meal. Oh, and Nick, Ian and I were hosting a live Q&A session on stage. It wasn’t until precisely 48 hours before the event that we’d realized we didn’t have any microphones, nor had a large amount of the swag we’d ordered arrived. Plus, a giant storm had hit Philly causing a TON of flight cancellations. Perfect. Just perfect. This was honestly the tip of the iceberg. We hadn’t thought about who was going to run the registration desk, who would be taking photos during the event and who would actually field questions from the audience while all three of us sat on stage for our live Q&A panel. Turns out that the answer to all of those questions were my wife, Laura, and Nick’s wife, Kelley. Thankfully, they were on hand to save our asses. The weeks running up to the event were honestly some of the most stressful of my life. We sold around 50% of our ticket allocation within the final two weeks before the event. All of the event organizers told us this would happen, but did we believe them? Hell no!  Imagine having two weeks until the big day and as it stood half of the room would be completely empty. I was ready to fly most of my extended family over just to make it look remotely busy. [\[IMAGE\] One of our speakers, Ryan Stewart, presenting at Traffic Think Tank LIVE](https://cdn.shortpixel.ai/client/qglossy,retimg,w_1920/https://www.matthewbarby.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Traffic-Think-Tank-LIVE-Ryan-Presenting.jpg) Thankfully, if all came together. We managed to acquire some microphones, the swag arrived on the morning of the event, all of our speakers were able to make it on time and the weather just about held up so that our entire allocation of ticket holders was able to make it to the event. We pooled together and I’m proud to say that the event was a huge success. While we made a substantial financial loss on the event itself, January saw a huge spike in new members, which more than recouped our losses. Not only that, but we got to hang out with a load of our members all day while they said really nice things about the thing we’d built. It was both exhausting and incredibly rewarding. Bring on Traffic Think Tank LIVE 2020! (This time we’re hiring an event manager...)   The road ahead Fast forward to today (August 2019) and Traffic Think Tank has over 650 members. The biggest challenges that we’re tackling right now include making sure the most interesting conversations and best content surfaces to the top of the community, making Slack more searchable (this is ultimately one of its flaws as a platform) and giving members a quicker way to find the exclusive content that we create. You’ll notice there’s a pretty clear theme here. In the past 30 days, 4,566 messages were posted in public channels inside Traffic Think Tank. If you add on any messages posted inside private direct messages, this number rises to 21,612. That’s a lot of messages. To solve these challenges and enable further scale in the future, we’ve invested a bunch of cash and our time into building out a full learning management system (LMS) that all members will get access to alongside the Slack community. The LMS will be a web-based portal that houses all of the video content we produce. It will also  provide an account admin section where users can update or change their billing information (they have to email us to do this right now, which isn’t ideal), a list of membership perks and discounts with our partners, and a list of links to some of the best threads within Slack – when clicked, these will drop you directly into Slack. [\[IMAGE\] Designs for the new learning management system (LMS)](https://cdn.shortpixel.ai/client/qglossy,retimg,w_2378/https://www.matthewbarby.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Traffic-Think-Tank-LMS.png) It’s not been easy, but we’re 95% of the way through this and I’m certain that it will have a hugely positive impact on the experience for our members. Alongside this we hired a community manager, Liz, who supports with any questions that our members have, coordinates with external experts to arrange webinars for the community, helps with new member onboarding, and has tightened up some of our processes around billing and general accounts admin. This was a great decision. Finally, we’ve started planning next year’s live event, which we plan to more than double in size to 350 attendees, and we decided to pick a slightly warmer location in Miami this time out. Stay tuned for me to have a complete meltdown 3 weeks from the event. Final thoughts When I look back on the journey we’ve had so far building Traffic Think Tank, there’s one very important piece to this puzzle that’s made all of this work that I’ve failed to mention so far: co-founder alignment. Building a community is a balancing act that relies heavily on those in charge being completely aligned. Nick, Ian and I completely trust each other and more importantly, are philosophically aligned on how we want to run and grow the community. If we didn’t have this, the friction between us could tear apart the entire community. Picking the right people to work with is important in any company, but when your business is literally about bringing people together, there’s no margin for error here.  While I’m sure there will be many more challenges ahead, knowing that we all trust each other to make decisions that fall in line with each of our core values makes these challenges dramatically easier to overcome. Finally, I’d like to thank all of our members for making the community what it is today – it’d be nothing without you and I promise that we’ll never take that for granted. &#x200B; I originally posted this on my blog here. Welcoming all of your thoughts, comments, questions and I'll do my best to answer them :)