There s so much noise right now about how AI lets you pump out 10x more video content in half the time. But honestly most of the fully generated stuff I see feels lifeless and gets scrolled past instantly.
I find these tools great for brainstorming concepts or grabbing quick placeholder visuals but pulling together a real story still takes manual tweaking and human intuition.
For those making content regularly have these speed up tools actually helped your quality or just pushed you to create more noise?
Every bug report, logged. Date, user, severity, what broke.
The pattern was not what I expected. Half of them were not bugs at all. They were confusion. People using the product in a way that made sense to them, hitting a wall, and reporting it as broken.
A few days ago, I listened to a Czech video cast where the idea was that in a few years, the teaching position will lose its relevance.
This seems like a quite realistic prognosis to me, because:
The teaching position is not particularly valued,
AI knows more information than a teacher,
AI does not sharply confront the user, which encourages people to ask questions and think critically (this can sometimes not be said about the school system)
More and more young people prefer to communicate with Chatgpt than with an "educational authority"
My app runs inside another company's app marketplace, so before anyone can try it they have to create an account on a platform they've probably never heard of. My first Reddit posts got about 380 views between them, and the install count didn't move.
For those of you building plugins, GPTs, Shopify apps, or anything else that lives inside someone else's platform: what helped people get past that first step? A short demo video, a sample they can see without an account, something else?
We have been building since late 2024. In that time we were a gen AI agency, then a voice AI company, then a procurement tool, before landing on the thing that actually worked. Every one of those pivots was decided by the same wrong diagnosis. Something was not selling, we concluded the product was not good enough yet, and we went and built more. It is a very comfortable conclusion because building is the part you control and the part you enjoy. It also has a satisfying story attached: not there yet, nearly there, one more release. What was actually happening both times was that nobody knew we existed, and the people who did know had no reason to try it this week rather than some other week. That is not a capability problem and no amount of shipping fixes it. The way we eventually found the real thing was not analysis. We ran the catalogue on ourselves, and the one item we kept reaching for was the cheapest thing on the list, the one we had been treating as a feature to sell the expensive stuff around. Two things I would tell myself at the start. First, if a customer signs and then does not use it, that is not a customer, that is a very expensive compliment, and it should be counted as churn on the day it happens rather than revenue. Second, when something is not selling, force yourself to write down the distribution version of the explanation before you are allowed to write down the product version. The product version will still be there afterwards. It just should not get to go first. Curious how many people here have made the same call. When something stalled, did you build or did you go and find out why nobody came back?
A few weeks ago, I started to feel like I had hit a plateau on social media, especially with my Substack newsletter. I couldn t seem to get past a certain number of subscribers (stagnation).
In similar situations, I ve noticed that people often either: run a giveaway pay for ads
With today s tools, translation (UI, copy, even video) is no longer the hard part.
What slows us down instead are things like tax, legal compliance, hiring, support, payments sometimes even geopolitics. The moment users show up from a new country, a product problem turns into an operating one.
We're building a personalized language-learning app inspired by our own experiences and frustrations with the one-size-fits-all approach of traditional apps. Our goal is to offer customized and adaptive learning paths, powered by user data and tailored to individual interests, goals, and motivations.
I won t go into full pitch mode just yet, but we d love to start a discussion around this question:
What s your biggest pain point or frustration with current language-learning apps?