humans fix ai
Real developers help vibecoders with AI-built apps
117 followers
Real developers help vibecoders with AI-built apps
117 followers
AI tools like Lovable, Replit, and Cursor make it easy to build apps — but when something breaks, you're often stuck. HumansFix.ai connects non-technical builders with real developers who help with AI-built apps — whether it's bugs, improvements, reviews, or technical questions. Describe your problem in plain words and a developer takes care of it. Affordable — fixed pricing and you set the price. Fast — results within 3 days. Perfect for vibecoders and AI builders with no technical background.
Free
Launch Team
Render: Get up to $100K in startup creditsCloud infrastructure for founders who want to move fast and NOT break things
Promoted
Hi Product Hunt 👋
I’m Stan, the maker of humansfix.ai.
Over the past year AI tools like Lovable, Replit, Cursor and v0 made it possible for non-technical people to build real apps. That’s amazing to see.
But there’s a moment many builders hit - something breaks and they don’t know how to fix it. Payments fail, deployments crash, integrations stop working, or the AI-generated code becomes hard to understand.
I built humansfix.ai to help in that moment.
The idea is simple: connect non-technical builders with real developers who can help with AI-built apps. Instead of hiring someone or paying hourly, you can post a task, set the price, and a developer picks it up. Results are delivered within a few days and you only pay after approving the result.
I’m curious what you think.
Thanks for checking it out 🙏
@stanislav_prigodichThis feels like a really natural next layer of the AI dev ecosystem.
AI tools are making it much easier to build apps quickly, but the moment something breaks or deployment fails, the gap between “vibe coding” and real engineering shows up fast.
Connecting builders with developers who understand AI-generated code seems like a smart way to solve that bottleneck.
Curious what types of issues people are posting the most so far — debugging, integrations, or deployment problems?
This hits a real pain point. I've seen so many people build cool stuff with Cursor and Lovable but then have no idea what to do when something breaks. Having a marketplace to connect them with actual devs is smart.
One thing that could pair really well with this is giving those non-technical builders a way to actually capture what's broken. Something like Blocfeed lets users click on the exact element that's not working and it grabs all the technical context (console errors, CSS selectors, browser info). Would make it way easier for the developers on your platform to understand and fix the issue faster.
How are you handling the matching between builders and devs? Is it based on tech stack, or more like a general queue where anyone can pick up a task?
@mihir_kanzariya thanks, really appreciate that!
for now the matching is very simple: first developer who accepts the task starts working on it. It’s more like an open queue.
but I definitely expect this logic to evolve over time - for example better matching by tech stack, type of issue, or developer expertise as more tasks appear.
also interesting idea about capturing more context automatically. that could definitely make debugging much easier for developers. thanks!
Curious how you handle the matching — does the developer self-select based on price, or is there some kind of routing on your end? The gap between "AI built it" and "I can actually maintain it" is very real, and I've seen a lot of teams hit a wall three weeks after shipping something on Lovable. Fixed pricing is smart here because the ambiguity of hourly rates would kill trust with non-technical users. The real challenge is probably scope creep — someone describes a "small bug" and it turns out the whole data model is broken.
@jscanzi for now it’s pretty simple - developers can see all available tasks, and the first one who accepts a task starts working on it. I expect this matching logic will evolve over time, but for the first version I wanted to keep it simple.
also good point about scope creep - I’ll definitely think more about how to handle that, it can indeed become a problem. Thanks for your feedback!
@stanislav_prigodich thanks a lot for your answer!
This is very much needed. I know quite a few people people who built something cool with Lovable and then got completely stuck when payments broke or deployment just died on them. The "set your own price" model is interesting too. How do you make sure the devs are actually good though? Any review system or do you vet them before they join?
@ben_gend thanks! for now I just manually review developers before approving them, mainly looking at their LinkedIn/GitHub and overall experience to make sure it looks solid.
if there are complaints from customers, developers can be blocked from the platform. the idea is to keep the pool small and filter for experienced devs who do good work.
Stellar idea guys) It is like the next 'StackOverFlow-Generation') but cooler)
Do developers also help with code review and optimization,
or just bug fixes? And what's the average price range for typical tasks
like fixing a broken API integration or adding authentication?
@denious thanks! I didn’t actually think about it from the StackOverflow angle, that’s interesting 🙂
it can really be any kind of task: bug fixes, code review, security checks, adding small features, integrations, or just helping understand what’s going on in the code.
the main idea is that it should be something that can be solved within a few days.
minimum price starts at $49, but the builder sets the price. If nobody picks up the task, it usually just means the price is too low and the builder can raise it.
How does HumansFix.ai manage the handoff of AI-generated codebases between non-technical users and developers to ensure that custom fixes don't break the original "vibecoding" workflow or compatibility with tools like Lovable and Cursor?
@mordrag at the moment the platform doesn’t manage the code handoff itself. it’s up to the developer who accepts the task to review the project and make sure the fix doesn’t break the existing setup or workflow.
This feels like an inevitable product with the rise of tools like Lovable, Replit, and Cursor.
AI can get you 80% of the way to an app, but that last 20% (debugging, architecture fixes, edge cases) is where people get stuck. A marketplace for human fixes for AI-built apps is a clever idea. Curious how you’re ensuring quality control for developers on the platform?