Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

builder.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 261 posts

Re: Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

#221

Post by rf15 »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #219

>..when we started talking to some large and privacy-focused companies as potential early beta customers, one of the most common pieces of feedback was that they were not able to use OpenAI or any products using OpenAI. It's interesting to me that there are apparently companies that won't let OpenAI see their data, but will let a random startup see it. What's going on with that? Does OpenAI have a lax privacy policy…

I'd assume that you have a lot more leverage over a random small startup than OpenAI who serves half the world. This leverage can be used to ensure better privacy/etc..

Re: Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

#222

Post by wslh »

esafak wrote: post #207
wslh wrote: post #183

I would say something more radical: the same AI product that you have in mind is being built by many companies at the same time, wait for clarity in the space. Use suspense in your favor, sometimes not doing everything is the best option. This can be applied to every hyped field but AI is specially mesmerizing all of us.

You're witnessing a Cambrian explosion of AI-based products. You could wait for the dust to settle but how will that help you as a founder?

If you are a founder that is not pressed by investors then take your time to observe the ecosystem before defining a specific product.

Re: Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

#223

Post by jillesvangurp »

The article mentions the need to differentiate, which is valid. A related concept here is negative differentiation. You can differentiate yourself negatively by not implementing certain things or doing them poorly. You always differentiate (positive or negative) relative to your competitors. If they do a better job than you, you might have a problem.

Adding AI and then doing a poor job isn't necessarily creating a lot of value. So, if you follow the author's advice, you might end up spending a lot of money on creating your own models. And they might not even be that good and differentiate you negatively.

A lot of companies want to add AI not just because it looks cool but because they see their competitors doing the same and don't want to differentiate negatively.

Re: Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

#224

Post by goalieca »

bobsmooth wrote: post #187
goalieca wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> run. For instance, if you are building an app that uses OpenAI to book hotels and flights by chatting with a bot, chances are someday either ChatGPT or something by Microsoft or Google will do that and make your puny little business totally obsolete. How many times have we been down the path of “travel website making it easy to find the best deal and book your flight”. I don’t see how AI will do it any differently…

I can see the utility in being able to tell a chat bot "Get me tickets to somewhere warm sometime in October" and having it trim down the options by asking me questions. Obviously you wont get the best deal, but I can see the convenience.

Travel sites already have categories and they often have "escape" plans and everything.

Re: Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

#226

Post by golergka »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #36
golergka wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, no. In a normal development project last 20% take just as long. But AI applications are a very special beast.

If there's anything I would not trust an AI on its polish. It's amazing for prototyping, and has some viability at scaling up an existing operation. But the rough edges (literally in some industries) are the exact reason it's such a controversial tech as of now.

That's exactly my point, yes.

Re: Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

#227

Post by mdekkers »

threeseed wrote: post #72
fkyoureadthedoc wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> data and no meaningful dataset is 100% representative and 100% accurate IMHO And? What point are you trying to make here?

People seem to think that LLMs are going to be this source of truth that everyone can rely on to give them the information they need. Which for certain use cases e.g. text based is fine because you can tolerate inaccuracies. But I have worked at highly regulated finance companies who aren't interested in LLMs at all. Because their business can't tolerate if your model returns a figure or calculation that is inaccurat…

https://www.bloomberg.com/company/press/bloomberggpt-50-bill... lol

You are picking out a specific use-case as an invalidation of a wide idea and concept. “This is thos _one thing_ an LLM cannot do for us so all of it is useless.

Re: Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

#228

Post by fbuslop »

austhrow743 wrote: post #160
BillFranklin wrote: post #7

This is a nice post, and I think it will resonate with most new AI startups. My advice would be don't build an AI product at all. To my mind an "x product" is rarely the framing that will lead to value being added for customers. E.g. a web3 product, an observability product, a machine vision product, an AI product. Like all decent startup ideas the obviously crucial thing is to start with a real user need rather than…

For the vast majority of technologies i would agree but i think AI has enough buzz behind it that it’s punched through the technology bubble in to the general business world. So slapping the term all over your product provides value to your customers.

How does slapping buzzwords provide value? It might secure funding but I'm having trouble seeing how it provides value.

Re: Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

#229

Post by oriolid »

foobarchu wrote: post #144
ancientworldnow wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's that chat bots have no actual power to fix most issues. They exist to make it more difficult to escalate up the bureaucracy where there is staff that can actually problem solve, issue refunds, give credits, etc. Chat bots are merely a filter to get rid of easily pacified pushover customers and those who refuse to read instructions or documentation.

And the ones that can do something would be better served as a simple form. My state has used a chatbot for car registration renewals for years. It works just fine, I can't truly complain, but it's literally just a higher friction way to fill in a short form. Why did it need to be a chatbot?

The usual explanation, true or not, is that someone was selling the state a chatbot as the modern solution and since the buyer isn't spending their own money they will happily buy it without thinking if it's useful.

Re: Don't build AI products the way everyone else is doing it

#230

Post by notahacker »

immibis wrote: post #177
dopidopHN wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t even care for a LLM chatbot. Something with multiple choice would do the trick. But that system has to have some way to actually do something. Close / open / update a account or record or what have you. If the bot is a glorify FAQ then I would rather use CTRL+F. But if the bot, even super dumb, can ID me or see that I’m logged in then change my plan or whatever… I’m happy and that my favorite way. Amazon does…

Why do you need a chatbot for that? Go to "my plan" and click "upgrade" (or "downgrade"). Customer support is for things the app can't do. Why would you put them in a chatbot instead of in the app?

Humans put themselves in the chatbot on a regular basis when they can't figure out the UI
Post reply on HN