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

251–260 of 261 posts

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

#251

Post by fy20 »

deepGem wrote: post #189
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 most of us technologists, figuring out user need is way way harder than doing research or building something. That's the reality. So we tend to take comfort in building technology and figuring out the user need later on. Even discovering a real problem, a problem that warrants the expense on technology, is unfortunately out of the comfort zone for a lot of technologists. We often assume that the problem is real,…

So basically making lots of different spagetti, and seeing which sticks to the wall?

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

#252

Post by fy20 »

quonn wrote: post #217
Torkel wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in a small team with increadibly good programmers. ChatGPT as of right now is not good enough to replace asking one of them for help when I am stuck. But it is good enough to replace stack overflow. Look forward. A year ago I would have so agreed with what you say. But look where we are already. And think about what will come. My god. We're in for a ride here. Saying that chatbots sucked last time we tried tha…

> But it is good enough to replace stack overflow. For the kind of things I‘m using stackoverflow for I prefer it. It‘s much fast to google and scan the sf page than to wait for GPT to type out an answer and read that. GPT is only useful if the code needs to be adapted, and I rarely use stackoverflow for that.

I'd suggest you try Copilot, specifically Copilot Chat. I was skeptical about it as ChatGPT feels like it had a lot of issues with code, but I tried it yesterday to build a small game (I do web APIs for my dayjob, so I have zero experience in that) and it honestly feels game changing,

It's like you have a mid-level developer sitting next to you, who has been using the libraries you are using for years.

It still hallucinates, and it still makes mistakes, but many questions I would have turned to Google to, it was able to answer right there and explain exactly why my code was not right. Also surprisingly good at figuring out logic issues, I always get confused if X and Y are up/down or left/right.

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

#253

Post by stefanlindbohm »

deepGem wrote: post #189
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 most of us technologists, figuring out user need is way way harder than doing research or building something. That's the reality. So we tend to take comfort in building technology and figuring out the user need later on. Even discovering a real problem, a problem that warrants the expense on technology, is unfortunately out of the comfort zone for a lot of technologists. We often assume that the problem is real,…

Building is a very expensive way of finding user needs, especially since you might rely on luck to start out even in the right ballpark.

I think of innovative products as the combination of a user need insight and an innovative solution. I think there’s a lot of time wasted when teams focus too much on iterating on one without the other.

If you’re a technologist who sees the potential in a particular technology, you need to start by thinking about how to navigate towards applying it to a real user need. The flipside happens too, where a team sees a need and gets stuck in circles because they lack the tech expertise to build a solution that delivers & is competitive (but surely less commonly in the HN crowd).

Someone good at one of these things but less interested in the other should find a co-founder who’s good at the other perspective.

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

#254

Post by QkPrsMizkYvt »

goalieca wrote: post #224
bobsmooth wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This conversation sums up why HN would never ship a successful product.

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

#255

Post by dang »

meiraleal wrote: post #212
johnsonjo wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really have much beef with your comment as it has pretty substantive points, but I just wanted to remind and let everybody know about a Hacker News guideline outlined on their guidelines under the comments section. Sorry, I just recently re-read the guidelines, so I thought I might point others to it too. I honestly believe there are a lot more people breaking all these guidelines on this site, so the whole t…

> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data. Please don't break the guidelines while?

johnsonjo's post was fine. It's perfectly ok for users to remind each other of the HN guidelines, as long as they do so respectfully.

The parent comment didn't make any insinuations about astroturfing etc., so it didn't break the guideline you quoted. The phrase "if you're worried about abuse" is scoped to that form of abuse—we don't want users accusing each other of being shills and whatnot, but if people are worried that actual astroturfing or shillage is going on, they're welcome to email and we'll be happy to take a look.

I hope that is clear!

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

#256

Post by dang »

johnsonjo wrote: post #239
meiraleal wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data. Please don't break the guidelines while?

I’m genuinely curious on whether this is an insinuation on me breaking that rule you posted in my previous comment or towards the general public. If anyone can clarify what is meant by the above comment then I will gladly fix whatever I’m doing wrong. I’m just unsure (a) whether I’ve done something wrong and (b) what part of that statement I did wrong.

You didn't do anything wrong.

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

#257

Post by dang »

_pdp_ wrote: post #198

Recently, I embarked on a project to create a song as a tribute to my colleagues' exceptional work in a specific domain. My tools? OpenAI for lyric generation, tailored to my specifications, and Suno for vocal and track synthesis. The resulting song was a blend of AI-driven creativity and my vision. However, as I prepared to share this creation on Slack, I pondered the nature of authorship in the AI era. Was I truly…

> An AI model assisted me in crafting this comment

I don't know what you meant by that, but if it meant that you copy-pasted generated language, please don't do that in HN comments. I mention this because the following sort of rhetoric is definitely not what we want here:

> In a world where websites, businesses, and SaaS tools can be launched in mere minutes, it's becoming increasingly clear that ideas and the ability to effectively harness technology will be paramount. This shift raises fascinating questions about the future of creativity and the evolving role of the human in the creative process.

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

#258

Post by dang »

unsubstantiated wrote: post #199
_pdp_ wrote: post #198

Recently, I embarked on a project to create a song as a tribute to my colleagues' exceptional work in a specific domain. My tools? OpenAI for lyric generation, tailored to my specifications, and Suno for vocal and track synthesis. The resulting song was a blend of AI-driven creativity and my vision. However, as I prepared to share this creation on Slack, I pondered the nature of authorship in the AI era. Was I truly…

[flagged]

We've banned this account for repeatedly posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

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

#259

Post by austhrow743 »

fbuslop wrote: post #228
austhrow743 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The customer now gets to associate themselves with those buzzwords.

On an organisational level that means they can now use them to secure funding. Helping your customers secure funding is generally providing huge value.

On an individual level it helps them position themselves internally as an expert on cutting edge technology. Earning raises and promotions. That also is a lot of value.

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

#260

Post by dopidopHN »

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?

I expressed myself poorly. Of course if it can be done from the UI I would just click around.

Unfortunately not all place have that in place.

A good example of what I meant is Amazon chat bot.

They can trigger refund / re-ship and the like. And if it’s too much money they bring a human customer service.

Post reply on HN