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

Does “building in public” work?

laike9m.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 225 posts

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#111

Post by RevEng »

patrickhogan1 wrote: post #24
sokoloff wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If no one will pay for the solution, the problem might not be that important.

100% Meaning that if you solve valuable problems you will [probably] make money. So spend all your time solving valuable problems not posting about $$

"If you make it they will come" has been shown to be false time and time again. Just because your product is useful doesn't mean anybody knows about it or that they recognize the value it has. Lots of things we take for necessity today were once seen as a pointless waste of time. You still need to spend a significant amount of time marketing to get other people to want your product.

But posting about all the money you are making is just silly unless you want a pat on the back. If you really are making bank and you want to get someone to buy you out, then start talking directly to the big players in your market. Then again, you won't have to, because they won't want to talk to you until you are a real threat to their business, at which point they'll be coming to you. Bragging to your early adopter community about your success just keeps them hyped for a bit.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#112

Post by TechDebtDevin »

winwang wrote: post #75
TechDebtDevin wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. I like listening to technical solo founders talk about they built. Its the less technical marketing guys building in public their AI "powered" crud apps or micro SaaS like you describe that really bother me. They remind me a lot of scammy people on Instagram talking about drop shipping or whatever the get rich quick scheme of the week is.

Currently a technical solo founder. Got any video recs?

The SaaS Podcast by Omer Khan has some solid technical interviews including lots on growth and matketing with solo devs and small teams who are actually serious and not just grifting and wrapping apis with no-code solutions.

The World Of DaaS by Auren Hoffman has some decent episodes. These tend to be interviews with more established entrepreneurs but lots of bootstrapping/ early growth stories from devs/teams when they were much smaller.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#113

Post by RevEng »

harshaxnim wrote: post #18
sokoloff wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If no one will pay for the solution, the problem might not be that important.

While this is true in broad strokes, I think money fails to capture non quantifiable quality of life improvements. Hacker culture being close to the users could solve them, but being driven by money would definitely hinder that development

This is something that has come up many times for our company over the last 20 years. You can't sell the bean counters on quality of life. You need to show lower costs, higher quality results, or faster time to market - that's what gets you in the door.

The thing that keeps you in the door and makes usage grow is the quality of life. Especially in the business world, most software is terrible. If people like using your software, they will tell others about it and they will be more accepting when things inevitably go wrong. The ease of use of our software and the immediate service we provide when customers ask for help are time and again the things they say keep them using our tools. With good support, even a frustrated bug report can turn into a happy experience.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#114

Post by null0pointer »

patrickhogan1 wrote: post #6

I really dislike that so much of hacker culture is $$ focused now. 1. Being a hacker means walking the world being constantly dissatisfied by all of the inefficiency you see on a daily basis and wanting to fix it. 2. Being a hacker means feeling like most of the software world is fraudulent and you are going to build a solution that actually works. 3. Being a hacker means building something because it is fun or cool.…

This resonates with me. Maybe I’m just nostalgic because I started my career during the hacking scene of the early 2010’s, but it really feels like we’ve lost our way as an industry since then.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#115

Post by RevEng »

readthenotes1 wrote: post #23
al_borland wrote: post #17

To me, it always seemed like the "build in public" folks were doing it more for themselves. A way to not feel so alone on the journey, while ultimately working alone. If it helped with marketing and launch, that would be a bonus.

Attention seeking activity... I guess it's one form of marketing, but if the attention is on the builder, probably not

Plenty of stupidly successful and wealthy people have risen up by getting people to pay attention to them. Jobs, Bankman-Freid, Musk, and so many others found their success largely on cultivating their public image moreso than on their products.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#116

Post by blitzar »

candiddevmike wrote: post #5
autocole wrote: post #2

I’m not sure I understood the author’s point. This write up sounds like a collection of thoughts and observations about trends and the now saturated landscape of “build in public”/“indie hackers” I’d like to have heard some perspective from people actively participating in this and how their experiences have been

IME, people who are building in public seem to spend more time letting people know they're building in public than actually building.

Letting people know how strong your grindset is requires 4am starts and grinding out social media threads all weekend.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#117

Post by janalsncm »

I tried it, but it’s not very effective. The central problem is the following: The people who are building, aren’t interested in your posts on Twitter. They’re busy building. For the most part in those groups, I saw people’s earnest attempts at getting attention but every moment you spend on self-promotion is a moment you’re not adding features.

The people who do end up getting a lot of attention, they’re better at marketing, but not necessarily building. This is how you end up with people creating pretty-looking tools and products that aren’t particularly innovative but make for nice screenshots.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#118

Post by antonvs »

oceanplexian wrote: post #56
zaptrem wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's another very large subgroup you're missing: the hackers that build things (even for $0) because they're fun/cool, not because they solve a specific annoying problem/inefficiency.

That’s not hacking, that’s called a hobby. Hacking is something that challenges social norms or might even get you in trouble.

What you’re describing are sometimes consequences of the hacker ethic, they’re not core features.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#119

Post by al_borland »

RevEng wrote: post #115
readthenotes1 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attention seeking activity... I guess it's one form of marketing, but if the attention is on the builder, probably not

Plenty of stupidly successful and wealthy people have risen up by getting people to pay attention to them. Jobs, Bankman-Freid, Musk, and so many others found their success largely on cultivating their public image moreso than on their products.

There does need to be a good product to back them up for long term success. That's where Bankman-Freid failed. Jobs was successful, and the products/company he created have outlived him and his image.
Post reply on HN