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

181–190 of 225 posts

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#181

Post by laike9m »

datahack wrote: post #142

Building in public comes down to a few core things: marketing your product, staying sane, and getting noticed. It’s a way to get people talking about what you’re building before it’s even done. The journey itself becomes the story, pulling in an audience that feels connected to your work. For a lot of solo founders, though, it’s not just about visibility. It’s about support. Building something alone can be isolating,…

Definitely agree. Sorry if the article sounds a bit negative, but I'm overall still in favor of building in public, for various reasons like the ones you mentioned.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#182

Post by laike9m »

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.…

+1, well said

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#183

Post by crabmusket »

a13n wrote: post #95

Counterargument: I started Canny and we were a "build in public" startup early on. Building in public was an invaluable marketing channel in the early days. When you are just launching your product, it's really difficult to get those first users and any awareness at all. If your target audience includes other people in tech, then building in public can be great marketing channel. Posting about your ideas or your prod…

> If your target audience includes other people in tech, then building in public can be great marketing channel.

> Posting about your ideas or your product just isn't that interesting. Posting how much money you're making is very interesting to other people who might want to follow your path.

Hang on, it feels like there's a contradiction here. Is the audience customers, or is it people who want to follow your path? Or are you thinking that's substantially the same audience?

We are a Canny customer since the early days But we're just a regular old software business, not indie hackers and nor does "building in public" describe how we work.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#184

Post by crabmusket »

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.

This is my read too. People refer to it as a "community". There's an emotional attachment to being an "indie hacker" that goes beyond "this is a marketing strategy". Of course, as the existence of the community becomes more valuable as a marketing channel, that may shift, and maybe the OP is noticing that it already has shifted?

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#185

Post by johnnyanmac »

janalsncm wrote: post #117

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 m…

> retty-looking tools and products that aren’t particularly innovative but make for nice screenshots.

I'm not as cynical with the idea, but you identified the core issue (be it the algorithm or people that came first is an exercise for the reader): Code doesn't make for good engagement with the current structure of social media. your web design or visualization or even simple pie charts of performance differences (obligatory https://www.hackingsap.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/dilbert_p...) is what gets people in. visuals what may or may not be the actual selling point of your project.

I don't really know how to get over that hump. You need some base audience first, and you want to make sure you aren't forgotten. So some public building will always be needed to maintain that.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#186

Post by crabmusket »

nicbou wrote: post #59

I build in public, but I never share numbers. I find that it attracts the wrong sort of people, and a particularly boring kind of conversation about money and growth and the icky business-y bits. I do work with the garage door open though. I share screenshots, ask for feedback, and show off the little details I spent a lot of time on. It’s basically a DVD commentary for the stuff I am about to release This attracts t…

My take: the valuable parts of "building in public" are actually "learning in public" per https://www.swyx.io/learn-in-public

The stuff in the OP is mainly just marketing/trends driven by social media platforms which has grown under the brand of "building in public".

"Working with the garage door open" is a great phrase.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#187

Post by johnnyanmac »

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.…

>Making money is a side effect of doing what you would do naturally because if you didn’t you would lose self respect.

Most hackers some 20 years ago weren't worried about money, so they could naturally explore their curiosities in their free time. Hustle culture in general seems to rise and fall inversely to the economic situtation, so I'm not too surprised that we're shifting to $$ over curiosity at the moment.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#188

Post by atomicnature »

EnigmaFlare wrote: post #177
bdw5204 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there was ever a time when you could succeed in the marketplace on the merits of your tech. Once the tech reaches the relatively low bar of "good enough", the rest is sales and marketing. In the most lucrative enterprise market, the "good enough" bar is even lower than in the much less lucrative consumer market because the people who will actually have to use your tech aren't the ones buying it. Technic…

I've got reasonable financial success in my software product mainly from the merits of the tech. Pretty much all the marketing I ever did was spamming a small mailing list once, making an anonymous website that subtly mentioned my product, got good Google ranking, and got referenced by other people, and eventually making a Wikipedia page which I'm not sure does any good. I got good ranking in Google early on without…

What's the product if I may ask? Or at least the general category of products you operate in - if you don't mind mentioning it.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#189

Post by Stem0037 »

Interesting take. I've been in the indie hacker scene for a while and I've noticed the same trend. The "build in public" movement has definitely become oversaturated.

While transparency can be valuable, I agree that many are overdoing it, especially with revenue posts. It often feels like peacocking rather than genuine sharing of insights.

I think the key is to focus on providing actual value to your audience. Instead of just posting numbers, share the strategies that led to those numbers, or the challenges you faced along the way. That's much more useful for other founders.

Re: Does “building in public” work?

#190

Post by cromulent »

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #41
pembrook wrote: post #10

Anecdotal, but it seems like all the people who “build in public” end up trapped by their chosen distribution strategy. What I mean by this is, if you’re building in public there’s a 99% chance you’re going to end up building products for other indiehackers who are interested in following people who build in public. This means you’re probably going to end up building yet another micro-Saas dev tool (Saas boilerplate,…

> What I mean by this is, if you’re building in public there’s a 99% chance you’re going to end up building products for other indiehackers who are interested in following people who build in public. Sounds a bit like a variation on Conway's Law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law

Demagoguery.
Post reply on HN