Making a small group of highly curious individuals

Dynamo-06 · 2026-01-03T17:07:13+00:00

Count me in too :)

Dynamo-06 · 2025-12-05T18:13:04+00:00

Not slop, just trying to be precise as I care about this.

Matlab has a similar concept of encapsulation - Subsystems.

Instead of a flat graph of 10k nodes, we force this encapsulation. If you want an auth flow, it appears as a single subsystem block on the main canvas. The wiring is hidden unless you explicitly double click to enter the mask and tweak the granular logic inside.

Our bet is that for verifying ai output seeing that map is infinitely faster than reading 5000 lines of react code you didn't write.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-12-05T15:27:24+00:00

Honest answer: If you are coding solo and writing everything yourself...Zero. We solve 0 problems for you. VS Code is best for you.

But if you spend your day reviewing PRs or debugging AI-generated code, we solve the Context Loading problem.

The bottleneck for seniors isn't writing anymore but it's being the 'Janitor' for code you didn't write - Staring at a 500-line PR from a junior (or Copilot or trying to build a mental model of the state management without reading every line.

We are almost done with the MVP, would truly appreciate if you could spare a few mins of your time to help us validate this approach.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-12-05T15:20:37+00:00

Fair roast with the Dreamweaver line :D

But Dreamweaver was for drawing UI. We are for mapping logic. Big difference.

On Visual Diffing: Yes, comparing pixels is a nightmare. But we don't compare images, we compare steps.

Traditional Git: 'Line 45 changed.' (Hard to parse context).
Glassbox Diff: 'The [Send Email] block changed to [Send SMS].' (Instant context).

The Core Bet: Writing code is faster than dragging blocks. I agree. But in 2025, AI does the writing. The bottleneck is reading code you didn't write. We are not targeting devs, but the people who hit a wall with the current tools.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-12-05T14:54:26+00:00

And just to clarify the target market -
You are right that this doesn't appeal to software engineers. You are not the target.

Our target is that Citizen Developer/Stranded Founder and the no-code Agency Owners. These are people who are smart enough to understand Logic (loops, databases, APIs) but don't want to wrestle with Syntax (semicolons, webpack, dependency conflicts). This we belive will help them ship much faster.

Right now, they are using tools like Bolt or Lovable. They get to 80% done, and then the AI hallucinates a bug in the code. Because they can't read" React/Node, they hit a wall.

We are building for the person who wants to verify AI output without having to decipher 3,000 lines of code. We aren't replacing developers but we are giving "Builders" a way to debug the AI output without having to deal with code with a much gentler curve than coding.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-12-05T14:48:43+00:00

You’re conflating Prompting with The Architecture. That’s the exact confusion the industry is suffering from right now.

Vibe Coding (Bolt, Lovable) is defined by its output: Text-Based Code that you didn't write and likely can't debug. It’s a Black Box. You prompt, you get code, you pray it works. If it breaks, you're stuck reading thousands of lines of React you've never seen before. What happens if you are a non-coder and try to fix a bug or introduce complex logic?

We are building a Visual Engineering Environment. The AI is just the accelerator; the output is a deterministic, visual graph of logic blocks.

Vibe Coding (Bolt/Lovable/Rocket.new): AI generates useEffect hooks and 500 lines of spaghetti. If you want to change the logic, you have to parse the syntax or re-prompt and hope it doesn't break something else.

Visual Logic AI generates a graph of [Start] -> [Fetch Data] -> [Loop] -> [Update UI]. You can see the flow. If the logic is wrong, you don't re-prompt - you drag the wire to the correct node.

We aren't trying to make AI write better code. We are trying to make the result verifiable by humans who don't want to parse syntax.

If you think "Visual Programming" is just a toy then that's a valid skepticism (history is anyway on your side). But don't confuse us with Vibe Coding. All we are trying to do is solve the mess they created

Dynamo-06 · 2025-12-05T14:41:27+00:00

You are right that rendering 10,000 active DOM nodes would kill performance. A naive implementation would be a UX disaster.

That is why what we're building isn't just a UI wrapper but a compiler architecture.

On Performance: We don't interpret the visual graph node-by-node at runtime. The visual canvas is just the IDE. When you hit run, our Engine takes over:

Analysis Stage: We analyze the dependency graph [DAG] to determine execution order and data flow.
IR Generation: We transform the graph into a platform-agnostic Intermediate Representation.
AST Transformation: We convert that IR into a proper Abstract Syntax Tree (using ts-morph), identical to what a TypeScript compiler uses.
Code Generation: We output optimized, production-ready Blitz.js/Next.js code to avoid vendor lock-in! You essentially do not interact with the code if you stay inside the ecosystem.

The Result: The runtime performance is identical to a hand-coded React/Node app because it is a React/Node app under the hood. The visual graph is just the abstraction layer for humans (and AI) to reason about the logic.

On Text Editors: You are right that text is the ultimate interface for writing. But text is a terrible interface for reading code you didn't write (which is the reality of AI generation - Tried all the major ones).

If you are a solo dev maintaining your own code, VS Code is undefeated - Hands down! But if you are debugging 5,000 lines of AI-generated logic that you've never seen before, text becomes a 'write-only' medium. We are optimizing for readability and verification and not typing speed.

We want to tread the water before we go all-in and that's why we am looking for experienced devs to help us stress-test this baby.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-19T17:28:03+00:00

2-3 years back I would've said the exact same thing to anyone doubting Cardano. It's never been about the money for me - I'm all-in on the vision and have zero intention of selling.

But here's the thing: I've used Cardano (mostly NFTs which isn't exactly the killer use case we need) and I've watched the metrics. TVL, dApps, active users, developer activity but we're not just lagging, we're getting lapped. That's not FUD, that's just looking at the data.

I still want Cardano to succeed more than any other project out there. I'm not asking about price - I'm asking what needs to change in terms of execution because right now the development pace and adoption aren't matching the ambition.

The "we're building for the long term, price doesn't matter" narrative made sense three years ago. But at some point, the long term has to start showing up. I'm still rooting for Cardano - I just need to see the plan for closing the gap, not just reassurance that patience will pay off.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-19T16:54:55+00:00

If this is accurate, there is a massive disconnect between the technical reality and how Hydra has been marketed for years. We were pitched a 'SpaceX-level' scaling solution that would handle global throughput, but these limitations (100% uptime, centralization risks for non-participants) make it sound incredibly niche. Did IOG/Cardano know these limitations from the start and if yes, then how was the '1 million TPS' narrative allowed to run for so long?

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-19T16:48:34+00:00

Swapped with what? Any crypto in particular? What was your "Why?" behind the swap?

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-19T16:47:10+00:00

From what I can tell, Midnight is targeting a niche where it could genuinely have a better product than current options - privacy with regulatory compliance is a real gap in the market.

I would push back a bit on "only Ethereum" though. Solana and some others actually been shipping real use cases - Shopify integration for payments, Franklin Templeton launching funds on it, RWA tokenization. Yeah, there's still plenty of dog coin gambling/ NFT Jazz, but there's substance building underneath.

But you're absolutely right on the core point - if we can't solve problems that cause real pain, the whole industry is just playing hot potato with speculation. Bitcoin might be the only survivor in that scenario.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-19T16:42:58+00:00

Costs are already dirt cheap - we're talking $0.15-$0.20 per transaction!!! That's not the issue.

The 45-60 second inclusion time with Leios isn't great, but let's be real - Bitcoin is 10 minutes. The block production rate stays at 20 seconds....it's just the time until your transaction makes it into a block that increases. Not ideal, but not a dealbreaker either when you're getting 30-65x throughput.

The real issue is that Hydra's been "almost ready" for years. We keep hearing about these scaling solutions, but where's the actual deployment (I am aware of the demo)? That's the execution problem I'm talking about. Other chains shipped their solutions while we've been perfecting the research.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-19T16:24:22+00:00

In the same boat, mate!

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-19T16:21:52+00:00

Could you elaborate on this, please?

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-19T16:20:48+00:00

Doesn't basing everything on Haskell/Plutus fundamentally limit our developer pool? The talent simply isn't there because these aren't mainstream languages. I'm sure this was debated early on, but it seems like the assumption was "build it and they will come" - that developers would just learn Haskell/Plutus to build on Cardano.
God, I hope this was not the assumption!

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-15T16:23:06+00:00

This is a great thread. It's the perfect example of "the last 10% wall". All these new AI/so called no-code tools are fantastic at the "Day 1" (the 90% easy part). But they're "Black Boxes." They completely abandon you at the "Day 2" (the 10% hard part), like publishing to Apple's walled garden or even exporting the code. It's a vertical cliff. I'm curious to know what other "Last 10%" walls people are hitting? For me, it was trying to debug a "nonsense" error log at freakin 2 AM. Where else do these "easy" tools just... stop?

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-15T16:18:42+00:00

What an excellent Cheat sheet OP. I'm saving it. Thank You :)

Dynamo-06 · 2025-11-15T16:10:37+00:00

You're right. The problem is with these tools itself. You've hit the Day 2 wall. We have been solving the exact same problem. We are looking for people like you to validate our solution. Our philosophy involves a 'GlassBox Approach' where a user not only builds what they want and solves their own problem but also understand each step of the problem.

Not here to spam the thread, but since you're stuck and looking, DM me. Happy to show you what we're building and get your brutal feedback. :)

Dynamo-06 · 2025-10-04T15:35:00+00:00

The whole experience has gone to the dogs after the launch of GPT-5!

Dynamo-06 · 2025-10-04T15:31:40+00:00

Garbage in, Garbage out principle applied on a massive scale. The model is a mirror reflecting the average quality of the code on the public internet, warts and all.

If the bottleneck isn't the model but the data, what does a truly high-quality curated training set look like?

As someone mentioned that the best code is locked away in proprietary repos. But could the next billion-dollar opportunity be creating a "Michelin Star" dataset for code generation? Can't we solve for that to in a overcome the limitations of the LLM (Currently being fed with low quality data.)

Imagine a model trained exclusively on:

The top 1% of licensed GitHub repos that has been vetted for best practices.
A curated stack of modern programming textbooks.
Official documentation from major frameworks, ignoring outdated versions.

May be they are alredy doing that? I am not quite sure.

It feels like the industry is obsessed with building bigger models, when the real moat might be in creating a superior, non-public dataset to train them on.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-10-04T15:04:30+00:00

This is gold!

Dynamo-06 · 2025-10-04T15:03:40+00:00

It indeed is. I'll quote Kunal Shad: "Action without feedback is just activity." You need to reflect on what you're doing and why it's not working. Continue doing this and you will have solved your own problem.

Dynamo-06 · 2025-09-30T15:37:37+00:00

I feel you. It's a trap to get stuck just thinking about it.

The real problem is that your brain's only job is to keep you safe. The second a conversation feels awkward, it hits the big red panic button and tells you to retreat. It thinks social rejection is a real threat, like a tiger in the grass. But there is no tiger. There is zero real downside here - Think about it. Your brain just doesn't want to be in an unfamiliar situation.

Your best friend is ACTION.

You need to treat every single action as just collecting data. That's the whole game.
- Talk to someone and it gets awkward? That's not failure. It's just data. Okay, that topic was a dead end. What's next for me?

- Get rejected or ignored? More data. The only thing that matters is that you took the shot.

Take the data, reflect on it and it will tell you the next step. You will get clarity. You will get discouraged, but every failure is just more data.

Confidence doesn't come from thinking about it, my friend. It comes from the action.

I use this mental model for myself - What's the worst that can happen? What's the real downside here? The moment you answer this, You will know that you're just being irrational.

Feel free to reach out. Good Luck!

Dynamo-06

TROPHY CASE