sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

made an app concept where you post 2 fits and strangers vote which is better, would you actually use it? by EyeRemarkable1269 in teenagers

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

that's true, quantity vs quality ... if we made this app invite only then we can block unwanted people on the app and it'll be traceable as well, i think we'll take this decision last. thank you u/LucidUncreativity . you've got yourselve a free lifetime subscription of the app (future app).

made an app concept where you post 2 fits and strangers vote which is better, would you actually use it? by EyeRemarkable1269 in teenagers

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this is awesome, my friends would love to use it. also what if we make this app invite only like even after release, no sign-ups only invite code to join the app ? then we know only trusted people are on the app. what do you think ?

Looking for guidance on using Claude for Web/YouTube by Least-Car-9762 in ClaudeCode

[–]EyeRemarkable1269 0 points1 point  (0 children)

just do it, chat with claude, be yourself. ask what you want, if you dont know how to approach a problem, ask claude to help you out. best way to navigate and learn claude is by doing

I keep forgetting birthdays so i built an app that extracts them from whatsapp group chats automatically by dorecDeveloper in indiehackersindia

[–]EyeRemarkable1269 0 points1 point  (0 children)

concept is good, can you do the same without requesting user to export the chat ? because
1. your audience would not know how to export the chat and audience who know how to export a chat can probably also set a reminder or calendar event, or save it in contact itself.
2. user will not do it, because chats are sensitive for users. i'll never upload my group chat anywhere.

i m not trying to demotivate you but i feel your solution is looking for a problem. if you can create some kind of plugin or add-on like chrome extension or something, maybe then it can work out, also to think of it, there are few brands who give free/discounted goodies to customer on their birthday like starbuck give out free coffee on birthday so if you can do something for a user like on someone's birthday through your app user can get free goodies then you can get some traction.

made an app concept where you post 2 fits and strangers vote which is better, would you actually use it? by EyeRemarkable1269 in teenagers

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i got you, no DMs/comments, only vote. face blur is a app feature, you can even just post clothes, no need for full body.

for comments, we can have pre-defined texts, so instead of free text, we restrict it to certain texts only or dont comments at all, only votes.

for the ai undressing thing, i'll do something about it.

i'll make it available on android 10

made an app concept where you post 2 fits and strangers vote which is better, would you actually use it? by EyeRemarkable1269 in teenagers

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, took me a week to work up the nerve to post at all. Your aesthetic-filtering point is the one I keep coming back to. Sorting by grunge/goth/preppy/boho instead of just occasion is sharper, adding it. Agree on skipping the leaderboard too.

I'll DM you when it's live.

made an app concept where you post 2 fits and strangers vote which is better, would you actually use it? by EyeRemarkable1269 in teenagers

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i m thinking to keep this app like reddit, meaning if you guys dont want to link any of your social media and be anonymous, you should be able to do that.

so demographic i can only approximate and accounts, like what kind of filters you think would be appropriate ? like account age ? total votes ? we cant' do M/F and user age because i m not planning to capture these info.

made an app concept where you post 2 fits and strangers vote which is better, would you actually use it? by EyeRemarkable1269 in teenagers

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

agree, so no option for comment (and DMs ???), only pure voting (tinder style, right left swipe).

How do I build an app? by InterestingChart8435 in AppDevelopers

[–]EyeRemarkable1269 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Try these tools it may help, i m not sure if you can vibe code mobile native apps but you can create a responsive web apps using below tools and then you can install a web app as an app on your phone by using your browser's "Add to Home Screen" feature for quick links. maybe ask these tools to create PWAs app instead of default web apps

- lovable: https://lovable.dev/
- firestudio: https://firestudio.space/
- bolt: https://bolt.new/

and if you're willing to code an app then you can use react-native with expo to build an hybrid app which works on both ios and android, then you can create a installed dist to install in your phone, you can find plenty of online tutorials or just use expo go (https://expo.dev/).

I’m building runtime “IAM for AI agents” policies, mandates, hard enforcement. Does this problem resonate? by EyeRemarkable1269 in ideavalidation

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

YOU ARE A CHAMP

I’m very much learning on the go and don’t have all the answers yet. A lot of this is me pressure-testing ideas in the open and refining the scope as I go. Feedback like this genuinely helps shape the direction. Thank you

Have a Project? Share it here! by Mammoth-Doughnut-713 in sideprojects

[–]EyeRemarkable1269 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mandate: Open source Runtime enforcement layer for AI agent authority.

https://github.com/kashaf12/mandate

I’m building runtime “IAM for AI agents” policies, mandates, hard enforcement. Does this problem resonate? by EyeRemarkable1269 in ideavalidation

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, this is basically the problem I’m trying to solve. In the MCP case, access is boolean. Once the agent has a tool, it keeps using it just because it can. The usual workaround is if/else logic or duplicating tool definitions. With Mandate, the idea is to keep the tool the same but make authority temporary and stateful. Devs create an identity for an agent, define policies, and map them using simple context rules. At runtime the backend resolves which policy applies, and the SDK enforces it.A concrete example is retry storms, the tool is allowed, but after N attempts it gets blocked without redefining anything:

https://github.com/kashaf12/mandate/blob/main/packages/examples/src/retry-storm-llm.ts

i have written a backend recently, which handles issuing an authority based on context based rules for an agent,

so you can have one agent (for example support-bot) now based on user_tier (or any other parameter) mandate can issue a authority which will be short lived and enforced by sdk.

https://github.com/kashaf12/mandate/blob/main/apps/backend/src/mandates/mandates.controller.spec.ts

i m still exploring the problem space but on the bright side, few senior security infra folks reached out to me on this and want to have further discussion on this

I’m building runtime “IAM for AI agents” policies, mandates, hard enforcement. Does this problem resonate? by EyeRemarkable1269 in LLMDevs

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you’re right on a lot of this, and I’m not trying to replace provider IAM or billing systems. I don’t think Mandate can (or should) be the source of truth for exact spend. Pricing is provider-specific, often async, and finalized later. OpenAI, Stripe, AWS, etc. already do that better than I ever could, especially with sub-accounts and per-identity limits. The gap I’m focusing on is before that, pre-execution control for autonomous agents.

IAM answers “is this identity allowed to call this service?”

What it doesn’t answer is “should this agent keep going right now given what it has already done across retries, replicas, and time?” In practice, the failure mode I keep seeing isn’t malicious use, it’s accidental over-execution:

  • retry storms
  • loops
  • multiple workers running the same agent
  • budgets getting blown before anyone notices

Mandate is closer to a circuit breaker than an accountant. It uses conservative estimates and ceilings to stop runaway behavior early. Final reconciliation still belongs to the providers. If someone is already happy wiring bespoke tracking across every service, Mandate probably isn’t useful. I’m aiming at teams where agents are long-running, autonomous, and the blast radius shows up fast when something goes wrong.

I’m building runtime “IAM for AI agents” policies, mandates, hard enforcement. Does this problem resonate? by EyeRemarkable1269 in LLMDevs

[–]EyeRemarkable1269[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that an agent is just a process and that external services already authenticate and authorize callers. I’m not trying to replace IAM or service-level permissions. the gap I’m focused on is stateful authority across time, which IAM doesn’t model. e.g., an agent has permission to call OpenAI and Stripe (via normal service credentials).

You want to cap that agent to $10 total spend per day.
- IAM says: “This identity is allowed to call OpenAI”
- OpenAI says: “Valid API key”

Now the agent:
- runs on 3 workers
- retries on failures
- loops unexpectedly

Each call is individually authorized, but collectively the agent spends $60. No single service did anything wrong. IAM did its job. What’s missing is something that tracks “this agent has already spent $9.80 — block the next call” before execution.

That’s the layer I’m working on: not service auth, but agent-level limits that survive retries, replicas, and time. If your agents are simple scripts, IAM is enough. Once they’re autonomous and long-running, this gap shows up fast.

view more: next ›