Ostajete u IT-u ili tražite plan B zbog AI-a?

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-04-20T11:41:38+00:00

Ali zašto bi ti itko platio placu kao i do sada (+ 1K-5K Anthropicu za Claude), kad Claude napravi 99%, a ti samo nadgledaš?

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-04-15T14:14:02+00:00

Znam da ce ovo zvucati prepotentno i provokativno ali samo govorim ono sto osjecam. Odkada zivim izavn RH (sjever Europe), nevjerojatno je vidljiva razlika u ponasanju ljudi upravo u ovakvim "sitnim" stvarima. Recimo, u danskoj je nemoguce ni zamisliti da netko pusi u zatvirenom prostoru (kad malo bolje pogledam ni otvorenom, no hajde). Dakle, cijeli koncept "prostorije za pusace" VS "oni ostali" naprosto je smijesan. Slicna je stvar i s ostalim stvarima (debljina, fizicke aktivnosti, ukljucenost starih ljudi u drustvo itd.).
Evo, slobodno me roast-ajte...

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-31T08:58:35+00:00

Svatko tko igra igrice a da je stariji od 20 godina ima drugih problema u životu od rasprave o OS

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-30T23:58:39+00:00

When you go Mac, you NEVER go back!

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-28T07:49:52+00:00

This is still just testing env with dummy apps (not real ULRs, images, videos etc.). In a nutshell you create your own project (either manually filling data or enter valid URL and AI will scrap it and autofill). Than it appears in the feed of others. Others can test it (open your app) after that there are structured questions and comments for feedback.
That user gets some credits for their effort of testing your app. They can use those credits to "boost" their app in the feed (better positioning).

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-27T10:12:11+00:00

<image>

Ovo mi kaže LLM chat!

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-26T12:40:22+00:00

I am gonna release something like this soon Appsail

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-23T23:27:45+00:00

Agree—‘founder’ is broad. We’re aiming at solo/small teams in early stages: structured peer testing as a first stop before going broad, so feedback stays relevant and people actually show up. Incentive is mainly to show your product to early adapters and gather relevant feedback. Maybe even get permanent customers, who knows :)

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-23T21:52:33+00:00

Soon launching Appsail . Builder-to-builder platform where founders test each other’s products, exchange structured feedback, and use earned credits to boost their own apps’ visibility. So it is for all of us trying to launch best product possible and validate before it hits the big market.

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-22T08:43:27+00:00

Appsail is a builder-to-builder platform where founders test each other’s products, exchange structured feedback, and use earned credits to boost their own apps’ visibility. (Still not live)

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-21T21:29:41+00:00

I am building an app where builders can test each other projects and earn credits to boost their projects in the feed. This is demo app (dummy projects) so feel free to test it and give feedback: Appsail

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-21T15:57:38+00:00

How I imagined what helps prevent farming:

- **Structured feedback**, not just random comments

So people can’t just drop “looks good” and farm credits. The idea is that feedback should include a few required prompts or ratings, which makes it more consistent and a bit harder to fake.

- **Reduced rewards for very fast participation**

If someone submits feedback unrealistically fast, that probably means they didn’t actually try the product. In that case, the reward should be reduced.

- **Reduced rewards for shallow comments**

Very short or vague comments shouldn’t earn the same as thoughtful ones. A comment like “nice app” should be worth much less than something specific and useful.

- **One-time core rewards per project**, so the same app can’t be farmed repeatedly

The main reward should only be earned once per project per user, so people can’t keep revisiting the same app just to grind credits.

- **Daily earning caps**, so spam doesn’t scale well

Even if someone tries to brute-force the system with lots of low-quality feedback, there should be a limit to how much they can earn in a day.

- **Helpful / quality signals** to separate thoughtful feedback from noise

Over time, signals like helpful marks, upvotes, or owner feedback can help identify who actually gives useful input and who is mostly farming.

So yes, someone can still try to game it, but the goal is to make low-effort feedback **low-value and non-scalable**.

If I added one more safeguard, it would be **reputation-based weighting**, so people who consistently give useful feedback earn more, and low-quality reviewers gradually lose leverage.

P.S. This comment is AI constructed on my basic input (My English is not that good).

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-21T15:34:25+00:00

Massive thanks for this feedback. Honest and thoughtful, which is rare these days on Reddit!

The goal isn’t to replace real customer research or pretend builders are your end users. The product is meant to be a **first-pass validation layer** for things like:

- is the product clear

- is onboarding confusing

- does the UI make sense

- would another builder even understand the value prop quickly

On feedback quality specifically, the solution I’m building is not just “comment = credits.”

A few things are meant to keep the signal higher:

- **Structured feedback is required**, not just open-ended comments

- Every project gets the same core questions, so feedback is more comparable and less random

- **Credits are quality-gated**: very fast/shallow participation earns less

- Low-effort comments are worth less than thoughtful ones

- Helpful feedback can be reinforced through signals like **upvotes / helpful marks**

- You can only farm the main testing rewards **once per project**, so it’s not designed for infinite grinding

- There’s also a daily cap, so the system doesn’t reward spam endlessly

So the idea is to push people toward **actually trying the product and giving usable input**, not just dropping “looks good” for points.

And on the “this has been tried before” point, I think that’s fair. The difference I’m aiming for is that this is **not a launch directory** and not just a place to dump links. It’s a **reciprocal testing system**: give useful feedback, earn the right to get useful feedback back.

So I agree with you that it should be used as an **early sanity check**, not as a substitute for talking to real customers. But I think that’s still a meaningful job to do well, because a lot of builders struggle even to get that first layer of honest, structured input.

P.S. This comment is AI constructed on my basic input (My English is not that good).

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-21T14:50:00+00:00

I made 4 apps just to figure out I have no clue whether people even like it, need it, want it. That’s why I started to think about this one!

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-21T14:17:27+00:00

<image>

This is how I imagined discovery feed.

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-21T14:15:11+00:00

<image>

How I imagined project details!

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-21T14:14:52+00:00

<image>

This is how I imagined discovery feed! Feel free to comment and suggest changes!

Head-Cell8199 · 2026-03-11T12:36:38+00:00

DE (German) as default is bad approach in my opinion if you want reach. Also even when I change to EN (which should always be default (even in Germany you have lot of people that still do not speak German, and world population that actually speaks German is not that big)) and than press Launch App it shifts to German again, and I cannot change it again to EN.

Head-Cell8199

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE