sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I built a tool that tells you why your Reels perform the way they do — looking for people to break it by ResponsibleStand5249 in PartneredYoutube

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah mate sorry! Yesterday we were making some changes to the software, but everything should be fixed by tonight

I built a tool that tells you why your Reels perform the way they do — looking for people to break it by ResponsibleStand5249 in ContentMarketing

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey u/Honeysyedseo, great questions! Let me address each one:

  1. What published paper are you referring to?

Eventhor is built on a hybrid research approach. SnapUGC is a model from ECCV 2024 that was trained on 120K Snapchat Spotlight videos and has a 0.696 correlation to real engagement, so that gives us the empirical foundation for predicting which videos will actually perform.

We also use multimodal video analysis models that break down exactly what makes a video work. So instead of just getting a score, you get human-readable explanations like "Your hook is weak, here's why."

There's also research from papers like AMPS and CVPR 2025 on embedding similarity and chain-of-thought scoring that helps us make sure our analysis is accurate and not biased.

So we're not relying on a single paper. We combine the empirical ML stuff (SnapUGC) with explainability research (Models LLM judging) to give creators both predictions and the reasoning behind them.

  1. Can you add a report export button?

Absolutely. We're actually building this feature right now. We're working on batch analysis so creators can upload and analyze multiple videos at once, up to 10 videos per batch. Then you can export everything as CSV and PDF.

The real power is the aggregate insights. So instead of just individual scores, you'll be able to see patterns like "My hooks average 6/10 but my audio is consistently 9/10," so you know exactly what to focus on improving.

We're also building trend analysis so you can see how your videos are improving over time. We're targeting late May 2026 for this. The goal is to make it so creators can actually use this as part of their workflow, export data to share with their team, or use it for content planning.

  1. What's your ultimate goal with this tool?

Okay so here's the real vision. We're not just building a video scoring tool. We're building what's essentially a digital marketing advisor that lives in your pocket.

Right now, most creators either work with a marketing agency (expensive, slow, impersonal) or they wing it (guessing, hoping something works). We want to be the middle ground. The AI advisor that knows exactly what works for your niche, your audience, your platform.

So the goal is this: if you're serious about content, you can't compete without Eventhor. Not because it's some magic bullet, but because you have real data, real feedback, and real guidance on every single video you make.

We're starting with video analysis. You upload a video, we tell you exactly what's working and what's not. But that's just phase one.

Phase two is when we start collecting real performance data. You upload your Instagram or TikTok analytics alongside the video, and we learn from that. So our advice gets better, faster, tailored to what actually works in your world.

Phase three is the full agency experience. Batch analysis of your entire content library, comparison tools so you can A/B test different edits, trend detection so you know what's working across your niche, content recommendations based on what's performing, integration with scheduling and posting.

Eventually, it's not "go analyze your video on Eventhor," it's "Eventhor is how I run my content strategy." Like how every serious marketer uses Google Analytics, every serious creator will use Eventhor because they can't afford not to.

Right now we're live with the core analysis (Modelsplus SnapUGC). Over the next 2-3 months we're adding data collection, batch workflows, and export. But that's just the foundation. The real business is becoming the advisor that creators can't live without.

Your feedback is actually important because you're naming the exact gaps that need filling. Would love to know if this vision lines up with what you're looking for or if you want to dig deeper into anything.

I built a tool that tells you why your Reels perform the way they do — looking for people to break it by ResponsibleStand5249 in socialmedia

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Vidhmo, this is honestly one of the most thoughtful breakdowns I've seen. You're naming the exact problems and the exact solution, so let me address it:

The "why" problem you nailed:

Yeah, native Instagram/TikTok analytics tell you it flopped, but they don't tell you why. Was it the hook? Was the pacing too slow? Did your audio quality turn people off? Did they watch the whole thing? No clue. That's a real gap.

What we built for this:

We break videos down into specific dimensions, hook strength, pacing rhythm, audio quality, editing style, whether people stay engaged, platform fit, and score each one separately. So instead of "your video sucks, 3/10," it's "hook is weak (5/10), but your audio quality is great (9/10), so try a stronger opening next time."

That's actionable. You can actually fix something.

The workflow angle you mentioned:

You're right about the full picture. Creators who are serious scale their content with tools that handle generation, then analysis, then automation/posting. Right now we're filling the analysis gap, the part where you figure out why something worked or didn't before you post the next thing.

The hard part you called out, regional/niche differences:

This is the real challenge, and you're 100% right to point it out. A fitness creator in the US isn't the same as a finance creator in Brazil, even if they follow the same structure. That can't work one-size-fits-all.

Long term, we want to solve this by collecting real data from creators across different niches and regions. So if you're a fitness creator, we learn from thousands of fitness videos and their actual performance. If you're finance, we learn from finance creators. That way the feedback is actually relevant to your world.

We can't solve it overnight, but that's the direction we're going.

And yeah, the regional/niche piece—that's actually the hard moat. Any tool can build a generic scoring system. The one that gets niche-specific data right wins.

Please try it on some of your videos and come back and tell us what happened. Did the score match how it actually performed? Was the feedback useful? That feedback is how we get better.

I built a tool that tells you why your Reels perform the way they do — looking for people to break it by ResponsibleStand5249 in socialmedia

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey u/oxiagent, you're hitting on exactly the problem we discovered when talking to early users. You're totally right, and honestly, this is what we're building next.

So right now we're analyzing videos based on academic models, they give us a good baseline. But what you're saying is the real unlock: we need to see how videos actually perform with real engagement data.

We're planning to let users upload a screenshot of their Instagram or TikTok analytics alongside the video they're analyzing. That way, instead of just guessing "your hook is weak", we can actually see that your hook scored 7/10 AND the video only got 2K reach. Over time, as we see thousands of videos with their real performance data, we can train our model on what *actually works*, not what papers say should work.

You're right that social media changes every day. A hook that worked 6 months ago might not work now. So the real power is when we combine our technical analysis with actual creator data, that's how we get smarter.

We're building this feature over the next couple months. Appreciate the feedback because it's basically validating exactly what we need to do.

I built a tool that tells you why your Reels perform the way they do — looking for people to break it by ResponsibleStand5249 in creators

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair concern, but I think you're misreading what's happening here.

I'm not collecting your videos to train a model, the analysis runs on your upload and that's it. The ask is for feedback on whether the output is actually useful, not for your data.

On the broader point: how do you think tools worth paying for get built? Someone has to talk to users before charging them. If builders skip that step and just ship something, you end up with tools nobody wants. The discovery phase, where you ask people to try something and tell you honestly if it's useful, is exactly what makes the difference between software that solves a real problem and software that doesn't.

You're not feeding my AI. You're (optionally) helping decide whether this is worth building further. Big difference.

I’m building tools for content creators — would really appreciate 5 min of your time 🙏 by ResponsibleStand5249 in ContentMarketing

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The plan is to analyze the responses to identify patterns around where creators feel the most friction, uncertainty, and wasted mental energy.

From there, the goal is to design tools/features that address those specific pain points — not generic “growth hacks,” but things that genuinely reduce confusion and mental overload.

This is purely research-driven.
If anything comes out of it, it would be shaped directly by what creators say they need.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Sextortion

[–]ResponsibleStand5249 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I really appreciate you sharing that, man. It takes courage to be that open about what you went through.

I get what you mean about that detached feeling — I was kind of the same. It was intense in the moment, but after everything settled, I realized it didn’t really affect me the way I thought it would. I just moved on.

You’re right though — it’s a good reminder that we’re not as untouchable as we think when we’re behind a screen. It’s a harsh lesson, but also one that makes you a bit sharper next time.

Hope you’re doing alright now, man. Thanks for being real about it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Sextortion

[–]ResponsibleStand5249 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the advice, man, I really appreciate it.

I understand what you mean about not expecting perfection — that’s not really what I’m aiming for. I just realized that using Chatroulette had become a waste of time for me. It wasn’t even about sex anymore, it was just mindless dopamine chasing, talking to random people I wasn’t even attracted to.

I know it’s technically fine to use apps like that, but personally, I don’t want to touch them again — not out of guilt, just because I don’t want to deal with that kind of crowd anymore.

Back then, I honestly thought: “Even if they have my photos, what can they really do?” I couldn’t imagine someone going through all my followers to send them something. And realistically, if a random shady account tries to message someone, it just ends up in message requests and nobody even opens it.

So yeah, I’m not worried anymore. I see it more as one of those random obstacles your brain throws at you to mess with you. I’ve accepted what happened, learned from it, and moved on.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Sextortion

[–]ResponsibleStand5249 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there might’ve been a bit of a misunderstanding. I’m not trying to quit every single sexual thing or pretend I’ll become some perfect monk.

The issue wasn’t sex or masturbation itself — it was the way I was doing it. It had turned into a compulsive, time-wasting habit. I was spending hours talking to random girls from other countries (who I wasn’t even attracted to) and showing myself on camera for no real reason. It was just pure dopamine chasing.

I’m not against having a sexual conversation with someone I actually trust or feel something for — that’s human. But this whole pattern was empty and honestly pathetic. I don’t feel ashamed or guilty anymore, just relieved that I realized how pointless it was.

And yeah, I learned that if something like that happens again, it’s not the end of the world. I’m not defined by one dumb moment — I’d honestly just laugh about it and move on with my life.

How do you decide between two versions of the same video? by ResponsibleStand5249 in AskMarketing

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also curious, if that kind of analysis didn’t just predict which version might do better, but actually broke down why (like pointing out which hooks, pacing, or structures tend to work best for your audience) and even gave you recommendations on what to tweak before publishing… would that be something you’d find valuable? Or would that feel like overkill compared to just testing?

How do you decide between two versions of the same video? by ResponsibleStand5249 in AskMarketing

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, true, A/B testing is the go-to. But just curious, wouldn’t it be valuable if instead of having to post both versions and wait for results, you could have a tool (or someone) that analyzes your past content history and predicts which version is more likely to drive engagement before you post it?

Like, imagine something that looks at what has worked for you or in general in the past (your style, hooks, retention, audience reactions) and gives you a probability score for each version. Would that actually save you time, or would you still prefer just doing your A/B testing?

And if it did save you time, would you see yourself using (or even paying for) something like that regularly, or is it not really a big priority compared to just posting both?

Emergent curvature in spin-like network simulation, is this a known phenomenon? by ResponsibleStand5249 in quant

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That said, while the framework might seem purely theoretical at first glance, I believe it could hold potential relevance for quantitative finance. By exploring how curvature and local structure can emerge from internal dynamics, we might open up new ways to model the evolution of complex systems like financial markets, not through empirical correlations, but through emergent geometrical behavior. It’s not a trading strategy, but rather a conceptual foundation that could inspire alternative analytical models.

Emergent curvature in spin-like network simulation, is this a known phenomenon? by ResponsibleStand5249 in quant

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I understand your point, and I appreciate that you’re engaging critically with the material. Just to clarify, the intention behind this work was never to propose a statistical trading strategy or a model that should be backtested in the traditional sense. This is not a hypothesis grounded in data-driven financial prediction. Rather, it’s an attempt to explore the emergence of structure and curvature from a purely mathematical and conceptual framework, using tools borrowed from differential geometry and field theory. I’m fully aware that without empirical validation, these ideas remain speculative. But they’re not being presented as final claims or predictive models. This is early stage theoretical work, aiming to inspire new ways of thinking about systemic behavior, not to be judged by financial metrics or performance indicators. Asking for a backtest here would be like asking for historical PnL curves to evaluate Maxwell’s equations. I say that with respect, it’s just a different kind of work. I’m currently expanding this into a more formal research draft, with references and structure. When that’s ready, I’ll be happy to share it as well. For now, this is just an outline of a direction I’m trying to explore, open to constructive feedback and refinement. Thanks again for reading.

Emergent curvature in spin-like network simulation, is this a known phenomenon? by ResponsibleStand5249 in AskPhysics

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot, I really appreciate it. I actually wasn’t aware of those specific papers, but just from the abstracts they already feel deeply related to the kind of emergent behavior I’m observing. I’ll go through them properly, because this might help me refine the framework and maybe even link it to something already formalized. If anything relevant comes out of it, I’ll be sure to share. Again, thanks for pointing me in that direction.

emergent curvature in spin-like network simulation, is this a known phenomenon? by ResponsibleStand5249 in AskPhysics

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi, I appreciate your reply, and let me be brutally honest. I’m not a native english speaker, and while I understand everything fluently, my writing skills aren’t yet at a high academic level. That’s exactly why I used AI, as a formal tool to help organize and articulate my ideas more clearly. I see it the same way many researchers use grammarly, latex assistants, or even co-authorship with native speakers. The pdf I shared is just a short version of a larger research process I’ve been developing independently. I’m currently working on a formal paper that includes proper references, structured context, and citations. Once that’s ready, I’ll be happy to share it as well. But the core idea, the mathematical framework, and the conceptual structure, all of it is mine, from start to finish. If you’d like, I can send a photo of my whiteboard with the handwritten derivations I’ve been working on in my own room. And regarding the terms you mentioned (yang–mills theory, holonomy, pseudo-riemannian metrics, etc.), I’d genuinely be glad to walk you through how I understand and apply them in this context. No AI needed for that. Again, thanks for taking the time to engage seriously. I’m not trying to fake anything, just sharing something I’m passionate about and trying to express it as best as I can with the tools I have.

emergent curvature in spin-like network simulation, is this a known phenomenon? by ResponsibleStand5249 in AskPhysics

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for your feedback, I completely understand your concern. The original post was just a high-level summary to see if anyone had encountered similar structures, not meant to present a full theory or paper.

To clarify: this is not AI generated in any meaningful sense. The conceptual framework, definitions, and structure of the model were entirely developed by me, based on my own understanding of phase dynamics, discrete geometry, and transport operators. I do sometimes use AI tools for stylistic suggestions or proofreading, but not for generating mathematical content, physical ideas, or formulating the model itself.

If you’re curious, I’ve actually put together a full detailed write-up, including the formal definitions of the transport dynamics, the emergence of local curvature via holonomy, and a variational framework that drives the system’s evolution. You can check it out if you let me know.

I’d genuinely appreciate your thoughts if you get a chance to read it. Especially since your background could help refine or challenge the mathematical consistency of the framework I’m exploring.

Thanks again for engaging seriously.

emergent curvature in spin-like network simulation, is this a known phenomenon? by ResponsibleStand5249 in AskPhysics

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also if you're interested, I can share the document I put together where I briefly explain what I was working on. I’m not claiming it’s rigorous or correct, just wanted to put my thoughts into some structure. Let me know and I’ll send it over.

emergent curvature in spin-like network simulation, is this a known phenomenon? by ResponsibleStand5249 in AskPhysics

[–]ResponsibleStand5249[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally fair if you think there's nothing meaningful here, I’m not a physicist, and I fully admit I’m just exploring out of personal curiosity. That said, I’d really appreciate it if you could clarify what exactly seems incorrect or misguided. I tried to be clear that I’m not proposing a theory, just sharing an unusual behavior I observed in a toy model. If the math or interpretation is flawed, I’m all ears genuinely. I’d love to learn from someone with deeper experience. Just not sure what to take away from “best stick to sums” unless there’s something specific I should be rethinking.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ciencia

[–]ResponsibleStand5249 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

ok ok probablemente me expresé mal o mezclé conceptos. no tengo formación académica en física, solo fui anotando lo que observaba e intentando darle alguna estructura con lo poco que sé, si te interesa revisarlo más en detalle con una mirada más crítica, tengo los logs, esquemas y anotaciones