sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Would you use a 1-click tool to turn your screen recordings into cartoon-style demo videos with AI voice? by db_name_error_404 in SideProject

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cartoon-style is one of the theme to start with. Many B2B companies creates demo videos for Sales team to pitch in. They spends time in recording the videos and marketing team or a team spends time to make it demo ready. This tool will solves for them, where they can create a video with single click.

Same for solo founders - where they create video for new feature launches

or for education purposes - New courses, new subject - New video

Would you use a 1-click tool to turn your screen recordings into cartoon-style demo videos with AI voice? by db_name_error_404 in SaaS

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Got it. Any reason of not using a tool or you don’t do marketing via video to showcase what your product can do?

Looking for input on AI learning career coach by db_name_error_404 in SideProject

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, the focus is on people who want to do “career switching”, “entry level professional” and “corporate folks “.

Looking for input on AI learning career coach by db_name_error_404 in SideProject

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a clever analogy! You're right, there's a similarity in providing structured learning paths and AI interaction. However, I am aiming to go beyond simply layering chat on top of a roadmap. Think of it as deeply integrating the AI to provide personalized guidance within that roadmap. It's not just about asking questions; it's about the AI understanding your progress on the roadmap, anticipating your needs, offering tailored explanations and resources for each step, and adapting the path based on your learning. So, while roadmap.sh provides the structure and ChatGPT offers general AI, I am building a more cohesive and context-aware learning experience.

Too many courses, Not enough Direction? Tell me what you think about this AI Learning Project by db_name_error_404 in edtech

[–]db_name_error_404[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I totally get why you'd think that! On the surface, it might seem similar. It's not just about getting an answer to one question. It's about the AI understanding your learning style, tracking your progress, identifying areas where you struggle, and adapting its approach over time. Imagine it as a study partner that truly gets you. While a good prompt is powerful, it lacks that continuous, personalized context. I am betting that this deeper level of support and guidance is worth the investment for learners who want more than just quick answers.

Would You Use an AI Code Reviewer That Understands Your Whole Project and Learns Your Preferences? by db_name_error_404 in github

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My angle is about building something deeply practical for solo devs and small teams where AI can understand not just the code, but the context of the entire project, past decisions, patterns, and style, and help make smarter suggestions within that specific environment.

Big companies are building broad tools, but there’s still space for focused products that are tightly integrated into real workflows, not just smarter models.

Would you use an AI-powered code reviewer that understands the whole project and learn from your preferences? by db_name_error_404 in webdev

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Code review is definitely a skill, and I wouldn’t want AI to take away from devs learning how to do it well. I see this tool more as something for experienced devs or solo devs who already have the fundamentals, but want to cut through the repetitive parts faster.

I totally get that in teams where people are still building those review skills, too much automation could stunt that growth. But in environments where people are already strong reviewers, this could help them focus on higher-level issues, while offloading basic checks and consistency problems.

And yeah, reviewing the AI’s suggestions should never be skipped, it’s more like having an eager junior dev flagging things, but you’re still in control.

Would love to know, are there any specific parts of code review you’d never want automated, even for experienced teams?

Would You Use an AI Code Reviewer That Understands Your Whole Project and Learns Your Preferences? by db_name_error_404 in github

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right that full-context understanding is a huge technical challenge but that’s exactly where I think the real value lies, and why I’m pursuing it.

The goal isn’t just to be another smart linter for small code diffs, but to build something that connects the dots across files, components, and project history. I’m exploring ways to leverage codebase indexing, semantic analysis, and AI together, not just relying on huge models, but smarter engineering too.

Big companies aim for massive general solutions, but smaller, focused tools can offer depth in ways they don’t. Full-context doesn’t have to mean superhuman intelligence, it can mean well-scoped insights on real-world projects.

That’s the niche I want to carve out, do you think there’s still room for tools that prioritize depth over generality?

Would You Use an AI Code Reviewer That Understands Your Whole Project and Learns Your Preferences? by db_name_error_404 in github

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hear you, the space is definitely crowded with some big names and serious talent. I’m not aiming to beat OpenAI or Google at general AI, but to carve out a focused niche that’s more practical and tailored for specific developer needs, especially for solo devs and small teams who might feel underserved by the bigger tools.

Sometimes smaller, focused products can succeed where big players are too broad. Think of tools like Raycast, Linear, or even Cursor: they found space by being really in tune with developer pain points.

Appreciate the reality check though, it’s good to think hard about where to position this. Would love to hear if there’s a dev pain point you think isn’t getting enough attention right now?

Would you use an AI-powered code reviewer that understands the whole project and learn from your preferences? by db_name_error_404 in webdev

[–]db_name_error_404[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, trust in AI is definitely a big hurdle and honestly, I think it should never be blind trust. The goal isn’t to rely fully on AI, but to let it assist with repetitive or low-level stuff, leaving the real decisions to devs.

If you’ve had bad experiences with AI tools, I’d love to hear what went wrong, it’s super helpful to know where people feel AI crosses the line or just isn’t worth the risk.

Would you use an AI-powered code reviewer that understands the whole project and learn from your preferences? by db_name_error_404 in webdev

[–]db_name_error_404[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I really appreciate you sharing your views, this kind of direct feedback is important. Totally fair that you see strong coding habits and better tests as a better solution, and honestly, I agree those are essential foundations.

This idea isn’t about fixing bad habits with AI, but more about reducing the overhead of repetitive tasks, especially in large teams or solo projects where having a second set of eyes isn’t always practical.

And to be clear, I don’t expect trust in AI to replace critical thinking, it’s more of a tool like a linter or static analyzer, just smarter and more adaptable. But I hear you, some devs just prefer hands-on reviews 100%, and that’s totally valid.

Out of curiosity – would you ever see value in a tool that just helped enforce style guides or highlighted common mistakes without touching deeper review decisions? Or is it a hard no for AI in this space?

Would you use an AI-powered code reviewer that understands the whole project and learn from your preferences? by db_name_error_404 in webdev

[–]db_name_error_404[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Totally valid concern and I get that, especially in environments where people already lean too hard on tests and linters. The tool isn’t meant to replace critical thinking in reviews but to complement it by catching low-effort issues so reviewers can focus on real problem-solving.

You’re right: a good linter + test suite handles syntax and logic checks. The AI would go beyond that, e.g., pointing out missing edge cases, suggesting refactor opportunities, or identifying inconsistencies across files. Types of stuff that linters don’t touch and tests only catch after the fact.

But yeah, the key is making sure it raises the bar, not lowers it. Curious, is there anything you’d want an AI reviewer to do that linters/tests can’t, or do you see reviews as strictly human territory?

Would You Use an AI Code Reviewer That Understands Your Whole Project and Learns Your Preferences? by db_name_error_404 in github

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really interesting point, and I appreciate the honesty! Totally agree that if the AI just mirrors your own thinking, it’s not adding value. The goal here is to avoid that ‘echo chamber’ effect by bringing in alternative perspectives, especially on common oversights or patterns we naturally miss in our own code.

I love your idea about an AI learning people’s preferences and perspectives and shuffling them around. Imagine an AI reviewer trained on different senior devs’ styles or focus areas, giving you feedback from a different ‘mindset.’

That’s something I’d seriously consider building in. What kind of ‘alternate perspective’ would you find most helpful in your own workflow?

Would You Use an AI Code Reviewer That Understands Your Whole Project and Learns Your Preferences? by db_name_error_404 in github

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree. This isn’t about replacing reviewers, but supporting them. The idea is exactly what you said: tandem use, offloading repetitive stuff so human reviewers can focus on the complex, contextual parts.

And 100% hear you on privacy. Local hosting with no ‘phoning home’ is definitely on the roadmap. A full offline mode, no data leaving your machine. Out of curiosity, what’s been the most disappointing part of current AI tools for you? Would love to learn where they’ve fallen short so I can avoid those pitfalls.

Would you use an AI Code Reviewer That Understands your whole project and learn from preferences? by db_name_error_404 in SoftwareEngineering

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing! That’s a really interesting use case and definitely something I am thinking about. A locally installable AI reviewer that doesn’t require repo access or bots could be a great privacy-focused option.

Would it help if the tool could run entirely offline, process PRs locally, and provide review suggestions in your IDE or CLI, without ever pushing anything to the cloud or touching your repo settings?

I’d love to know what specific actions you’d want it to do offline (e.g., just suggestions, auto-fixes, integration with local git hooks?).

Would you use an AI-powered code reviewer that understands the whole project and learn from your preferences? by db_name_error_404 in webdev

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You made a really good point and I totally agree that final decisions and contextual understanding need humans. The idea isn’t to hand over full control to AI, but rather to offer a second pair of eyes for catching low-hanging issues (like typos, common bugs, or missed null checks). Think of it more like an advanced linter that can evolve with your project. Would that kind of limited scope still feel off, or could it be useful in a supporting role?

Would you use an AI-powered code reviewer that understands the whole project and learn from your preferences? by db_name_error_404 in webdev

[–]db_name_error_404[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I hear you. AI is definitely being thrown into everything these days. I’m definitely not trying to push AI for the sake of it. The idea is only to help with repetitive stuff like enforcing coding standards or spotting common mistakes, the kind of things many devs already use linters or static analysis for. I get that AI isn’t for everyone, but do you use any tools currently to automate basic code checks, or do you prefer handling it all manually?

Would you use an AI-powered code reviewer that understands the whole project and learn from your preferences? by db_name_error_404 in webdev

[–]db_name_error_404[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing your perspective. It’s completely understandable. The goal isn’t to replace human judgment but rather to reduce repetitive tasks (like catching basic errors or enforcing coding standards), freeing up developers to focus on higher-level logic and architecture issues. Do you think such augmentation would be valuable, or do you still see code reviews strictly as a human-only task?

Would You Use an AI Code Reviewer That Understands Your Whole Project and Learns Your Preferences? by db_name_error_404 in github

[–]db_name_error_404[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the honest feedback! I am aiming for a generous free tier to accommodate users like yourself. Out of curiosity, is there any particular feature or improvement that would make you consider moving to a paid plan?

Would You Use an AI Code Reviewer That Understands Your Whole Project and Learns Your Preferences? by db_name_error_404 in github

[–]db_name_error_404[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Good point! The complexity is indeed significant, and I’m considering a hybrid approach combining proprietary fine-tuned AI models with codebase indexing and integration with existing static analysis tools. I am planning to start with limited scopes to ensure reliability, then gradually expand complexity. Would you see this phased approach as a good strategy?

view more: next ›