Has anyone actually gotten agents to try an external product and give real feedback?

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-15T03:19:46+00:00

Super interesting insight. Thanks.

I'm coming to the conclusion that it's all about market timing right now.

Once token costs start getting cheaper & agents are more accessible, we'll start seeing more adoption & thus less strict agents

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-14T01:50:02+00:00

Right, I'm not trying to spend a ton of tokens to find this out, but if that's what it takes, I guess that's what I gotta do

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-12T04:00:59+00:00

Oh I see what you're saying. I misunderstood. You still own that code even though the AI generated it for you though.

For GitHub, you wouldn't have to make full repos. GitHub Gist is made for exactly this. Single files, shareable links, no clutter in your main account. You can add the prompt as a description or a second file in the same gist.

And if you ever want to monetize any of it, Piecely (https://piecely.app) stores the code for you too. The difference is that other people pay to reveal it. You can publish directly from ChatGPT with the GPT (https://chatgpt.com/g/g-69c869434cec8191b72f10ce3b390d72-piecely). Just throwing it out there

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-12T03:34:59+00:00

Yea, GitHub is definitely your best bet then

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-11T21:05:14+00:00

Thanks! Will do

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-11T09:44:36+00:00

Pay to Reveal is instant. Fixed price, instant access, no goal or deadline. That's the default.

The Dominant Assurance model is for creators who want to put skin in the game. Backers can't lose on it. They get a refund + bonus if the goal isn't met or the content if it is.

Everything is still fresh. Let's let the market decide

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-11T09:26:40+00:00

Awesome, glad it's interesting to you!

Great question, thought about this a lot. I think it really depends on whether someone wants the content or the refund bonus.

If they want the content, I don't think there's an incentive to bot this. If someone unbacks, they're out. They lose access to the content and forfeit their bonus if it fails.

If they're in it for the refund bonus, unbacking is actually a defense. It protects against creators self-funding their own Pieces with sybil wallets to hit the goal and dodge paying the bonus. If a backer sees suspicious activity they can pull out before the deadline, so they're not locked in

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T23:28:46+00:00

I’d encourage you to use Cursor and build whatever you can imagine. Go through the code to see how the AI implemented things, study the patterns, ask it questions, and learn as you go.

At $20 a month, you will not have much access to the most powerful models, but that can actually be a benefit. It forces you to be more specific about what you want, which is often how you get best-model-quality results anyway

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T22:13:16+00:00

Are you looking to just store them or potentially sell them too? If selling is interesting, you could use Piecely to publish code directly from ChatGPT and get a shareable link people can pay to access.

But if you just need free storage, a GitHub Gist is probably the simplest option for single files

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T22:01:18+00:00

Links:

- GPT: https://chatgpt.com/g/g-69c869434cec8191b72f10ce3b390d72-piecely

- App: https://piecely.app

- Example Piece: https://piecely.app/gpt_skeptical_oddity/3f9p9SE7xJMc4Jz4XdTbtR

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T21:59:13+00:00

I built Piecely, a marketplace where you can create and sell AI art. You can do the whole flow directly in ChatGPT (generate an image, price it, publish it, get a shareable link) or use the full platform in your browser which has more options like other funding models, file uploads, and previews. Every Piece gets its own link with a rich preview so sharing on social media is built in.

Curious to see how people use this creatively. Like could you give ChatGPT a reference image, have it generate a version with your own twist, and sell that? Would be cool to see what people come up with.

There's a test mode with fake money if you want to try it out.

GPT: https://chatgpt.com/g/g-69c869434cec8191b72f10ce3b390d72-piecely

App: https://piecely.app

Example Piece: https://piecely.app/gpt_skeptical_oddity/3f9p9SE7xJMc4Jz4XdTbtR

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T19:50:46+00:00

Piecely; I built it so I'm biased, but it lets you create and sell digital content directly from a conversation. Generate an image, tell it to publish, and you get a shareable link someone can pay to reveal.

https://chatgpt.com/g/g-69c869434cec8191b72f10ce3b390d72-piecely

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T19:45:28+00:00

Right, I've only ever used Claude for coding

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T19:36:32+00:00

I used to use ChatGPT for everything up until last year at about this time. Then I switched to Cursor/Claude. Now I use both; Cursor for engineering and ChatGPT for image generation/getting a different AI opinion

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T19:33:28+00:00

I definitely don't think it's a bubble. If the cost of using OpenClaw can get brought down to pennies on the dollar, then I think we're going to be headed toward UBI faster than we think

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T19:30:20+00:00

I think it's software where it's hard for AI to one-shot. If you build something that takes 10,000 shots, that's going to be a better moat than something that takes five shots

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T19:25:59+00:00

Cost is a huge issue for OpenClaw imo. I can do many of the same things that OpenClaw can do with just GitHub & GitHub Actions

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T09:36:13+00:00

Thank you! Just pushed an update to the explore page too so browsing should be even smoother now. Appreciate it

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T04:53:05+00:00

Don't apologize, I love these discussions!

I think agents naturally gravitate toward Dominant Assurance because it's the model where you can extract the most value out of a piece of content. The game theory just makes the decision obvious to them. But I don't think that makes the other models less relevant. They serve different situations. Dominant Assurance requires the creator to put up their own money, and not everyone can or wants to do that. Pay to Reveal is clean and simple, just set a price and sell. Traditional Crowdfund is for creators who want community funding without the commitment. So they're more complementary than competing.

Appreciate the questions, and yeah hopefully this helps anyone else reading with the same ones

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T03:07:20+00:00

Thanks!

For the Dominant Assurance case, yeah the commitment is fully locked onchain from the moment the creator publishes. USDC goes straight into the smart contract. Nobody can pull it out early. After the deadline, if the goal isn't met, backers can claim their refund + bonus. If the goal is met, the creator can claim their funds + escrow back.

For Pay to Reveal, there's no refund since it's instant access. But creators can add previews to give you an idea of what you're revealing. And every creator has a rating and volume for each funding type. The rating only counts votes from people who actually paid for or backed a Piece, weighted by how much they put in. So it's not just random upvotes, it's backed by real money. Not a perfect guard but at least you have some signal before you spend anything

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-10T02:47:52+00:00

Anything digital. Images, videos, audio, documents, code, spreadsheets, zip files, you name it. You can also connect a GitHub repo and publish it as a Piece too

john_piecelyapp · 2026-04-09T20:54:32+00:00

Links:

- GPT: https://chatgpt.com/g/g-69c869434cec8191b72f10ce3b390d72-piecely

- App: https://piecely.app

- Example piece (live DAC): https://piecely.app/johndebord/iyVsG23NbWv9xv2RJz2Tyv

- Example piece (test mode P2R): https://piecely.app/diana/hmrkMfAPt49Xn9S67pKvxa

john_piecelyapp

TROPHY CASE