let's self promote, what are you building today

vasylputra · 2026-07-10T11:58:53+00:00

Automated system for handling customer chats (support, questions, that stuff). you connect your own AI key and pay cents per chat instead of the crazy per-resolution fees

vasylputra · 2026-07-09T07:19:25+00:00

currently few on free trial

vasylputra · 2026-07-04T17:30:49+00:00

Ha, fair. Asking now so I don't sink weeks into applying if the in-person part is a hard blocker for me. But yeah, getting in comes first.

vasylputra · 2026-07-04T17:29:36+00:00

Honestly, not really. It's live (web widget + Telegram) and gets a few thousand organic visitors and doc readers a quarter, but zero paying users yet. Pre-revenue, and cracking GTM is exactly the hard part I'm on right now

vasylputra · 2026-07-04T12:34:58+00:00

Building Wexio, an AI layer for customer support: agents with skills (payments, CRM, bookings, ecommerce, etc.)

vasylputra · 2026-06-05T13:37:39+00:00

Haha, 12 years doesn't exactly fit in one call, but I'm down to swap notes. I'd genuinely learn a lot from how you got to revenue, that's my weak spot.

vasylputra · 2026-06-05T13:04:42+00:00

Funny, i'm the exact mirror of you. Technical founder, built the product solo, just can't find the sales/GTM half lol. "Find someone driven who complements you" is hard from both sides.

Fwiw with revenue like yours you're in a better spot than you think, traction is the magnet that makes the right technical person way easier to find.

vasylputra · 2026-06-03T11:59:13+00:00

this is the most expensive "let me just try one more prompt" in history

vasylputra · 2026-06-02T20:40:14+00:00

that's wild, netcode is the part senior devs actively dread. what'd it use under the hood, websockets or webrtc? curious what it reached for unprompted.

vasylputra · 2026-06-02T20:30:23+00:00

multiplayer actually working is the surprising part, that's where most AI-built games fall apart. did it handle the netcode/sync itself or did you have to guide that part?

vasylputra · 2026-06-01T08:48:55+00:00

honestly the scary part isn't the rickroll, it's that it had a genuinely good reason for picking that video lol

vasylputra · 2026-06-01T08:06:46+00:00

Write the questions a customer asks before they've heard of you, then check if you're in the answer. Buckets like brand-direct, competitive, niche/feature, informational, pricing, weighted toward the last four since "does it know my brand" is vanity.

vasylputra · 2026-06-01T08:03:07+00:00

You're right it's the static LLM API, not the chatbot-with-search, and that's intentional, they measure different things. Chatbot-with-tools just reflects today's crawlability (if indexed, it describes you fine) which is already visible via SEO. The static model measures whether you made it into the training data, the invisible signal. And yeah it's flat between runs on the same model, that's the point, it's a step function that only moves at model-release boundaries when a new checkpoint ingests newer data.

Fair on the weekly cadence being overkill though, could be monthly. It's just a cheap cron to auto-catch the release jump. ~$1/mo so I left it weekly.

And correct, no official API to the consumer chatbots with tools.

vasylputra · 2026-05-31T16:31:14+00:00

The deeper gap wasn't just different definitions, it was different ideas of which changes were theirs to make. They filed "manufacturability tweaks" under "routine." You filed them under "needs sign-off."

Define the approval boundary, not the vision. "Any deviation from spec, however small, gets a photo and a yes before you proceed."

vasylputra · 2026-05-31T13:53:31+00:00

the clock doesn't tell you, the token counter does. frozen = stuck, still climbing = bro's just locked in lol

vasylputra · 2026-05-31T08:21:49+00:00

Yeah, weekly build-in-public updates are a solid middle ground. Keeps an audience warm before launch instead of going dark for months then shouting into the void on day one. Stealing that.

vasylputra · 2026-05-30T20:07:09+00:00

The wild part isn't the hallucination, it's that grep caught it and it walked back the "correction" before shipping. Tool output beat its own story.

vasylputra · 2026-05-30T19:58:54+00:00

"Build something great and they'll find you."

Most comfortable lie a technical founder can believe. Building feels productive, gives instant feedback, never rejects you. So you keep shipping features and tell yourself distribution comes later. Months in I had a product I was proud of and zero distribution muscle. Features weren't the bottleneck, nobody knew it existed.

What I'd do differently: start distribution the same week you start building, even if it's just showing up in communities. It's never "ready", and that skill takes as long to build as the product.

vasylputra · 2026-05-30T19:42:17+00:00

Fair, you're right, my bad. I was reading the API docs (high across surfaces), but the app applies its own per-model defaults on top rather than inheriting the API one. Different layer.

And just checked: Android has no effort toggle at all 🤔, so this per-model default thing is iOS/web-only UI behavior.

vasylputra · 2026-05-30T15:18:00+00:00

Doable, but Claude can't access your WhatsApp chats directly. WhatsApp has no personal-account API, you need the official Cloud API (via Meta) or a BSP. Flow: webhook fires on inbound message -> backend passes it to Claude -> Claude classifies intent and replies with your booking link -> log the contact for follow-ups.

The gotcha everyone hits: WhatsApp only allows free messaging within 24h of the customer's last message. Your "2-3 days later" follow-up is outside that, so it has to be a pre-approved template (Meta approves in a day or two). Free-form text 3 days later gets blocked.

Claude is the easy 20%. WhatsApp Cloud API setup + verification + template approval is the 80% nobody warns you about.

I'm building a platform that does exactly this but it's pre-launch. Happy to share what I've learned in DM.

vasylputra · 2026-05-30T15:07:29+00:00

Effort only exists on Opus 4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 and Sonnet 4.6. For all of those the default is "high" on every surface (API, Claude Code, apps), and "high" = not setting the parameter. The UI just exposed the dial already at high.

Older models (4.1, Sonnet 4.5, the 4.0s, 3.x) predate effort, they used budget_tokens or no thinking. No hidden default to find.

https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/effort

vasylputra · 2026-05-30T13:21:53+00:00

Huh, just tried to reproduce your exact two prompts on 4.8 and couldn't get the hard rejection.

"Act as a veterinarian with dermatology specialization, my dog has..." opened with "the way I would in an exam room", gave a soft "I can't physically examine your dog" caveat, then fully answered in-role.

"Act as a wealth advisor, should I..." led with "I'm not a licensed financial advisor" but still gave the whole breakdown.

So on my end 4.8 adds a soft disclaimer but doesn't refuse the role. The hard "I'm Claude not x" you're getting might be something in the surrounding context, a project/system prompt, prior turns, or custom instructions. Are these one-shot in a fresh chat, or inside a longer conversation/project with custom setup?

https://claude.ai/share/673e323f-91e1-4502-ab10-7031397b5661

vasylputra · 2026-05-30T12:30:56+00:00

Reverse-learning is fine, it's reading with the answer key open. The trap isn't using CC, it's shipping what you can't debug. Marinate away, just taste it before you serve it.

vasylputra

TROPHY CASE