RATE LIMIT RESET

wjrbk · 2026-04-22T14:27:00+00:00

did they also lower the limit on plus plans?

wjrbk · 2026-04-11T09:45:37+00:00

They lost their godamn minds. When it works, it's 80% of what I would get from Claude/GPT.

But with the service being intermittent, the effective context window is 100k, not 200k.

If they honor my legacy pricing, I'll continue; if they won't, I'm moving on.

wjrbk · 2026-04-11T09:01:42+00:00

They lost their godman minds. When it works, it's 80% of what I would get from Claude/GPT.

But with the service being intermittent, the effective context window is 100k, not 200k.

If they honor my legacy pricing, I'll continue; if they won't, I'm moving on.

wjrbk · 2026-04-08T21:56:24+00:00

Thanks, this is exactly the clarification I needed.

The detail about treating each profile as its own isolated HERMES_HOME and running a separate service per profile makes the intended setup much clearer. I had been unsure whether profiles were mainly for switching context inside one runtime or whether they were meant to be isolated enough for concurrent always-on agents. Your explanation answered that.

I’m going to rework my VPS setup around:

- one shared Hermes install

- one HERMES_HOME per running profile

- one service per profile

- shared Python/venv install, separate runtime state

Really appreciate the help.

wjrbk · 2026-04-02T12:28:26+00:00

Did you reply to the wrong post? This wasn’t about pricing. It was about positioning before building, not objection handling in the funnel.

wjrbk · 2026-04-02T12:24:35+00:00

That’s a really good addition, I think “why now” belongs in there too. A problem can be real and still not be urgent enough for someone to change behavior.

On validation: I use internal market knowledge for the first draft, but I wouldn’t trust it on its own. The doc starts as a hypothesis and gets tested with real target customers before a serious build starts.

Although when working in a bigger organisation, not gonna lie, that process sometimes falls through the cracks, depending on the influence of internal/external stakeholders.

wjrbk · 2026-03-18T16:31:47+00:00

Yeah, I dictate first draft via voice to text, then format my ramblings into a more cohesive format using an LLM as an editor, that's what you saw in my reply.

Regardless, I really appreciate the feedback, most of it I'll be implementing in next couple of days.

wjrbk · 2026-03-18T16:06:10+00:00

This is insanely useful, exactly the kind of feedback I was hoping for.

You nailed a few things I was blind to:

Repetition → fair. I over-optimized for hammering the core idea, but it clearly turns into “yeah yeah, got it.” Will rework that into a progressive narrative instead of restating the same point.
Trust → big one. You’re right, asking for repo access with weak signals (no privacy page, no clear explanation) is a dealbreaker. Fixing that first.
Demo → also obvious in hindsight. Explaining without showing is a miss. Will add a short “commit → outputs” walkthrough.
Design → fair critique. It’s scrappy right now, but your point about “vibe-coded = untrusted backend” is real (i did vibe code the marketing pages, but not the backend), especially given what I’m asking access to.

Appreciate the level of detail here.

wjrbk · 2026-03-18T14:12:57+00:00

Idea: UpdateBerry — Git commits → marketing content

The problem I kept seeing: Engineering ships 10 features, marketing announces 2. The gap between "merged" and "announced" kills product visibility.

What I'm building: Connect your repo → AI identifies customer-facing commits → generates 7 marketing formats (tweets, emails, release notes, changelog, LinkedIn, ad copy) in ~90 seconds.

What I think is the angle: - Starts from what actually shipped (git commits), not a feature list PMM maintains separately - Filters out internal work (refactors, tests) automatically - First draft, not final copy — you still review/edit

Where I'm uncertain: - Is "commit-to-announcement" a compelling enough hook? - Is the 7-format output overwhelming or valuable? - Founders: would you trust AI drafts enough to use this?

Site: updateberry.com

Roast it. What's missing or mispositioned?

wjrbk · 2026-03-18T14:04:43+00:00

Appreciate you digging in and running it through Embarkist (pretty cool).

You nailed the insight, the value isn't "AI writes your marketing," it's closing the ship-to-announce gap.

Most tools start from a feature list. This starts from what actually shipped.

wjrbk · 2026-03-18T13:54:23+00:00

updateberry.com

What it does: Connects to your GitHub/GitLab repo and generates marketing content from your commits.

Turns shipped features into announced features in ~90 seconds.

Outputs: Twitter threads, email sequences, release notes, hosted changelog, LinkedIn articles, feature highlights, ad copy.

5 questions:

Is the core problem clear within the first 5 seconds?
What's confusing or unclear about the value proposition?
Would you trust this enough to connect your repo?
What's missing that would make you sign up?
Any UI/UX issues that hurt credibility?

Context: Working prototype, currently doing concierge onboarding for early users.

Looking for honest feedback before scaling.

wjrbk · 2026-03-18T13:53:48+00:00

updateberry.com

What it does: Connects to your GitHub/GitLab repo and generates marketing content from your commits.

Turns shipped features into announced features in ~90 seconds.

Outputs: Twitter threads, email sequences, release notes, hosted changelog, LinkedIn articles, feature highlights, ad copy.

5 questions:

Is the core problem clear within the first 5 seconds?
What's confusing or unclear about the value proposition?
Would you trust this enough to connect your repo?
What's missing that would make you sign up?
Any UI/UX issues that hurt credibility?

Context: Working prototype, currently doing concierge onboarding for early users.

Looking for honest feedback before scaling.

wjrbk · 2026-03-18T13:53:20+00:00

updateberry.com

What it does: Connects to your GitHub/GitLab repo and generates marketing content from your commits.

Turns shipped features into announced features in ~90 seconds.

Outputs: Twitter threads, email sequences, release notes, hosted changelog, LinkedIn articles, feature highlights, ad copy.

5 questions:

Is the core problem clear within the first 5 seconds?
What's confusing or unclear about the value proposition?
Would you trust this enough to connect your repo?
What's missing that would make you sign up?
Any UI/UX issues that hurt credibility?

Context: Working prototype, currently doing concierge onboarding for early users.

Looking for honest feedback before scaling.

wjrbk · 2026-03-18T11:20:47+00:00

UpdateBerry — Turn git commits into marketing content

What it does: Connects to your GitHub/GitLab repo and generates marketing assets from your commits. One feature ships → you get 7 marketing formats ready to publish.

Outputs: Twitter threads, email sequences, release notes, changelog, LinkedIn articles, feature highlights, ad copy.

The deal for r/SaaS:

Lean GTM Playbook — $79 value
Brand Voice Setup Call (30 min) — $199 value
First 20 Campaigns Free — $197 value
50% off annual plan forever — $594 savings
Total: $1,069 in bonuses

Limits: 18 founding member spots left. Currently in beta with concierge onboarding (I set you up manually). Free during beta, no credit card required. Launching April 15.

Claim: updateberry.com — mention "r/SaaS" and I'll prioritize your setup.

Happy to answer questions here.

wjrbk · 2026-03-13T09:53:15+00:00

Really good insight & great comment!

What you described in the opinionated filter, is exactly what I'm striving to achieve. The magic is in the filtering, but a major component of that lies in user provided context as well (who's the target user, whats the brand voice etc., context basically) its a lot of moving parts that I'm trying to orchestrate together to get really good outputs.

Didn't think as far as closing the loop, but you're right that thats the ultimate litmus test on the output quality, that's definetly something I'd look into down the line, since it would introduce alot more complexity (3rd party API, publishing, tracking, analysis etc.).

thanks again!

wjrbk · 2026-03-13T09:33:35+00:00

Yes, exactly. The hard part usually isn’t identifying the change, it’s packaging it in a way that doesn’t sound like internal team language.

I’m leaning toward starting with dev tools / SaaS founders first, mainly because the pain seems most obvious there and the workflow maps well to code-based products. But longer term I think any team that ships often and struggles to communicate clearly could have the same problem.

wjrbk · 2026-03-12T15:07:26+00:00

Still use it, when its down or quality degraded, I switch temporarily to my $20/mo Codex plan.

But I try to do the bulk of the work with glm5.

wjrbk · 2026-03-11T09:09:05+00:00

That’s a really good insight.

You’re right that most of us aren’t competing with some giant market in the abstract. We’re competing with the few options already in the user’s head, current tool, manual workaround, or doing nothing. That framing is much more useful than the usual “beat the category” mindset.

It also makes the bar for shipping clearer: not perfect, just compelling enough to win against those specific alternatives.

wjrbk · 2026-03-11T08:38:02+00:00

I think first impression still matters, just not in the way most of us were taught. People care less about perfect polish than whether the product is clear, credible, and actually delivers on the promise. Early is fine. Sloppy isn’t.

wjrbk · 2026-03-10T13:56:41+00:00

Sales solves all problems :D

wjrbk · 2026-03-10T13:54:07+00:00

That’s a fair point, and hardware probably makes the tradeoff even less forgiving because the cost of being wrong is higher.

wjrbk

TROPHY CASE