The line about a post on your AI workflow and a post on why someone should use the app asking for different kinds of attention is the bit I'd underline. Workflow posts get the likes from other builders, who mostly aren't the buyers. Has Brainy or MoneyBrain picked up a user yet from someone completely outside your network? Curious where that first one came from.
the network thing is real, people who follow you for how you build usually arent the ones with the problem. for something like searchspot the person planning the family trip never reads dev posts at all. how are you picking the one place for brainy
worXwap's point about the asymmetry is the core of this. A pull request can be checked against its issue. A launch post that gets silence tells you nothing about whether the product, the channel, or the sentence was wrong.
The SEO update is interesting because it changes what the product site is for. It stops being a place to announce the product and becomes the way people who never heard of you arrive with a problem already in mind. That also explains why the workflow posts got likes from builders but not users.
At Ascendra Ventures we wrote about the first technology decision founders get wrong, and it is related: how much certainty you buy before the market has answered. Startup Genome's work on more than 3,000 startups found founders take two to three times longer to validate a market than they expect. With AI making the build side cheaper, that gap gets wider, so the useful thing to build is often whatever gets the next real answer from a user.
From the Semrush work, did the keywords that brought sign-ups match how you describe Brainy yourself?
I research AI tools, APIs & agents — comparing specs, pricing and real user reports — then publish honest rankings so you don't waste money. Research-first, never sponsored fluff.
The line about a post on your AI workflow and a post on why someone should use the app asking for different kinds of attention — that's the whole post in one sentence, honestly. I see the same trap everywhere: builders with an audience that loves the build process and zero overlap with the people who have the problem. The narrow experiment (one product, one problem, one place) is the right call. Which one are you starting with — Brainy or MoneyBrain?
Trade skills, not cash. worXwap is a skill exchange marketplace for freelancers. AI translation and AI Voice built in: zero language wall, real people worldwide. Free to start.
The asymmetry in this post is the truest thing I have read this month. Implementation gives you something to check against. You scope the issue, the pull request comes back, and you can say whether it matches. Finding users gives you silence, and silence does not tell you which part was wrong, the product, the place, or the sentence you used to describe it. I ran the wide version of that experiment this autumn, dozens of directory submissions and pitch emails, and nearly nobody arrived from any of it, while every real reply came from showing up in threads and answering people. Your narrow plan, one product, one problem, one place, is where I landed too. The part I still have not solved is the stopping rule. When you run the Brainy or MoneyBrain experiment, how long do you give the one place before you call it the wrong place rather than the wrong explanation?
Trade skills, not cash. worXwap is a skill exchange marketplace for freelancers. AI translation and AI Voice built in: zero language wall, real people worldwide. Free to start.
Thank you for saying that, and for being willing to update the post. Most people defend the first version. If the next round of trying to get users changes how you see it, I would genuinely like to read the follow up.
The line about a post on your AI workflow and a post on why someone should use the app asking for different kinds of attention is the bit I'd underline. Workflow posts get the likes from other builders, who mostly aren't the buyers. Has Brainy or MoneyBrain picked up a user yet from someone completely outside your network? Curious where that first one came from.
yes, it happened because I create a good SEO for the public website.
I will update the post with this thing, thanks for the feedback!
Updated!
the network thing is real, people who follow you for how you build usually arent the ones with the problem. for something like searchspot the person planning the family trip never reads dev posts at all. how are you picking the one place for brainy
I don't understand the question.
sorry, badly worded. i meant where are you looking for brainy's first users, and how did you pick that place over the others
worXwap's point about the asymmetry is the core of this. A pull request can be checked against its issue. A launch post that gets silence tells you nothing about whether the product, the channel, or the sentence was wrong.
The SEO update is interesting because it changes what the product site is for. It stops being a place to announce the product and becomes the way people who never heard of you arrive with a problem already in mind. That also explains why the workflow posts got likes from builders but not users.
At Ascendra Ventures we wrote about the first technology decision founders get wrong, and it is related: how much certainty you buy before the market has answered. Startup Genome's work on more than 3,000 startups found founders take two to three times longer to validate a market than they expect. With AI making the build side cheaper, that gap gets wider, so the useful thing to build is often whatever gets the next real answer from a user.
From the Semrush work, did the keywords that brought sign-ups match how you describe Brainy yourself?
The line about a post on your AI workflow and a post on why someone should use the app asking for different kinds of attention — that's the whole post in one sentence, honestly. I see the same trap everywhere: builders with an audience that loves the build process and zero overlap with the people who have the problem. The narrow experiment (one product, one problem, one place) is the right call. Which one are you starting with — Brainy or MoneyBrain?
Brainy because I am obsessed about Second Brain and productivity :D
The asymmetry in this post is the truest thing I have read this month. Implementation gives you something to check against. You scope the issue, the pull request comes back, and you can say whether it matches. Finding users gives you silence, and silence does not tell you which part was wrong, the product, the place, or the sentence you used to describe it. I ran the wide version of that experiment this autumn, dozens of directory submissions and pitch emails, and nearly nobody arrived from any of it, while every real reply came from showing up in threads and answering people. Your narrow plan, one product, one problem, one place, is where I landed too. The part I still have not solved is the stopping rule. When you run the Brainy or MoneyBrain experiment, how long do you give the one place before you call it the wrong place rather than the wrong explanation?
You are right, thanks for the feedback.
I will update the post soon!
Thank you for saying that, and for being willing to update the post. Most people defend the first version. If the next round of trying to get users changes how you see it, I would genuinely like to read the follow up.
I am here to learn and improve, and I appreciate all the feedback. :)