一个用结构化质疑和证据检验来杀死糟糕创意的 AI 工具,帮助独立开发者避免浪费精力。
独立开发者常被 AI 或自我热情误导,高估创意价值,导致开发后无人使用。痛点在于缺乏客观的早期验证方法,且传统验证耗时。
独立开发者、初创者,聚集在 Reddit (r/SideProject, r/startups), Indie Hackers, 以及 X/Twitter 的 #buildinpublic 社区。
AI 工具泛滥,但多数只提供正面反馈;开发者对 AI 生成创意的质量存疑,需要反向验证工具。同时,独立开发者数量增长,竞争激烈,验证需求迫切。
专注“杀死”创意,通过预设失败条件、证据收集和结构化质疑,提供客观的“死刑判决”,并附带可执行的验证报告。
订阅制,每月 $9-$19,提供免费试用 3 次验证。
Next.js + Tailwind CSS + OpenAI API + Stripe + Vercel。AI 用于生成质疑和总结证据,其余部分可让 AI 辅助编码。
I'm Pablo, and I run a SaaS for restaurants in my city, Córdoba, Argentina. In my free time, I like to think about and generate new ideas for potential future projects, or see if tools I develop for my daily use could work well as business ideas. So instead of starting development from scratch, or getting excited about a tool I already have, I put them through a validation process to see if they're really worth the effort of putting them into production. First, I write down the conditions the idea would have to meet to work, and also the conditions it would have to meet to fail. Then, I sign and date this document, before having a single piece of data. I sign it for myself, because if I write the conditions after seeing the evidence, I'll be writing them so that my idea survives. If the evidence meets one of the conditions I wrote when I was still in the dark, the idea dies, and that's that. Four of my five ideas died. The one that hurt the most was an open-source printing bridge developed purely in Rust. I use it for my own SaaS; it prints kitchen tickets from the cloud to thermal printers, and I was sure the problem was common. My research turned up four almost identical open sou