... Start with the one number here that isn't someone's marketing. Pew Research put browsing software on 900 US adults and watched 68,879 real Google searches in March 2025. Not a survey about how search feels. Actual behaviour. When an AI summary appeared, people clicked a traditional search result on 8% of visits. When it didn't, 15%. Roughly half. They clicked a link inside the summary itself on 1% of visits. And they ended the browsing session ... ... referrals under 1% of sessions. Hold both: the old channel is shrinking, and the new channel is currently a rounding error that converts fine, not magically. Anyone selling you urgency on this is selling you something. Which leaves the actual

... Frontier models now cluster above 90% on the public benchmarks, and Gartner says over 40% of agentic projects get killed by 2027. Those two facts are closer to the same fact than they look here's the eval that actually predicts whether your thing ships. There's a number that decided which model your product runs on. You saw it on a leaderboard or in a launch post 94% on this, state-of-the-art on that ... ... made you feel safe picking. I've done exactly this. That number is close to useless for the thing you actually

... typical day looks something like: Work normally across a few projects Switch between models and tools depending on the task Hit a usage limit, or see the invoice at the end of the month Try to work out what actually consumed it Realize the answer isn't really there I want to know things like: Which project is using the most? Which model is responsible? Was it one huge session, or hundreds of smaller ones? Am I paying for long ... ... context, retries, or tool calls? Am I using an expensive model for work that didn't really need it? Which parts of my workflow are actually

... enough to get you to a good product experience? Would love to hear how other makers approach it. Comment from Jordan bulk(@jordan_bulk): The hardest part for me isnt the UI anymore. its knowing whether the flow actually makes sense to someone who didnt build the product. Comment from Jordan bulk(@jordan_bulk): @adana  That s exactly the tricky part. You re too close to the product to see the confusing bits anymore. I ve found even ... ... that will cost less? Comment from Adana Marukhyan(@adana): @andreas_broutas  Will definitely take a time to it soon. Comment from Adana Marukhyan(@adana): @savd  Yes, this is a really cool approach to understanding how your interface actually

... Watched a product go from "hoping to get featured" this morning to #1 by this afternoon, and paid attention to what actually pulled people into the comments instead of just counting upvotes. The single comment that got the most reaction wasn't a pitch. It was the founder admitting a real gap straight up, saying a part of the product wasn't built well yet. That pulled more replies than any feature announcement in the same thread. The founder answered ... ... nearly everything within minutes, including comments that pointed out real problems, and never got defensive about it. The speed plus the lack of spin seemed to matter more than what the answer actually

... years by people who cared about how it feels to use. Dark, considered interfaces. Whitespace that isn't accidental. Content that is the product, not decoration bolted onto a spreadsheet. The short answer to "what's the best LinkedIn alternative in 2026" is this: builders aren't looking for another feed. They're looking for a professional network that was actually

... last few months, I've been building salary calculators and researching compensation data across different industries. One thing surprised me. People often say they want "more salary transparency," but in practice, raw salary numbers rarely answer the questions people actually have. For example: Is a $120k salary in one state actually

... couldnt download a video in hd quality. then as a dev, when something doesnt work, you think "let's build it." so i got the same thought. i started researching idea validation and found like 0.2% of websites actually worked fine, but they were full of shitty ads. i thought this is the perfect market , we should go all in. and when i checked their traffic i got shocked , cause they werent getting one or two million, they were getting ... ... tens of millions. after some weeks of confusing "thinking" with actual

... just maximizing launch day numbers. for me the minimum would be a stable core product, a clear landing page and a handful of real users who have actually tried it. I am curious though how much traction do you think is really necessary before launching? could waiting for strong social proof actually

... that scoping is probably the honest answer for where a destination check works today. what I keep getting stuck on is the other half: for the high blast radius, mission critical case, the one where checking actually matters most, what are teams actually

... Been building almost entirely with AI-assisted tools, and the thing I've found matters most isn't how fast the AI generates code, it's having a real, repeatable way to verify what it actually did before trusting it's correct. A recent example: I had a security researcher report what looked like a real vulnerability. Turned out the AI-assisted fix from weeks earlier had shipped correctly, but the researcher's finding conflated two different things, the anon ... ... being visible client-side (expected, normal) versus

... this works," and that gap is where the real risk hides. Not because the code is wrong, most of the time it isn't, but because the next time something breaks nearby, you're debugging code you never actually read closely the first time. during the BC (before ChatGPT) era, this gap barely existed. You wrote it, so you understood it, mostly by necessity. Now understanding is a separate step you have to choose to take, not something that comes ... ... free with writing the code yourself. One habit that closes that gap fast: before merging anything non-trivial, ask the agent to explain its own implementation back to you, line by line, in plain language. Not as a formality, actually

... Genuinely curious how people here actually think about their own data security not in theory, but in practice. Do you feel confident it's actually

... Since our last launch we've been heads-down on one thing: making "this integration works" actually mean something. Here's what changed, and why we're more confident than a month ago. What we shipped? Five integrations now recognize the bugs people actually

... need to launch too? Taking a product from founder to many users is a challenge but I think the number of users does not necessarily validate the product. I see validation as reviews and how many feedbacks you actually receive from any user. Obviously as your user base grows then you will be able completely validate your product. In the meantime if it works for you and the few users, your product works! That's what counts. No business idea ... ... quantity, always for me. UXers and developers are trained to spot friction and name it, which is why their feedback reads sharper. However, that's also the limit: they're pattern-matching against general UX conventions, not against the actual

... apparently didn't search, with zero indication anything had been missed. It wasn't even a hard case, the file just wasn't in the directory it happened to grep first. What was your moment? And did it actually change your workflow afterward, or did the trust creep back in after a week like it always seems to for me? Comment from Maya Boothman(@maya_boothman): Mine was when it confidently referenced a file that didn t exist ... ... replies and the comment wasn't there at all, just a stray fragment where the real text should've been. Silent failure, no error thrown, nothing that would've caught my attention if I hadn't gone back and actually

... fourteenth time this week. A motivational quote about hustle printed over a sunset. Three humblebrags disguised as life lessons. One "I'm grateful and blessed" announcement with 4,000 likes. And somewhere, buried under all of it, maybe one actually useful post. This is the daily reality of LinkedIn for most programmers. They tolerate it because they feel they have to. They hate it because, honestly, it deserves to be hated. Here is exactly why. The Spam Never Stops ... ... developer" in your headline, the messages start. About 35% of LinkedIn connection requests are followed by aggressive sales messages, according to research from email management company Superhuman. That means one in three people trying to "connect" with you are actually

... product was this - R1 - recruiter1.io - ended on #238 - 12 upvotes. Now the good part - all these are FAKE - none of these people created any account or actually tested anything - all is FAKE - i do not know these people - Taha The end-to-end encryption angle is genuinely thoughtful, especially for a recruiting tool where privacy usually takes a back seat to features. Mark as readReplyAward View Upvote 5h ago Unread Cansu the no-login share flow is genuinely smooth, felt ... ... sending a link and not signing my life away Mark as readReplyAward View Upvote 7h ago Unread Devran T ktas Tried it out and the single-link sharing feels really clean, no logins or weird redirects. Curious how the crypto actually

... stages, sectors and geographies Investment theses, portfolios, recent investments and latest fundraises Individual investor backgrounds, focus areas, career histories and past investments Verified emails where available Sources for the underlying research Non-investment staff separated from the people who actually make investment decisions But the goal was never to build another giant directory or give founders a CSV and wish them luck. You add your company, and Causo works out which funds actually

... already get pulled into AI search now do more heavy lifting than a pile of plain links ever did. High DA links still matter for ranking in Google's top 10. But they won't do what most teams actually want in 2026, which is showing up inside AI Overviews, ChatGPT answers, and Perplexity citations . What still works: Relevance over volume. A link from a site in your niche that drives real traffic beats dozens of low-quality links. Earn ... ... category queries. Original data and digital PR. Surveys, benchmarks, and proprietary research earn the kind of editorial links that Google values and AI systems trust. What no longer works: Chasing DA alone. A relevant link from a site your actual

... that let any logged in user read rows that aren't theirs. None of that throws an error. It just sits there until someone finds it. For the non-engineers building real products with this stuff, what does your actual security check look like before you launch. Are you running anything to scan for this, paying someone to review it once, asking the AI itself to audit its own code, or just shipping and hoping nothing bad happens. Curious ... ... there is an actual

... through rates have fallen 61% when an AI Overview is present. The kicker: according to Semrush data, 93% of searches conducted in Google's AI Mode end without a single click to any external website. Ninety-three percent. What Actually Happened Here is the short version of why this happened. Google introduced AI Overviews in 2024 and AI Mode in 2025. Both formats answer questions directly inside the search results page. The user asks something, gets a synthesised answer ... ... Google still largely shows traditional results. AI search is mostly eating informational traffic, not purchase-intent traffic. Second, the traffic that AI does send is higher quality. ChatGPT-referred visitors spend an average of 15 minutes on a website versus

... median points needed to break the top 5 and top 10 on each day. Check the full report here: https://app.databox.com/shared/a... The short version: Saturday is the easiest day. Only 266 median points to crack top 5, vs 360 on Wednesday. That's a 35% harder climb on the worst day vs

... same time and kept missing things that mattered because everything competed for my attention equally. That's the story I lead with when I talk about FounderFlow, not the "AI agent" framing. The version of the pitch that actually gets replies is "what's the thing currently slipping through the cracks when you're juggling more than one business?" people answer that; they don't answer "check out my AI chief of staff." Comment from Stacy Wycoff(@stacywycof83995): Suzy ... ... promote the problem, not the product" is exactly what shifted things for me too. Every time I tried to talk about FounderFlow's features (confidence grading, cross-business monitoring, etc.) it fell flat. The posts that actually

... format. Candidate B had a simple resume. Nothing fancy. But alongside it, there was a profile. Not a beautifully designed personal website. Just real work, laid out clearly. Projects that could be clicked and tried. Problems that were actually solved, with the reasoning behind them. Code that could be reviewed. An article that had been published. A small tool with real users. The recruiter spent less than a minute on Candidate A's resume. She spent nearly twenty minutes ... ... Candidate B's profile. What Actually