... pricing is $19/month since there was a competitor who priced their service at $24 per month, and I wanted to make sure that mine would come across as cheaper and more friendly. I didn t even use a spreadsheet for that. No survey was conducted. In eight months of running my project, support eats up half an hour of my time every day and the hosting bills doubled twice

... same request come through twice in one week and was about to build it. Then I realized they both came through the same referral link and were likely friends and I would have built something for two people over a weekend. Now I wait until the third unrelated request comes through before I even fire up my editor. It has been a blessing in disguise because half of the requests that I would build now aren't even asked ... ... just go with your gut? Comment from Alex Goldwyn(@alex_goldwyn): I have no paying customers yet, so I cannot help with the revenue half. But the referral link catch is a mistake I have made twice

... solo founder. I make an LED light therapy mask, and I decided early that I wanted FDA 510(k) clearance rather than selling it as a generic beauty gadget. Most competitors under $400 don't have it, which tells you something about how painful the process is. Twelve months. Roughly $140K. One person. The single most expensive mistake I made was assuming a testing lab is a testing lab. I picked one based on price and turnaround. Their reports looked ... ... their accreditation actually covered the specific standards my submission needed. It didn't. The data was unusable, and I had to run the testing again somewhere else months gone, and a large chunk of that $140K was just paying twice

... right and is more useful than either, and the revised version went up this month, so it's worth twenty minutes before you write your Q4 plan. It's NBER working paper 35275, Demirer, Musolff and Yang - "Writing Code vs. Shipping Code." More than 500,000 GitHub developers, matched against their actual AI usage telemetry rather than a survey, in a matched event study design. The headline numbers are large and I have no interest in arguing with them. Cumulative ... ... precisely, for free. The finding that should matter most on this site. The paper also checks four major software marketplaces, and finds a sharp increase in the number of new apps and no increase in total usage. Read that twice

... Apple's own support pages. Apple In-App Purchase: 26%, or 15% if you're in the Small Business Program, the Mini Apps or Video Partner Programs, or on an auto-renewable subscription after the subscriber's first year. Alternative payment processing inside your app: 20%, or 10% for those same groups. Out-of-app offers with an actionable link: a 15% store services commission, or 10% for those groups, on anything bought within 7 days of the tap. Apps ... ... distributed outside the App Store entirely - an alternative

... never imply. The detail I enjoyed getting right: recording the subset rather than the file. I measured the last 20 lockfile revisions of axios, npm/cli and undici 57 in all. The files churn constantly; the install-script subset moved twice, and the same version was republished zero times. That zero is what lets the sharp case carry real weight instead of teaching you to skip the axis brew upgrade gfazioli/tap/octoscope What does your team actually do with a lockfile diff ... ... security tool trustworthy. Makes total sense that the write is unconditional otherwise you'd have to build a whole separate 'is this repo clean' system just to decide when to record. The trade-off you described (false positives vs

... with Claude Code. It worked fine. Three weeks later renders started failing at roughly 1 in 40, and it took three days to find, because the retry was firing against a stale job id. I had approved that diff twice without reading past the function signature. That isn't an AI problem. It's that approving generated code feels like reading it, and it isn't. When I write something badly I remember roughly where the bad part is. When ...

... break top 5. Thursday needs 235. That's a 70-point gap just from picking a different day. Weekends aren't just easier, they're way less crowded Tuesday averages 30.4 launches a day. Saturday averages 10.7. Fewer competitors, lower bar, most of the effect comes from volume, not some algorithm quirk. If you can't launch on a weekend, Friday is your best bet 205 median points for top 5, the lowest of any weekday and noticeably easier than ... ... Thursday. Tuesday's hidden trap Tuesday has more total launches than Monday (1,064 vs

... scientific computing) 52.6% Fable 5: 24.7% Opus 5: 29.0% Context window 1,000,000 tokens hold a whole codebase at once Max output 128,000 tokens a full build in one pass Prompt-cache reads up to 75% cheaper vs. standard input Agentic workloads up to 45% cheaper end to end Source: Anthropic, Fable 5.1 launch (September 1, 2026). Benchmark figures as reported by Anthropic. Translated for the three worlds above: a million-token window means it can hold ... ... runs mean a build like Winterholm dozens of iterations, tool calls, and self-corrections now costs a fraction of what the same run cost a version ago. The benchmark jump and the snow globe are the same story, told twice

... recall. It is that when I say something that goes against a decision I made before, it stops me, shows me the old one with the reason, and asks me what changed. It caught me twice this month. It is all just markdown files right now and very manual, I am testing the behaviour first before I build anything real. I am still not sure about 2 things. If people actually want to be confronted with their own old decisions ... ... much should happen automatically vs

... Virtual Assistants OpenHuman = Productivity + AI + Open Source Upstream = Productivity + AI + Email Coming in third was the Developer Tools category, which more than doubled its growth from the previous year and saw several very large launches: Kilo Code v7 for VS Code = Dev Tools + Open Source + Software Engineering Plurai = Dev Tools + AI + API  Drizz = Dev Tools + AI + No-Code Terminal Mode by Even Realities = Dev Tools + TK Open Wearables = Dev Tools + Open Source + Wearables Around this time last year, Microsoft ... ... folded GitHub into its CoreAI group. Fast forward to this year, and it s apparent that it s still a vital tool. Here were the five biggest GitHub launches: OpenHuman Kilo Code v7 for VS

... never arguments, never file contents. `SKILLDOCS_LISTENER=off` opts out. The same beacon carries a hash of your local skill file. If it differs from the doc's latest published version, your agent gets one short note, at most twice per version, then it stays quiet. Nothing ever writes a skill file for you. K palette Jump to a doc, run a command, enter focus mode, format the selection, or change the theme. All from K . h/t @Superhuman ... ... same suite still put two similarly unevidenced claims into two different negative categories. Green run, inconsistent verdict. So the beacon I would want is not pass or fail. It is whether the same input gets the same label twice

... into something this week that's been bugging me: gave a local model the exact same prompt, replayed it twice with nothing else different, and got a correct answer once and a wrong one the second time. Not a hard edge case either a pretty basic task it clearly CAN do, it just didn't do it reliably both times. Made me rethink something: a lot of what gets blamed on "the model isn't good enough" might actually ...

... same object. Every value you asked for sat at the top level next to field_bboxes, review_summary, image_size, so knowing which half was yours meant knowing a reserved list that grew every time I shipped something and twice it grew without me noticing, which is a bug I would rather not be able to write again. It also carried counters whose unit was never defined: needs_review: 2 never said whether it counted cells or reasons ... ... charged and retrying will not change it, so 502 now means my side and is still worth a retry. https://space-ocr.com/docs#errors A field can name the label printed next to it. When the same value appears twice

... stripe sends webhooks at-least-once. so what's the actual risk? one paid invoice, two deliveries, non-idempotent handler: you've just provisioned twice. you won't catch it in review because the code is correct on the first delivery. the bug only shows on the second. so how do you even reproduce it? I stopped reading and started running. took a real express and postgres billing app, replayed the scenario in a sandbox: same stripe webhook, delivered twice

... 18/20 Qwen3 8B: 19/20 Qwen3 14B: 19/20 The result that interested me most was the trade-off between model size and local responsiveness. In the tested setup, Qwen3 8B matched the 14B model on complete corrections while running approximately twice as fast. Qwen3 4B remained faster and still completed 18 of the 20 cases. This is not intended as a universal model ranking. The benchmark suggests that choosing a local writing model should not depend only on parameter count. Correction ...

... weeks ago my coding agent wrote a Stripe webhook handler. Signature check, event type check, fulfillment, clean 200. I approved it in 90 seconds because every line was correct. And it was, until Stripe delivered the same event twice. Which it's allowed to do. Then the handler credited the customer twice

... want to amplify your launch, focus on the period before, during, and after the launch. Before the launch, I would start with enough time in advance, around one month before, and I would personally post approximately (at least) twice a week. But I think that in general, if you want to be visible within the forums, twice

... insight, Monday morning, then please leave me alone. Numbers, not guilt. Which means when it's working, I don't open it. The Monday card shows up, I go "huh, $61 on delivery again," I close it. Twice a month I actually poke around inside. Every retention playbook says that's a problem. DAU is a metric I've decided not to care about, and I've spent a few uncomfortable weeks sitting with that instead of quietly designing streaks ...

... nobody could tell me why. Users could submit a check-in, but their score history never saved. No crash, no obvious error on screen, just silence where data should've been. I asked my AI tool to fix it twice. Twice

... honest map: what we test, what we don't (yet), what languages it works with, and where we're going. The failures we test for (the "it passed, then broke in prod" stuff): Double-processing the same webhook arrives twice; do you charge the customer twice

... read today on producthunt.com/kitty-points with the period switched to All time. Switch it, because the default view is last week and that is how people end up quoting the wrong number as their total. I did exactly that twice. 121 KP total. Forum Threads +58. Comments +48. Reviews +10. Maker +6. Eight forum threads produced that +58. Every comment I have ever written on this site produced +48. So a thread pays roughly 7 KP and a comment pays ... ... worth about eight comments. Here is the part I did not expect. Six of those eight threads got no replies at all. They still paid. Meanwhile a comment where a maker replied to me three times and upvoted twice

... nothing, the reviewer's normal experience becomes an empty screen, and empty screens train people to expect empty. Whether the one that is not empty gets read properly on day forty is an open question. It still beats the alternative, because a difference against a background of silence is about as salient as anything gets. And yes to the small pile. Most of what gets called judgement is work nobody has bothered to make mechanical yet. Comment from Aadil Ghani ... ... Comment from Aadil Ghani(@aadilghani): @jernej_jan_kocica   The request moving rather than the record is the sharper version, and it lands on me too. Our timeout hands back to the terminal with the plan intact, so runs twice

... nika): @abidhusain  I am curious when you will launch. Once you are ready, I will gladly upvote. :) Comment from Nika(@busmark_w_nika): @abidhusain  When you describe it like this, it sounds complex. Does it have any competitors at all? Comment from Nika(@busmark_w_nika): @abidhusain  What is your tool about? What does it do? :) And does it have your first initial testers? Comment from Nika(@busmark_w_nika): @buildtheweb1  Thank you so much ... ... nika): @dinocorreia  I was the very first user of my tool (because the problem happened to me) :) Comment from Nika(@busmark_w_nika): @dinocorreia  To be honest, for now, I was able to find only one competitor

... might come back for the community or the paid stuff later. A $17 e-book sale would earn less than that trust is worth. The resale rights part was the scarier decision. It felt like giving away the product twice. But the people who resell them link back, talk about the brand, and effectively distribute it for me. It's still early and I'm figuring plenty out. Curious how others here think about free vs