Connect with the Product Hunt community

I keep telling myself, Tomorrow I ll finally get uninterrupted focus time.

Tomorrow arrives

and it s another day of PRs, bugs, meetings, helping teammates, and context switching.

Is this just me, or is this the default experience for most software engineers?

Recently, I came across a discussion where someone asked whether to skip the internship and build the product with AI instead.

I see the same trend on X. Some founders are just 14, 15, or 16 years old already building tools, and some are even raising funding. AI has completely changed what's possible.

A big part of my week is spent talking to early-stage founders about how they handle login, access, and identity, and there is a pattern I keep noticing that I want to understand better.

Almost everyone puts auth off at the start, which honestly makes sense when you are still trying to prove the product matters at all.

I've been working on ReadymadeUI for the past 3 years. It has organic traffic, an established developer audience, and premium templates.

Lately I haven't had enough time to maintain it, so I'm thinking about selling it to someone who can keep growing it.

If you've been through this before, where did you find buyers? Any advice would be really helpful.

Any coding agent gives you a working version of a feature in minutes. Ask again and you get another one, also working, slightly different. Working stopped being the filter.

My rule is simple: I ship the version with the fewest moving parts, because I'm the one debugging it at 2am. Speed of writing means nothing against speed of fixing.

What's your filter? Curious if anyone has a better rule than simplest one wins

OpenAI just dropped GPT-5.6, their largest model yet, and we're teaming up with them to get it into makers' hands.

Here's the deal:
- Build something with Sol, Terra, or Luna
- Schedule your launch on Product Hunt for July 23

- The top products walk away with $10k in OpenAI credits

If you've been following along and would like to support us we would appreciate a star of GitHub: https://github.com/ota-run/ota

A repo can look fine until it is run in a different environment. Native setup, Docker, CI, and remote execution often carry different assumptions, and most teams only discover the mismatch when something breaks.

Ota makes those execution paths explicit so a repo can declare how it should be prepared, verified, and run in each environment.

Where does drift cost your team the most today: local setup, CI, containers, or remote environments?

Woke up tired like I'd worked a full shift. Same bug, looping, my brain solving it ten slightly different wrong ways until morning. Git log empty. Nothing real happened.

Part of me took it as proof I care about what I'm building. The other part knows a brain that won't clock out isn't a flex, it's a leak.

Do you get this one? And if you do, what actually makes it stop?

I'm not going to talk about the "longevity" trend.

I'm talking about simple, practical hints that can make your life and work a little better.

The one where all your mailboxes finally stop pretending they don't know each other. Connect five accounts, get one tidy stream of mail sorted by date. Revolutionary concept: everything in one place.

New

• "All inboxes" view pick All inboxes in the account switcher and every connected mailbox pours into a single, date-sorted list of messages and threads. No more clicking between accounts like it's 2009.

• From picker in compose replying or writing fresh from the unified view? Skim now lets you choose which account it goes out from, so your work self doesn't accidentally email your mom's book club.

Wanted to share some data before our own launch, since this took a while to pull together and might save someone else a bad launch day pick.

We pulled every featured product across all 7 days of the week and looked at the median points needed to break the top 5 and top 10 on each day.

hey guys,

today we shipped Founder Leaderboards on ExploreYC: ~3,000 YC founders (and growing), deduped across every company they've started, ranked four ways:

Yesterday, you contributed a lot to my discussion about not sounding too salesy.

But that's not the only problem the early founders have.

Sendr is officially a Semi-Finalist in Pepperdine Graziadio's Most Fundable Companies 2026 one step closer to the Finals.

Building the better way to move money home. More soon.

There are a lot of products being hunted, launched, and competing for attention here.

But I still see some makers missing the very basics.

For me, it's usually Downloads.

Thousands of screenshots, random PDFs, ZIP files, invoices, images, and files named things like:

final_v2_FINAL_really_final.pdf

"Talk to users" is probably one of the most repeated pieces of startup advice.

And for good reason.

Mine is from a sales call last year. Someone told me they'd "figure out budget later" and I just moved on. Should have asked who actually signs off. Found out six weeks later it was never going to happen.

Curious what everyone else's is. We're using these to work out what Ruby should be catching.

I don t want to rant here (but I probably will a bit)...

Almost every ad visual, but also a lot of organic content on social media, is very generic and created by AI (I get it, it s a cheaper and more scalable way of promoting). But when everyone does it, it becomes really hard to stand out and differentiate yourself.

No judgment, genuinely curious. How many of us asked ChatGPT for app ideas at some point, then ended up building one of them, or half-building it? The line between "my idea" and "the model's idea" got blurry this year. Where did your current project actually come from?

I think AdSense rejection emails are one of the least helpful feedback in the tech field. They simply state, "Insufficient content." "Policy violation." They don't even specify the exact page, section, or rule.

When I spoke with bloggers who had this experience, I found the pattern was almost always the same. They guessed the reason, finished writing the post, waited two weeks, and still got rejected again. Some people even gave up after trying three or four times.

Has anyone here had a similar experience?

Did you actually figure out the reason for the rejection?

AI coding assistants have become part of my daily workflow, especially for repetitive tasks, documentation, and quick prototypes.

At the same time, I've found myself spending more time reviewing generated code than I expected, particularly around security, scalability, and edge cases.

For me, AI has become an accelerator, not a replacement for engineering judgment.

I'm curious how others are using these tools today.

When we first built Murror, we stored every journal entry forever. More data meant better emotional pattern detection, smarter insights, richer reflections.

Our AI kept getting better. Our users kept getting quieter.

Yesterday we recapped our past 3 months, and I would like to continue in accountability.

Whether you have personal goals or business/career goals, write them down in the comments and after a quarter, we will revisit what we have done. (And what we will push into Q4.) :D

What would make you trust an Android keyboard that claims to encrypt your typing before it reaches the chat app? I m testing a different UX: encryption at the keyboard layer, before plaintext reaches the chat app.

The difficult problem is not adding an Encrypt button. It is trust. A keyboard can see sensitive input, so enabling a third-party keyboard should require unusually strong evidence.

If you were evaluating this idea, which signal would matter first?

A. A two-device demo: type encrypt send open offline