Hey all, first time founder here. I'm having trouble knowing when good enough is good enough.
It's SOO easy to let feature creep take over with AI now days. I've posted on Reddit a few times and I've gotten a few 100 signups and a few of them (~10%) even seem to be sticking. But I don't know whether this means "great, keep improving the product" or "that's good enough, start distributing more aggressively".

Some advice would be appreciated.

Cheers,

Working and being productive aren t the same thing.

We often sit in front of the laptop for hours, but between context switching, notifications, and tiny distractions.... we barely get real work done.

I'm super curious how everyone starts to vibe code? In the beginning I would simply jump into @bolt.new or @Cursor and just do a prompt and continue refining with the AI. I quickly realized this created a lot of issues as I didn't think about the structure, tech stack, and how I wanted the features to interact with each other and how the way I was building things would impact the user experience. I now do the following:

• Write down a simple problem statement: "what am I trying to solve?"

• Write down a simple solution statement: "what does the thing I'm building do (to solve the problem)"

• Share the above with @ChatGPT by OpenAI and word vomit my thoughts, ideas, how I want the user to interact with my app, etc and ASK ChatGPT to turn everything I said and want into an easy to understand directive and instructions for an Engineer.

• I then take the Engineer instructions and give it to a new chat in ChatGPT and ask it to turn those instructions into a prompt for an AI engineer and to break up the project into sections so that each time we focus on a section the app is shippable and keeps things easy to work on.

• I take the output and paste it into my notes. I then give it to Cursor.

• Once in Cursor, I create a new project folder and got at it!

Curious what everyone else does and if you've experience any things to avoid or must do

I've spent a lot of time thinking about the difference between testing a product and validating it.

When you're building software, there are so many things you can measure. Does the functionality work? Are the calculations correct? Can users complete the workflow? Are the security controls working as intended?

Those are important questions, and you can spend months getting them right.

But there's another question that technical testing can't fully answer: