by akharris on 7/12/21, 4:44 PM with 78 comments
by rpastuszak on 7/12/21, 5:23 PM
For instance, I launched a bunch of games that are, frankly, more fun to watch, than to play (e.g. an All-hands meeting simulator: https://rafsters.itch.io/all-hands) or little tools this one https://sonnet.io/posts/reactive-hole/ (it's stupid, completely replaceable, but somewhat adorable).
I come from a family with 4 generations of carpenters. It's a profession more similar to software engineering that most engineering jobs I can think of. The main difference is that in our domain so often the results of our work just don't feel real.
If you're in this situation and this frustrates you, either build something small that people would use OR go ahead build something useless, but intentionally.
by MrLeap on 7/12/21, 6:54 PM
Like, I just added printer support.. https://twitter.com/LeapJosh/status/1413803026062745600
But for the sake of the trees I'm making it grueling https://twitter.com/LeapJosh/status/1414411610844803072 https://twitter.com/LeapJosh/status/1414678420177440769
Does anyone even own a printer these days? Who knows? Don't care! The feature's true purpose is to try and draw out a smile, and from there maybe a look. The fact it actually works is a nice side effect.
by svilen_dobrev on 7/12/21, 6:09 PM
it's a blessing that some (physical or not at all) toys still exist without being monetized.. although the trends with everything-being-appz might kill that some day
maybe OT, but some 10+y ago, i passed through few continents and cultures within 3-4 months, and while looking for toys for the kids to bring home from that journey, in plenty of places, i realized something.. the culture/society is somehow representable by what toys it makes for it's kids. Somewhat like the cultural dimensions thing, but in different aspects.. Like shallow vs deep, curiousness vs just-grinding, beautiful vs ugly, well crafted vs cheaply, etc. And funny, Rich/expensive as $$$ doesnot always correspond to richness of toy-experience/perception. Of course it's rather subjective, YMMV
by azhenley on 7/12/21, 6:54 PM
Blog post: https://web.eecs.utk.edu/~azh/blog/makinguselessstuff.html
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27256867
Reddit discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/njcpxt/why_i_p...
by mattpratt on 7/12/21, 6:09 PM
While Aaron's essay approaches the analogy from the perspective of those building, the linked essay approaches it from the market's perspective. For builders, don't take yourself so seriously -- but on the flip side, don't be so quick to write new things off as silly.
by dimatura on 7/12/21, 8:21 PM
by svilen_dobrev on 7/12/21, 6:16 PM
Maybe the problem is that what is called/accepted as "serious" is the opposite of it? A toy for shapeing a mind (of kids) may be looooots more serious/important that some $$$$$ made per-day.. kind-a the 4th planet the little prince visited..
by slmjkdbtl on 7/12/21, 9:53 PM
by wanderingmind on 7/13/21, 5:22 AM
by sircastor on 7/13/21, 5:15 AM
I came across an article[1] recently that suggests that everything we do doesn’t have to turn into a business. I get why people want that, but my anxiety dropped a bit when I decided to just build the thing I wanted to.
[1] https://repeller.com/trap-of-turning-hobbies-into-hustles/
by jgerrish on 7/12/21, 7:42 PM
I'm happy developers have the ability to build and work on things they love. And create something fun.
But, at the same time, endless warnings about the seriousness of toys becoming monster businesses would be more believable if aborting companies and anti-trust wasn't still a shitshow a century after the big trusts.
This isn't the author's fault, but mixing "Let's have a conversation on Big Tech." with warnings about havoc seems disingenuous at best.
We understand that organizations are these complex things that take over everything and shit everywhere. And at the same time build things that make you smile and facilitate community.
We don't as citizens have all the tools to manage that without drama.
by defnmacro on 7/13/21, 3:23 PM
I guess the one thing I've realized is the problem with this is the one more feature trap. Sometimes those people who like your toy will never pay for it, which may be fine depending on your goals, but the issue is there just as relentlessly demanding as paying customers. It's demoralizing to have a side-hobby project which you don't want to monetize but still has all the demands from "adopters/customers" that a paid solution would. It just destroys your passion for that project because it ultimately it just becomes work.
Really charging for a product is great and I think hacker culture seems to dismiss it because its not in the ethos but if there's anything in retrospect I think I've learned so far with my many failed side-projects is charging for them is the best way to have a great personal experience and best experience for who your building that product for. Mostly because it aligns incentives appropriately.
As much as I've enjoyed some of my passion projects I can't think of one I ended up "finishing" which I wouldn't get some monetary gain from. Because let's be honest whose passionate about setting up a Jenkins server, or implementing git checks, writing unit tests or creating onboarding documentation for cranky free or OS users? At a certain point a successful side-project/product requires you to do things you wont enjoy doing, and honestly some of those things may be the most important things you do for the "success" of that side-project/product.
I'd rather be spending that time with loved ones, enjoying the sun, which is ultimately far more rewarding than a few git stars or upvotes for ego. With that being said I think if you utilize this approach which is basically just freemium for B2B like projects it could be a powerful step towards finding your ideal customer and getting paid users, but it has to be just that a step towards acquiring paid users.
Just my 2c
by the_only_law on 7/12/21, 5:44 PM
90% of the side projects I embark in are likely to have no commercial value, but are pretty cool, at least I’d like to think.
by juliend2 on 7/12/21, 10:35 PM
by ineedasername on 7/13/21, 4:00 AM
I always thought Airbnb was an awful idea. I didn't pay attention to it for a long time, except to be surprised it was still around when I would see it mentioned. I'm sure the big hotel companies feel worse about that mentality than I do, though it's probably a good thing I'm not a venture capitalist.