Hi all. Yesterday I shared a link to my project, https://adhdhelp.app, here on Hacker News. I have ADHD and developed the app to help individuals like me manage everyday symptoms.
The post created a lot of heat on two fronts. First, some did not like the fact that I offer a premium level. It's 5$ a month, and the majority of the necessary tools are still free, even without an account. I know of no one in this niche asking less than this, but the backlash was horrible nonetheless.
The larger backlash was the AI artwork in my blog. Each picture was cleared with the writer of the article, but several commenters stated I should have hired a freelancer instead. The project is funded independently; paying for art per post would draw my budget quickly dry, and I intend to release a great deal.
Several individuals also assumed that if pictures are AI-created, then the therapeutic techniques must be AI-created as well. They're not. I accumulated them over months, cross-checked the research, and added a page on the website that cites the science that supports each technique.
So I'm posing the question to the community: are AI images really such a game changer? Do they render useless the value of a tool that already helps users? I'd love to know where your line is and how indy builders like me can meet expectations without sinking the ship.
pvg•7mo ago
Once an HN post gets a substantial discussion, immediate followups generally count as dupes - after all, these topics just had a big discussion. This is mentioned in the FAQ - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html (search for 'reposts')
ahazred8ta•7mo ago
Try making the pictures a smaller thumbnail, and redo the ones that have obvious non-real elements in the picture.
People by now are pretty used to recognizing AI-slop pictures and relying on that as an indicator that the rest of the content is low quality slop as well. You are marketing to an audience that DOES judge a book by its cover. Get local feedback on removing anything that other people think is AI generated.
digitalions•7mo ago
The post created a lot of heat on two fronts. First, some did not like the fact that I offer a premium level. It's 5$ a month, and the majority of the necessary tools are still free, even without an account. I know of no one in this niche asking less than this, but the backlash was horrible nonetheless.
The larger backlash was the AI artwork in my blog. Each picture was cleared with the writer of the article, but several commenters stated I should have hired a freelancer instead. The project is funded independently; paying for art per post would draw my budget quickly dry, and I intend to release a great deal.
Several individuals also assumed that if pictures are AI-created, then the therapeutic techniques must be AI-created as well. They're not. I accumulated them over months, cross-checked the research, and added a page on the website that cites the science that supports each technique.
So I'm posing the question to the community: are AI images really such a game changer? Do they render useless the value of a tool that already helps users? I'd love to know where your line is and how indy builders like me can meet expectations without sinking the ship.
pvg•7mo ago
ahazred8ta•7mo ago
People by now are pretty used to recognizing AI-slop pictures and relying on that as an indicator that the rest of the content is low quality slop as well. You are marketing to an audience that DOES judge a book by its cover. Get local feedback on removing anything that other people think is AI generated.
https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=adhdhelp.app