I propose a third way to build something useful:

Have a problem --> Solve it for yourself --> open source the solution

Customers don't know what they want. Even if they do, they will struggle to communicate it to you effectively. And you will struggle to solve a problem that you, yourself do not have.

Instead, build something you want.

Who cares if anyone else uses it? You solved a problem you had. You are the customer and that is enough of a reason to build something useful.

I think fast n agile iterations are the key. Don’t let perfection be the enemy of the good. I would suggest build something, test it out with potential customers, gather feedback, build prototype version 2.0, rinse and repeat the process. The key is to balance (1) and (2).

Fire bullets before you fire cannonballs.

Check out this book for the fuller description of what I just said. Sensei learnt it from this book:

Good luck n have fun

"A lot of bitcoiners seem to have the first mindset. Perhaps this has been built into the Bitcoin community from the beginning."

I actually wish the Bitcoin community adopted this mindset more. Maybe it's a knee-jerk reaction to FTX and those type of characters, but there's this weird culture of, "selfishness is good and philanthropy is objectively bad," among maximalists. Like you said, I don't get that sense from Satoshi and I definitely don't get it from the old-school Austrian economists.

When you look at the heroes that any history book celebrates, you always find a good percentage of non-problem solvers. Isaac Newton didn't have a patron for calculus. Fredrick Douglas was a free man when he wrote about slavery. Despite what it says in The Bitcoin Standard, Bach* actually never made any hard money (or even soft money!) from Brandenburg Concertos. He had an idea, built a product, and his intended audience did not pay him (hire him for paid work in the case of the Brandenburgs). Nevertheless, they have provided massive value to subsequent generations.

All this to say, while I think the latter attitude probably leads to an easier life, there's so much value in the former and I think there is a certain type of person that is just wired to operate that way. Let's not throw out the Nicolai Teslas with the Sam-Bankman Fried water.

*As an aside, another thing that book really gets wrong about Bach was his sense of being misunderstood as an artist. He's actually the king of the "long diatribes" that Ammous equates with modern artists, spilling TONS of ink to justify his music to people that thought it was too esoteric and pretentious.

Spot on. If the problem is big & bad enough, the research and effort you put into ideation should not be boring, but instead fulfilling work.

I’ve spent countless hours building and experimenting, then wishing to start over. That was the motivation behind my SN post Building Better Products.

You likely only need 2-3 weeks of research (without code) to determine if the problem is the right one and if the solution you envisaged is up to scratch. Any longer and your product is too big and needs to be made smaller. A Mini-MVP if you like.

Marketing can likely wait until your MVP has been validated and has at least some level of traction. The last thing you want is a) explosive growth when the product is not ready or b) the wrong product that no one uses and for which there is no demand.

I believe we project our reality into existence. It is only the mind. So... What we put energy into, we will inevitably receive back from. As long as the intentions are clear, and we are committed. I am working on a few things where I am waiting, building, having faith in myself. Because from the outsider perspective, it all seems pretty strange. As a bitcoiner I see opportunity where others miss it. Have faith. If you build it, they WILL come. 🙏💚🌄

I think that's where MVPs come in: you don't have to only build or only do customer research. MVPs feel like the solution: build just enough so you can have effective research into the problems of your potential customers (and your own capabilities like Satoshi mentioned).

I think if you're building a protocol, this mindset of "if you build it, they will come" applies more. Protocols are meant for others to come and build something on top of it. Your "customers" aren't end-users.

But if you build a product, service or however you want to call it, it's different.

I agree

Find a niche (pain), market research (build community), build MVP - minimum viable product. Or other way around: build a landing page add a payment and see the response if people are willing to pay for it. Then explain them it's an idea and collect their feedback and then build community, MVP and product.

That's how I've build https://lntictactoe.com See #451880

Isn't this a quote by the unforgotten great Al Bundy???

Keep creating!

I understand the duality. On the one hand, you need to have a product to show the customer. In situation 2, you don't have a product to show the customer. Conducting market research before developing a product is crucial, but sometimes these studies don't tell you much about new and innovative products. I believe that we should have something to show the customer, and if there is interest, then we can continue with the development. I'm not an expert in this matter, but it's what I see my boss do, and he's relatively successful.

user when they test new apps/web they always find these;

user wants ✔ profitable ✔ fun and engaging ✔

1 > 2

Have a problem....solve it ....help others to solve it ....v4v

Keep thinking keep building