How to Build an MVP in the AI Coding Era transcript

I think for better or for worse, the consistent problem has always been how do you help your customers be more successful? If you would ask me 5 years ago, "Oh, the price of building features has decreased. That's obviously good." I think I would have probably said yes. And I think that like the TLDR of this video is like unclear. This is Dalton plus Michael, and today we're going to talk about how to build an MVP in the age of AI.

This is an interesting topic cuz I actually think we have to disagree with our former advice or there's a different set of constraints now. It used to be the case you had to figure out what's the smallest set of features to build that would create value because building features was costly. We're now in maybe a different situation. It What environment are we in now? >> I think that's completely right. I think much has been said of how to build an MVP and get first customers.

And there's you know, we've talked about it, there's great content out there. But I think that advice needs updating to AI tools. And I could speak to this myself a little bit because I recently built a product and and launched it. You know, it's called Standard EDB if people want to check it out, but we won't we won't talk about the specifics, but guys, I've gone I've gone through this. I just built and launched a product.

And so let me start with what's different. Number one, it is so much easier to build features that for me to launch that, I had to delete 80% of the features that I built in the MVP. >> That's That That is not an old problem. That is a very new problem. >> I built this crazy huge thing with my co-founder Brian in 2 weeks. And I'm like, "Oh, this is bad. This is This is like a bunch of crap." And so I had to I had to >> Huh. >> Yeah. >> And that feels very different to me than just trying to build a product like the difficulty of building something prevented you from from getting into that feature creep. >> Yeah.

Or that feature creep would take months. >> Yes. >> Whereas you're basically you got feature creep in two weeks. >> creep in two weeks. And so you see people just by coding just crap. >> Yes. >> And it's because it's so easy to just keep adding and adding and adding. >> Yes. >> And so I think that you also have to be more of an editor than you did in the past. >> That's a big one. >> Right? >> I might argue it also makes it far more challenging when you're building a product for someone else.

Cuz when you're building a product for yourself, at minimum you can use it throughout the MVP process and see if you're getting value. When you're building a product for someone else and you can build infinite features, your brain can be like, "Well, they would want this feature. They would want that feature. They would want Why would I want to go to them with something that doesn't have all the features they're going to want? >> Right?

Why don't I give them all the features they want right in the beginning? >> Well, and it's addicting >> Yeah. >> to write the feature. >> It's fun to like tell Codex. >> And so I think what I'm arguing is >> It's more tempting now than ever >> Yes. >> to not talk to users >> Yes. >> and to not launch with something small. >> I want to extend that. And when you talk to users and they gave you the laundry list of features, in the past you knew you couldn't build all that.

So early smart people did. And so your instinct would be, "Let me try to dig deeper. Let me try to figure out what they really need. What's really going on?" Now in the hand you have all the features like, "Hey, can you describe those in more detail?" >> we can literally just give those to >> Yeah, let me make an extreme point. >> You can take >> notes with granola of you're talking to a user and feed them to Codex and Codex will build every feature the user asked for. >> Yes. >> And I'm saying that's really bad. >> Yeah. >> Like don't do it. >> That's the counterintuitive bit is it's always been a theory of old to build every feature a user wants, but now it's an exponential theory of old because you can.

Like you actually could do that. And that's really, really, really bad. Unfortunately, I think as a result, knowing yourself about the problem is way more important now. Because like, if you don't know about the problem and users are telling you features and they're excited, and you don't know what the hell's going on, you can get yourself in a like you you you basically have created a tar pit. Like like you like where one never maybe have existed.

You you you are the tar pit. >> And again, I'm saying I experience like I I feel this viscerally where it's so easy to crank stuff out. And so, I think the advice here founders is you have to try harder than ever to resist the temptation of building super complex broad surface area products. And of course you should add more features to it, but it should be because users are pulling you towards building more stuff, I think, and not because Codex could crank it out. >> Well, let's talk about that users bit.

So, okay, it's easier to build products. I was about to say I can't believe I'm saying this, but of course I can believe I'm saying this. Spamming is easier, too. Spamming always gets easier. Like that's the history. So, let's talk about that. >> You know, the old advice is have 100 people that love your product. The old advice is talk to as many users as possible. Again, it's all true. We're not saying that's wrong.

Here's the problem. It's easier than ever to have your claw spam people or you to go buy a bunch of leads online and spam people. And so a lot of founders, their version of talking to users >> It's perverted. >> It's just it's to like spam. And it's easy and the numbers are big. And again, so here's the counterintuitive thing. Don't do it. That is noise. >> Yes. >> And a smaller number of high-quality conversations where you really listen >> Yeah. >> is much better than spamming a thousand people. >> If we want to go one step deeper, right?

If startups were as simple as talk to users, build what they want, so many more startups be successful. Fundamentally, you have to assume that most of your users want their business or their project to be successful and they don't exactly know how. So, some fundamental part of what you're doing is 10x harder because you're trying to figure out how to help your customer's business do better and your customer doesn't have that playbook perfectly.

By talking to a smaller number of customers more intimately, it massively increases the chances that you can actually make an impact in their business. And then that spins a flywheel that's not spam, it's word of mouth. >> Again, let me give you my real example for what I did with Standard DB. >> Yes. >> We built a bunch of stuff and then I set up 12 Zoom calls >> Yes. >> with founders that I knew that I that are in the that could be users of it. >> Yes. >> My co-founder founder and I joined and I we just asked them and a lot of people didn't really understand what it was >> Yeah. >> because it was too complicated. >> Yeah. >> And my I tried to explain what it was and they're like, "Oh, I don't know." And so we when we stripped out 80% of the functionality >> Yeah. >> they were like, "Yeah, I'm I'm signing up right now." Like someone signed up on the call. >> There you go. >> And that's counterintuitive.

Less features, more usage. >> Isn't that weird? It's because they didn't they were like overwhelmed >> Yeah. >> by too much complexity. >> Yes. >> And my vision I had this expansive vision of what it could be, but man, like users don't care about that. They just want to know how to solve their short-term problems. >> No. >> Right? >> No. I think for better or for worse the consistent problem has always been how do you help your customers be more successful?

And if you had asked me five years ago, "Oh, the price of building features has decreased. That's obviously good." I think I would have probably said yes. And I think that like the TLDR of this video is like unclear. >> I was Look, I think about this a lot. So, I I was tweeting about this a little bit. So, I don't know if you saw it. I'll tell you about it. Think about how hard it was to get a record made in the '60s. >> Mhm. >> You needed a label deal, you had to pay for studio time, you needed instrument you know, it's like super expensive.

How many people created a radio quality record in the '60s? Thousands? >> Mhm. >> Now, you buy a Mac. >> Yeah. >> And it comes with GarageBand. >> Yes. >> And a lot of number one hits, you can research this, were made in GarageBand. >> Yes. >> So, you're using the same tools >> Yes. >> that the greatest people in the world are using. Yes. Now, how much more demand is there for music than there was in the '60s? >> Mhm. >> It's flat. >> Mhm. >> Like, how many hours a day can people listen to music? >> People are not living more than 24 hours a day. >> And how many people wake up every day being like, man, I really want to hear some songs written by, you know, some guy in Illinois >> that no one's ever heard of. >> that no one's ever heard of.

Gee, I really Like Like, no one wants that. And so, this is my metaphor for a lot of the Vibe Coding stuff, which is in the right hands, it's awesome. >> Yes. >> Is a thing to do for fun. I love making songs in GarageBand. I'm not going to release that. Sorry, folks. But like, it's fun to make music. >> Yes. >> But I am under no uh delusions that like the crap that I make in GarageBand >> Yeah. >> is going to be a number one hit. >> It's going to put you on tour. >> I don't think so.

Oh, there's no demand for it. And no, I don't have the talent. >> Exactly. >> And so, my theory is the democratization of these tools is awesome and it's going to allow more young people to be discovered >> and to like >> Yes. >> break into the industry. Hooray. >> Yes. >> But the total um >> winners >> number of winners is not obviously going to go up. >> No. >> Right, man? >> Well, and what's funny about this is that when you're building tools for yourself, um you know, I would argue that like an employee inside of a company is now so much more empowered with these tools when they have a clear job to do and they know how to do it.

And now it's like they don't have to tax the company's resources, they probably get a much higher multiplier effect than the startup. >> It's true. I mean, it's the it's like think about how many people are employed um making videos for like internal training purposes or for whatever versus people that are making Hollywood blockbusters. You know, like or how many directors are in the world? >> Yes. >> And so probably there's lots and lots of people who use these tools to get their job done that might not be creating the next Facebook. >> Exactly.

Exactly. So, TLDR, building an MVP, E, and the I were all different. Features, I've always thought features are bad, but now features are cheap. Oof, scary. >> You just have to be picky and like maybe one more thing is a lot of our advice was always to build in public into publish a lot about what you're doing. >> Mhm. >> And the problem is the claws make it so easy >> Yeah. >> to create crap on LinkedIn and X about what you're building and it's all the same. >> Yes. >> Versus if you take the time to write really unique stuff, you can build a following.

And so I I again, I see a lot of founders just putting out slop versus like Arko, he writes about file systems all the time. 100 guys constantly. And he's building a following cuz it's super idiosyncratic writing about file systems. >> Yes. >> Ironically also, the best content to learn about what the labs are working on is the Twitter accounts of people that work at the labs and they are definitely not writing all that stuff.

Do you get what I'm saying? Like they're leaking alpha. >> Exactly. It's a weird game. It's basically like it's become easier for a startup to basically look like it's going through a positive feedback loop when it's actually secretly going through a negative feedback loop. >> Yeah. >> Spam bunch of customers, get their usage, they don't like the product, they all churn out, keep doing it, da da da da. But that's an advantage in a weird way.

Like if more of your competition's doing that and you're not, you can figure out how to use these tools in the measured way to actually create value for people, there is tons of advantage to pick up right now. Tons of advantage. >> And it's almost like the people that are the best at editing or creating white space >> Yeah. >> and focusing >> Yes. >> I think are like really well positioned when everyone else is doing the opposite.

Like that's a way to stand out from the crowd. >> Yes. >> Right? >> We have two features that work. That actually make your business better. Or make your life better. Yes. >> As opposed to 150 that you might be confused initially. Obviously the thing with 150 features is better. Then when you start using it, you're like, no, thank you. >> You got it. >> All right. >> Cheers, Alton. >> All right, thanks.