

Ask HN: Solve a problem or build something cool? - coralreef

HN, like most of you, I want to be successful. My dream is to build something to the likes of Facebook, Instagram, or Snapchat. (I like consumer apps).<p>However, I&#x27;ve done a lot of reading on the origins of these products. In the early stages of these products, you really couldn&#x27;t tell if there was a $b future or not. I&#x27;m sure the founders had some idea of the problem they were trying to solve, but I doubt any of them validated their ideas outside of a small circle of friends. In short, I don&#x27;t think they really knew the problem they were solving. They just built it because it seemed cool. Defining and explaining &quot;the problem&quot; is always easier in hindsight.<p>However, I know that there are thousands of programmers and entrepreneurs who built cool stuff, but whose products failed and never gained any traction.<p>Thus, on the path to success I am lost. It feels like building something cool and solving a problem are two lines, where the intersection is your brilliant product.<p>If I want to fulfill my dream of having an app with 100m users, what should I do?
======
lutusp
> If I want to fulfill my dream of having an app with 100m users, what should
> I do?

If one of your readers knew that, why would he tell you? Why wouldn't he
instead fulfill his own dream?

> However, I know that there are thousands of programmers and entrepreneurs
> who built cool stuff, but whose products failed and never gained any
> traction.

Yes, and the difference between those stories and that of Bill Gates and Mark
Zuckerberg is ... to a large extent chance.

Well, chance and persistence. Successful people try hundreds or thousands of
things until one of them works.

“We now know a thousand ways not to build a light bulb” -- Thomas Alva Edison

------
shawnreilly
My advice would be to focus on the customer and validate. There are so many
variables when it comes to big name success stories. It could almost be
considered a waste of time to break it down into a success formula, there are
just too many variables. The only constant is the fact that they gained
traction, which means that customers wanted the product they built. So in this
sense, understanding the customer (or potential customer) is one of the most
important aspects of success. It is also one of the hardest things to
understand/master because in many cases, even the customer does not know what
they want. This is why you end up with scenarios where it appears a big
success was found "by accident" or "unknowingly"

------
dvt
You should stop making posts about it on HN and start writing code :) I'm
being serious. Go!

There is no mystery, no magic sauce, no secret recipe. When your product (or
idea) inevitably sucks, it's okay to be depressed. And after you're done with
that, try again. You might get lucky. Or you might not. You might be the next
Zuckerberg. Or you might not. The only way to find out is to get off Hacker
News, Facebook, Reddit, etc. and give it a shot.

~~~
coralreef
Its not a matter of doing, I'm motivated enough to put time in. The problem is
what to build.

In any set of ideas, some are more obvious in their usefulness. Some just seem
cool. If you look at the biggest consumer apps in their earliest stages, they
almost all were ideas that "seemed cool" and lacked obvious usefulness (it was
hard to see what problem they solved).

The problem is that way more of those apps fail vs ones that have utility.
Hope that clarifies what I'm confused on.

~~~
_pius
_The problem is what to build._

You're over-thinking things. Easiest actionable advice is to build whatever
excites you. A great way to do this is to build something that would have at
least one user: _you_. Maybe it's "just" something "cool" or maybe it solves a
pressing problem.

Don't get caught up in all of this up-front analysis where you try to build
the perfect thing timed with some magical market moment. Instead, build a
quick prototype if and when you feel excited about an idea. If your enthusiasm
wanes early or you finish it and you realize it's not going to work out, it's
_OK_ ... wrap a bow around it and move on to the next thing.

edit: You seem to be looking for a magic bullet in the form of a Paul Graham
essay. If so, this may be your best hope:
[http://www.paulgraham.com/startupideas.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/startupideas.html)

~~~
dvt
Pretty much what this gentleman said! :D

------
sideproject
Personally, I think I initially leaned towards "building something cool" \-
which led me to build something which "I" thought was cool only to realise
later that there aren't that many people sharing my same thought.

Above leads to an unprepared development of a product because you don't know
whether there is a need/problem out there.

I think that's why it's so important to know the market + customers.

I think if you do find a problem to solve, then you can build something "cool"
to solve that problem.

But if you have to compare the two, "solving a problem" seems objective,
whereas "cool" is... just... too relative + subjective.

------
Dimitris
Study and maybe you will get lucky. There are no shortcuts to success.

~~~
coralreef
Study what? I'm not looking for shortcuts, I'm looking for ideas that help
consolidate the concepts of 1) building things interesting to you, and 2)
solving real problems

~~~
lutusp
> Study what? I'm not looking for shortcuts, I'm looking for ideas that help
> consolidate the concepts of 1) building things interesting to you, and 2)
> solving real problems

You're suffering from a misconception -- that a commercial success results
from a deterministic sequence of choices and events. This isn't true -- there
is a large element of chance involved in modern success stories.

If this were not true, people could apply the known laws of success, become
successful, and retire, without ever having to think creatively. In fact, a
computer could automatically apply the rules of success without brooking human
interference.

Success depends on a combination of creativity, hard work, and chance. No
amount of creativity and hard work can eliminate the role played by chance.

> I'm looking for ideas ...

With all respect, if you become successful, it will be because of ideas you
discovered on your own.

~~~
coralreef
Fair enough, but I believe there are patterns to success, and I believe there
are people's opinions worth reading. PG's essays have mostly been true to my
experiences.

Build something people want, have a co-founder... I don't necessarily need to
learn those lessons on my own, yet understanding them gives me a vast
advantage over someone who doesn't.

~~~
lutusp
> ... I believe there are patterns to success ...

Those patterns are illusions that rely entirely on hindsight. How can I be
sure? If there really was a meaningful pattern to success, a computer could
carry it out like a recipe, and achieve an automated success each time it was
executed.

> Build something people want, have a co-founder... I don't necessarily need
> to learn those lessons on my own, yet understanding them gives me a vast
> advantage over someone who doesn't.

Really? "Build something people want" is a lesson? It's a self-evident and
self-referential proposition. And the advice to have a co-founder is a silly
proposition that's probably wrong more often than it's right. Bill Gates
because successful only after getting rid of his co-founder. Steve Jobs
because successful only after marginalizing his co-founder. Steve Zuckerberg
became successful only after cheating his co-founders. Elon Musk because
successful partly by avoiding the advice to have a co-founder.

You don't need the useless advice of sages, you need life experience.

~~~
coralreef
I'm sorry, but I still don't follow where you're trying to go with this. You
don't strike me as someone who is particularly well informed with the modern
startup, or the principles of turning an idea into a business.

If you were, you'd know that cofounders are important because building a
business is difficult, and going the path with a partner has numerous tangible
benefits. You'd also know about the pitfalls that kill startups, things people
believe to be important but are not, and may get in the way of "building
something people want". It is not useless advice, its actually quite good
advice that can save you a lot of time and energy. That's why I don't dismiss
it, I seek it.

~~~
lutusp
> I'm sorry, but I still don't follow where you're trying to go with this.

You don't understand what I mean when I say there are no secrets of the
winners? That success is what success does? How is that either difficult to
grasp or in any way controversial?

> You don't strike me as someone who is particularly well informed with the
> modern startup, or the principles of turning an idea into a business.

So the fact that I have been a successful software developer for decades
doesn't count? That, as one example, I turned my idea for a word processor
into a product that became a worldwide best-seller doesn't count? You need to
show a little respect, given that you're presuming to pontificate about
something you've never accomplished, to someone who has.

> If you were, you'd know that cofounders are important ...

You know what? Thinking is important. A respect for evidence is important.
Your belief in the value of co-founders is falsified by the history of
successful businesses, and I already provided a list of obvious examples where
co-founders only got in the way.

> ... going the path with a partner has numerous tangible benefits.

I guess that would explain why the most successful companies were started by
individuals, or teams consisting of a leader and followers (which contradicts
the meaning of "co-founder").

> You'd also know about the pitfalls that kill startups, things people believe
> to be important but are not ...

Like believing there are surefire rules for successful startups? The thesis
that there is a winning formula is as true in business as it is in war -- it's
proven false over and over again. In business and war, whatever strategy you
choose, your enemy will adapt to it, which means you have to ... wait for it
... think original thoughts, thoughts that by definition aren't on a list of
surefire ways to succeed. Thoughts your adversaries won't anticipate.

> It is not useless advice ...

It is useless advice simply because it's out there -- everyone has it. What
you need is not more canned formulas for success, but more life experience and
less respect for formulaic "solutions".

"When we started out, I had six rules and no children. Now I have six children
and no rules."

> That's why I don't dismiss it, I seek it.

And eventually you will stop wasting your time trying to find the magic
potion.

But, contrary to what you say, your writing so far only proves that you are
incredibly rigid in your thinking, incapable of hearing anyone's advice, and
you already have your mind made up about what constitutes a successful
business strategy. You are neither flexible nor open to new ideas. You can't
be bothered to listen to the advice of people who've had successes you can
only dream of.

~~~
coralreef
This has gotten too personal and no longer has any substance. If you want to
reply to get the last word go ahead, but I won't be replying to you any
further.

If you presented any worthwhile ideas, I could discuss them. But all you've
presented is that success is unmeasurable chaos and therefore any discussion
is pointless and awash.

You have such a strong disposition, you even call it magic potions and canned
formulas. Your last paragraph describes you as much as me, think about that.

~~~
lutusp
> If you presented any worthwhile ideas, I could discuss them.

Translation: "In my search for surefire rules to success, I am going to avoid
any advice from successful people." Sadly noted.

> But all you've presented is that success is unmeasurable chaos ...

And? That's correct. The only problem is that you have the modern equivalent
of a religious outlook, i.e. there are rules that, if followed, assure
success. It's false, but you can't accept that.

The fact that life is unmeasurable chaos doesn't mean people can't be
successful. Those who are successful accept life as it is, not as they would
like it to be.

> You have such a strong disposition ...

Just like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, an a thousand other successful people. But
you have a belief in authority, in the power of rules, so you don't need to
learn anything from successful people. Dream on, pilgrim.

------
lgieron
I'd work on redefining the dream. Dreaming of being one-in-a-milllion person
can, in the long term, lead to frustration.

------
convex_hull
that is easy. just pay attention to what you and people do and how they do it.
if you find a way to simlify that, you got an idea.

