Dasher

A very interesting article, but I have a genuine question about this!! You can’t constantly share high quality, informative content or insights based on your own experience multiple times a day. So, do you think the frequency of posts will evolve over time and obviously reduce? Or should these so called "experts" sharing their own opinions will have to keep "shitposting" on daily basis just to keep feeding the algorithm, while saving their "bangers" for when a truly great idea + their unique approach comes along?

We are entering an era where, as everything becomes "fake" with AI spreading everywhere, people will gravitate toward stuff based solely on tangible proof & emotions. This encompasses various forms of evidence - Social proof (influence) - Proof of financial success (high spending power or significant MRR generated) - Proof of trustworthiness (scoring or other systems demonstrating through collective validation, that a project or person is reliable) The "Attention & Trust Economy" will drive people to either go crazy to stand out or try to find extreme strategies to get attention

This might be one of the best changes X has made in a long time. For too long, X rewarded engagement farming, reply bait, recycled takes and pure volume. Now replies no longer count toward the 500K threshold, the bar for creators instantly gets higher. And that’s a good thing. Now you actually need to earn attention: - Stronger hooks - Better storytelling - More original ideas - Smarter use of multimodal content - Dynamic Videos - Real retention, not manufactured engagement In a world where everyone has access to AI, simply producing more content is no longer an advantage. The advantage becomes authenticity + execution. AI content can still win, but it has to feel crafted. Edited. Directed. Intentional. There needs to be a story, a specific pov, and visible effort behind it. Or you can simply turn the camera on yourself, speak directly and deliver real value. Either way, the era of endless AI slop, botted accounts and people reposting the same thing 20 times a day just to hit metrics should become much less rewarding. We’re about to see a much clearer separation between people who were creating quality… and people who were simply manufacturing volume. Can't wait to see how TL will evolve

AI was supposed to unlock unlimited opportunities for indie hackers / solopreneurs. It might actually become the thing that kills many of them (i'm part of it) We’re entering a world where everything is evolving faster and faster. Most major LLMs are already receiving huge updates almost every month and that pace is only going to accelerate. The smarter these models become, the more they’ll optimize their own costs, improve productivity and allow big AI companies to move into basically every market. Before, small startups, solopreneurs and indie hackers could survive because there were gaps everywhere. There were markets, niches and problems that large companies had not addressed. And iimo, it wasn’t always because they hadn’t noticed them. Most of the time, they simply didn’t have the time or the resources to focus on them. They had to prioritize the biggest and most profitable markets. - 1st, because they had high costs. - 2nd, because they often had VCs expecting massive returns. They couldn’t afford to spend months building something for micro-niches. But now, that limitation is slowly disappearing. With the level of productivity AI gives them, these companies will be able to attack the biggest challenges while also targeting the small niches that used to belong to indie hackers. And that’s the paradox. What we thought would unlock thousands of new opportunities for us may become our biggest competitor. Big AI companies will be able to address massive markets, niches and micro-niches at the same time. They’ll probably acquire smaller companies, launch their own subsidiaries or create new AI-powered products almost overnight, all powered by their own models and infrastructure. They also need new sources of revenue. Because of the competition between them, you can see by yourself how past weeks and fast reactions where ridiculous between Fable 5, GPT 5.6 and Kimi K3. They’re already making concessions on pricing & margin lol. In reality, many of these companies would probably love to charge us much more, but they can’t because another model or platform is always ready to undercut or outperform them. So one way to compensate will be to enter more and more markets. And we’re forgetting another uncomfortable point: we are also giving these models our ideas, our projects, our problems and our strategies. I’m not saying they’re automatically going to steal every idea you type into a chat. But the more original ideas, use cases and emerging problems people share with these systems, the easier it becomes for the companies behind them to understand where the next opportunities are. Something that wasn’t originally on their roadmap could eventually become a feature, a product or an entirely new company. At the same time, the barrier to building products is becoming ridiculously low. Thousands of new projects can now launch every day. So yes, you already need to move beyond the AI slop. You need better quality, better design, better UX, better support, better execution and a better overall experience. But quality alone won’t solve the problem. You’re competing on several levels at the same time. ▶️You’re competing against every other builder launching products. ▶️You’re competing against potential customers who may decide to build the solution themselves because AI makes them believe they can. Some of them will succeed, others won’t. But they may spend months trying before eventually coming back to an existing product. ▶️You’re competing against big AI companies. ▶️And you’re competing for visibility and clicks inside AI chats themselves that will lead to conversion. People are no longer always going to search on Google, click on your website and convert. They’ll ask ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini or another assistant for the best solution and the products that get recommended will have the highest chance of winning. So we’re entering an era where margins will become harder to maintain, durable moats will become rarer, and competition will exist everywhere. Does that mean the era of indie hackers is completely over? Not necessarily. I do agree that building one random product and expecting it to generate money forever will become much more difficult. But building a durable company is still possible. You just need a real moat that you keep improving overtime. Something that makes you so unique that even if models become capable of building almost anything, they can’t replace your entire business with one feature. That could be proprietary data, a strong community providing exclusive experiences, unique distribution, deep integrations, network effects, a unique workflow or something that would be too expensive, too slow or simply impossible to replicate. The problem is that many moats will no longer last for years. Some will be copied within months or even weeks. Obviously, replacing something like Ahrefs and its entire data infrastructure would still take a huge amount of time and money. But for many smaller SaaS products, the advantage may disappear extremely quickly. That doesn’t make a moat useless. A few months of advantage can still be enough to grow, generate revenue and build the next layer of differentiation. But you’ll need to keep upgrading your value instead of assuming the original advantage will protect you forever. And this changes the traditional indie-hacking approach. Before, the idea was often to launch many different projects, maintain them more or less and move from one opportunity to another. I think that model will disappear. You can still run 5 or 10 projects, ofc. But you’ll have to accept that some of them will slowly die. The moment you move your attention elsewhere, the product stops improving, competitors catch up, and the moat that once made it special eventually disappears. So builders will probably have 2 real options : - One is to keep launching lots of projects because that’s what they enjoy. Some products will decline, others will die, but new ideas will continuously replace them and keep generating revenue. - 2nd is to choose one, two or maybe three projects maximum and give them your full attention. Constantly upgrade them, improve UX, create new advantages and keep rebuilding the moat before competitors catch up. Both approaches can work. But pretending that you can launch 10 products, barely update them and still keep all the revenue forever probably won’t. And the famous 80% or 90% net margins we used to see in some SaaS businesses will also become much rarer. When there were five or ten competitors, customers could understand why one solution deserved to cost $99/mo. But when there are 100 or 1000 products offering roughly the same promise, the difference becomes much harder to perceive. Visibility, price, branding and distribution start becoming just as important as product quality. Even when your product is better, enough competitors will undercut you at $19 or $29 just to capture a small piece of the market. At some point, you’ll probably have to sacrifice part of your margin to remain competitive and continue converting. So no, indie hacking isn’t dead. But easy, passive and comfortable indie hacking probably is. The winners won’t simply be the people who can build products anymore. Almost everyone will be able to build. The winners will be the ones who can distribute, differentiate, adapt faster than their moat disappears and keep giving people a reason not to replace them.

We’ve really evolved tremendously over the last few months. Creating mini-series is clearly within our reach these days. AI generation is accessible to everyone now, whether it's in content creation or business, our moat relies on how far we can use creativity + taste + execution in the right way

great extra time but at this point make it permanent 😅 You know the day you will switch to pay per usage, people will shift to GPT 5.6 Sol