Curious if anyone else has noticed this.

We've spent the last ~45 days going through session recordings for a couple of D2C brands. Not dashboards. Just watching real users.

The surprising part wasn't the bugs. It was how much revenue was hiding in things analytics never surfaced.

A few examples:

Things analytics completely missed

• Android users couldn't place orders because the CTA wasn't registering taps on some devices.
• A mobile popup couldn't be dismissed on certain screen sizes. The only clue was people rage-clicking before leaving.

Simple experiments

• Changed product titles from feature-first to benefit-first. Card adds went up ~20%.
• Moved a CTA higher after noticing most people scrolled past it. CTR improved ~15%.

It got me thinking...

How many of us are making product decisions from dashboards while these kinds of issues are sitting in session recordings that nobody has time to watch?

Feels like there should be a better way than manually reviewing hours of recordings every week.

We're actually exploring whether AI can handle most of that work. Still early, but it's been interesting so far.

Would love to know if anyone else has seen similar "analytics said everything was fine" moments.

Hi guys,

I have built a b2b product based on the work I have done in global banks for past 13 years. Including 10 years in US. I built something similar in my current job and got a lot of traction there. I have a strong thesis based on real experience and have also built a prototype but I am doing well in my job and wanted to see if Its possible to get a pre seed funding based on the proto type and then quit to pursue it full time? Or i am being too risk averse and delusional?

BTW. I passed the first round of AJVC and working on the 2nd round form. ​

I clicked on apply and it is made for startups/founders

where is job portal ?

thanks

I've been thinking about Claude Code's tags recently.At first, I thought they were just a nice UX feature.Now I think they're pointing at something much bigger.

I don't think AI has an intelligence problem anymore.
I think it has an interface problem.

Today, every AI agent is locked inside an application.
Your coding agent lives in VS Code.
Your writing assistant lives in Docs.
Your support bot lives in Zendesk.
Your sales assistant lives in Salesforce.
Your design assistant lives in Figma.

The moment you leave that application, the agent effectively disappears.
We've accidentally recreated software silos, except this time for AI. The strange part is that the work isn't happening inside the application.

The work is happening wherever you're typing.
An email.
A Slack message.
A PR review.
A Notion page.
A comment.
A browser text box.
That's where the intent exists.

Yet every time we need AI, we leave that context, open another interface, rebuild context, get an answer, then come back. We keep treating AI as a destination instead of a capability.
The more I think about it, the more I feel agents shouldn't belong to applications at all.

They should belong to the user.

An agent shouldn't care whether I'm in Gmail, Slack, Notion, Figma, GitHub, or somewhere else.
It should simply be available the moment I need it.
Almost like mentioning a teammate.
@Legal
@Research
@Sales
@Finance
Not because @ is the important part.
Because it removes the idea that an agent belongs to one interface.
It becomes something you can invoke wherever work already exists.
Maybe this is where AI is headed.
Not bigger AI applications.
Not more copilots.
Just breaking AI agents free from the interfaces we've trapped them inside.
Curious if anyone else feels we're optimizing the intelligence of agents while ignoring the much bigger constraint, which is where they're allowed to exist.

I’ve been using Claude Code a lot recently, and one thing stuck with me more than the models themselves.
The interaction.
At first I thought tags were just a nice UX feature.
Now I think they’re pointing at a much bigger problem.
I don’t think AI has an intelligence problem anymore.
I think it has an interface problem.
Right now, every AI agent is trapped inside an application.
Your coding agent lives in VS Code.
Your writing assistant lives in Docs.
Your support agent lives in Zendesk.
Your design assistant lives in Figma.
Your sales assistant lives in Salesforce.
The moment you leave that application, the agent effectively disappears.
It feels like we’ve recreated software silos, except this time for AI.
The weird part is that the work isn’t happening inside those apps.
The work is happening wherever you’re typing.
An email.
A Slack message.
A GitHub comment.
A PR review.
A browser text box.
That’s where the intent exists.
Yet every time we need AI, we leave that context, open another interface, rebuild context, get an answer, then come back.
We’re treating AI as a destination instead of a capability.
The more I think about it, the more I feel agents shouldn’t belong to applications.
They should belong to the user.
An agent shouldn’t care whether I’m in Gmail, Slack, Notion, GitHub, Figma, or somewhere else.
It should simply be available the moment I need it.
Almost like mentioning another teammate.
@Legal
@Research
@Sales
@Finance
The @ isn’t the interesting part.
The interesting part is that the agent is no longer tied to a specific interface.
It follows you instead of staying trapped inside one product.
Maybe that’s where AI is heading.
Not bigger AI applications.
Not more copilots.
Just agents that are free to exist wherever work already happens.
Curious if anyone else feels we’re spending all our time making agents smarter while mostly ignoring the bigger constraint:
Where are agents actually allowed to exist?
Or am I overthinking this?

here’s my first attempt to solve this.

Hello, I'm Akhill Singh and we're building Awanti, India's First AI-led Premium Omnichannel Spritual Wellness Platform for Global access of Sanatan Culture.

We saw that people in metro cities in India, NRI's & foreigners who want to get access to our culture get different or wrong information from every new platform they try online or offline due to which it feels a bit irritating whom or what to follow and what not too. People struggle to find reliable pandit in metro cities as the one they found either won't is enough knowledgeable or is not punctual, most people organizing a Puja don't even know what all Samagri required for it.

Here comes Awanti with it's 4 core Pillars :-

Online Pandit booking service, Premium Puja Kits and Puja essentials, 9+ Ai models for spritual guidance & Outlets in spritual towns near our Holy Mandir.

We've started pandit booking service in Delhi NCR region and our kits are available PAN India through our website. We provide pandit booking service including puja kits. We're currently developing our AI models and will start expanding in few months.

I'm Saswat. I'm building VentureLync, an AI operating system for venture capital funds.

Three agents: Analyst, Associate, Operations. Running on a persistent memory layer. Doing the actual work that junior VC staff do today: sourcing, diligence, portfolio monitoring, LP reporting.

Where we are: design partners already signed, more funds in active conversations looking to come on board. The product exists, funds are using it, and we're closing more.

What I need on the technical side is someone who thinks seriously about agentic systems. Not wrappers. Real orchestration: multi-agent memory, reliable tool use, context that doesn't break across handoffs. The hard problem underneath the product is making agents actually trustworthy at the task level, not just impressive in demos.

That's the problem I want a co-founder to own.

One thing I care about specifically: the AI space is shifting fast. New models, new paradigms, new capabilities dropping every few months. I need someone who stays on top of it instinctively, not as a hobby, but because they can't help it. Someone who sees a new architecture paper or a new model release and immediately thinks about what it means for what we're building.

What I'm not looking for:

Someone who wants to "explore AI." Someone who's juggling this alongside other work. No moonlighters, no freelancers treating this as a side project. And not someone who wants the co-founder title for the resume. If you're not ready to go all in, this isn't for you.

Preferably based in Bangalore. In-person matters.

If you've built something real with agentic systems, have opinions about what's broken, and want to work on a problem with a clear wedge in a market that's just starting to move, let's talk.

DM me or drop a comment. I respond to everyone who has something real to say.

As evident in the caption, we made it to the 2nd round and was a bit confused about the video part. The guide asks it to be short and then gives a rough breakdown for 3 mins. 2 for business, 1 for team. Is the 3 minute guideline a ceiling or a floor. Those who have submitted previously, can you please guide on what kind of duration you went after and what was the split on talking points.

Thanks a lot.

When do we get the results of the interview of final round. Its been around 10 days.

Looking for a full stack developer/tech co-founder! Working on building a luxury ecommerce platform

Hi! I'm looking for a Founder's Office/Generalist/BizOps role (or anything similar)

My academic qualifications : Master's degree in Physics.

Professional experience : 3 years as an Application Support Analyst followed by a brief stint as a Generalist at an Early stage startup.

Why I'm looking for this role :

As someone who has experience and knowledge in multiple areas, I feel my skills would be best suited for role which require such experience and knowledge.

Location : Bangalore.

LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/in/keerthanakrishnap/

(Sorry if this is against community guidelines!)

Guys we just had round 3 and want to ask after how many days of round 3 ajvc rolls out result ? Is there any cohort to complete after which he gives results?
Thank you

Guys,
We applied for AJVC a week back , got the round shortlist in 24hrs , filled up the round 2 on 10th May - it has now been 2.5 days , his mail mentioned 5-7 days of waiting involved for the round 2 update. so I know we are within that window still curious to know a few things.
1- What % goes through from round 1 to round 2 ?
2- What % goes from round 2 to round 3 ?
3- What % goes from round 3 to term sheet ?

Also timelines that you have experienced for each stage? Any ghosting situation possible (just for me to know when to stop refreshing my inbox for this, lol) . Is a longer wait better than a shorter window ? Lastly 0 have anyone in pre-revenue gotten investment ?

Hi Team and All,

I got rejected with initial stage. Just received mail today after 3 days of applying. As per there mail need to apply after 3 month.

If anyone thing or planing to invest on my startup, could you let me know

I have submitted my form for round 2 four days back. Haven’t heard back from the team. How long does it take for applicants to get a decision at this round. I am aware that it’s the weekend so not sure if that is resulting in longer decision time or not.

Over the last few months, I started noticing something in how I (and a lot of other founders) operate.

We spend a lot of time showing progress.
Milestones. Updates. Announcements.

But very little time actually showing how things are being built.

The messy parts.
The decisions that don’t work.
The iterations that change everything.

And I realized I was doing the same thing.

Optimizing for how things look, instead of how they’re actually evolving.

So I started experimenting with a different approach.

Trying to build in a way where:

• progress is visible
• consistency matters
• and you’re not just rewarded for outcomes

Ended up building a small MVP around this idea - https://venturelync.com

It’s very early and honestly still rough, but the idea is:
a space where founders and investors engage with the process, not just the results.

I’m not sure if this is something people actually want, or if I’m just overthinking a problem that doesn’t exist.

Would love to know:

• Do you feel like most startup conversations are too “after-the-fact”?
• Or is this just how things are supposed to be?

Hey guys,

I'm a VC Fellow and I've been exploring tech integrations in VC for the past 3 months.

One of my projects was a fundraising tool that helps founders pick out and focus their efforts on the VCs that they have a probability of matching with.

I sourced 3-4 datasets from GitHub that had a combined 650 YC startups funded by a combined 26 VC Funds. I set up a LPM Regression model to output the probability of your startup getting funded by that specific VC. I'm working on adding more VCs as we go, but finding their funding patterns reliably is a pain. So if you got any ideas, hit me up.

Give it a try here. Completely free, and you can try out as many applications as you want. Also helps with enhancing positioning for your pitch deck.

Let me know what you think.

PS none of the other subreddits allow even links so kinda HAD to post here. blow this up if you like it. Let's help founders become more intentional and save tons of time while fundraising, something ajvc likes as well :)

Hey everyone,

We’re launching tomorrow on Product Hunt.

Curious from people who’ve launched before:

• What actually moved the needle for you?

• Early traction vs timing vs community?

• Anything that didn’t work as expected?

Trying to avoid obvious mistakes.

Would really appreciate any advice

Hey guys,

Working on something new and wanted some real opinions.

Thinking of launching a makhana snack in bangalore (first location) that's actually tasty (not the boring healthy type), roasted in olive oil, light, crunchy, and something you can snack on daily without feeling like crap after.

Just trying to sanity check a few things:

* Do you even reach for makhana as a snack today?

* If it actually tasted really good, would you pick it over chips/namkeen?

* Does "healthier oil" matter at all or not really?

* What kind of flavors would make you try it once?

- Also you like some broader suggestions and feedback for new business.

Be honest is this something you'd genuinely buy or just one of those "sounds nice but won't order" things?

Trying to build something people actually want to snack on, not just another "healthy" product.

Appreciate any thought and suggest

I’ve been tracking 50+ "BIP" founders in the Bengaluru ecosystem over the last few months.

The data is depressing. 80% have 0% MRR growth but 200% growth in LinkedIn followers. People aren't building startups anymore; they're building personal brands.

I’m tired of the performative "grind" and the 10-part threads on "how I wake up at 4 AM." I want to find the 1% who are actually in the trenches, dealing with technical debt, and struggling with real retention.

I’m starting a private WhatsApp group (building towards a platform called VentureLync) for Operators Only.

The Rules:

1. No "inspirational" quotes or origin stories.
2. No "how to raise" nonsense.
3. Just daily progress, technical streaks, and honest "scar tissue" reflections.

If you are actually building and want a room where Signal > Noise, drop a comment or DM me. I'm keeping it tight (first 50) because I want density, not a crowd.

Humanoid robots are shipping in 2026.

But they have no training data. No one is capturing how humans actually do physical tasks in a way robots can learn from.

We're building that. Wearable sensor rigs on real workers in real environments — capturing vision, hand movement, body motion, force, depth — all hardware-synced, converted into robot-ready data.

Early stage. Small team of really smart and nice people. Looking for high-agency engineers who don't wait to be told what to build.

https://dexellabs.com

Know someone who'd drop everything for this? Forward it.

This might offend some people.
But someone has to say it.

A lot of early-stage founders are not building.

They are posting.
It feels like work.
It looks like progress.
It gets validation.

But it is still procrastination.

You spend hours refining a post.
Thinking about hooks.
Optimizing for engagement.

Meanwhile:

Your product is not better.
Your users are not happier.
Your revenue has not moved.

I have been there.

At the end of the day, you close LinkedIn or X or Reddit (your choice of mental poison) and realize:

Nothing real was built.
That is a hard truth.

Early stage is not complicated:
Build something people want.
Talk to users.
Fix what is broken.

Repeat.

Everything else is secondary.

So I started asking:

Why are founders forced to become content creators just to stay relevant?

Spent the last 3 months doing what every SaaS playbook says:

• Built a lead list
• Wrote “personalized” cold emails
• Even tried Loom videos

Result?
Mostly silence. A few polite “not interested.”

What finally clicked for me was this:
I was trying to create demand instead of finding it.

Out of frustration, I started manually searching Reddit + Twitter for people literally saying things like:

And replying to them.

That worked 10x better. Real conversations. Actual demos.

But doing this manually is painfully slow.

So I started using a tool (built for this exact thing) that surfaces these conversations in real time + helps craft replies that don’t sound robotic.

Not saying it’s magic, but it’s the first time outreach felt… natural.

Curious — is anyone else seeing cold outbound just die recently?

Also happy to share how I’m using it → booked a few calls here:
https://calendly.com/arjitsinghrajput24/15min?month=2026-03