什么是产品?
What is a product?

原始链接: https://roge.onwrite.app/what-is-a-product

目前互联网上充斥着人工智能生成的原型,它们看起来令人印象深刻,却缺乏实质内容。虽然生成式人工智能让人能轻而易举地在几分钟内构思出“应用”或“克隆产品”,但这些演示往往不过是数字玩具罢了。 作者认为,AI 原型开发的便捷性与构建可持续产品之间的现实存在着严重的脱节。尽管炒作不断,但我们尚未看到 AI 构建的产品能够与谷歌或 Instagram 等行业巨头竞争。这是因为一个真正的产品并非由其代码或初步设计所定义,而是由其为稳定的用户群体解决实际问题的能力所决定的。 归根结底,打造成功的产品仍然是一项艰难且复杂的工程,需要的不仅仅是智能或几个精心设计的提示词。我们应当对源源不断、看似出色的“演示”保持怀疑,并清醒地认识到:拥有一个 AI 生成的原型与拥有一个可行的、面向市场的成熟产品有着本质的区别。不要被铺天盖地的 AI 内容所困扰;如果你的创作缺乏实际应用场景和用户,那它就只是个玩具,而非商业项目。

这篇 Hacker News 的讨论探讨了“产品”(product)与“项目”(project)在基本定义上的区别。 其核心观点由用户 MomsAVoxell 提出,认为产品的定义完全取决于“交换”。按照这一观点,一项事物只有在从创造者转移给另一方时才成为产品;在此之前,它仅仅是资源或“库存”。因此,“产品管理”被定义为促进这种成功转移的手段,而“项目”则只是旨在最终创造出可交换之物的活动。 其他评论者对这一观点提出了质疑或补充: * **效用与规模:** 有人认为产品必须具备解决实际问题的能力,并指出那些尽管拥有大量用户但缺乏实质内容的病毒式营销噱头,可能并不真正称得上是产品。 * **“克隆”问题:** 另一项批评指向了 AI 生成工具的兴起,认为许多现代“产品”只不过是利己者营销的平庸克隆品,缺乏专业作品的内涵。 总而言之,这场讨论凸显了在定义产品时,以“市场成功(交换)”为标准与以“功能效用(解决问题的能力)”为标准之间的分歧。
相关文章

原文

I've seen, and probably you have seen too, far too many prototypes out there created with AI treated as products, because it is that easy to prompt two sentences and get something that resembles a real thing. Do you want a website to sell your old furniture? Done. You want an Instagram clone? Done. What about a full-feature LinkedIn replacement? Done. Except, it is not really done. 

Every other week, Anthropic or OpenAI launches a new version of their models, and every other week, the internet is flooded with examples of what those models are capable of. Beautiful designs and prototypes fill up our feeds, giving us, simple mortals, a taste of what the future looks like, on localhost. No link needed.

I am impressed. Are you impressed? Well, you should be. But when I think about this for two seconds, I realized that four years after Sam Altman tweeted about his new chatbot, I haven't seen any real competitor of YouTube, or Figma, or Google, or Instagram created solely with AI. If this thing is so powerful, where is all the innovation? Shouldn't all of us be creating our own version of GTA 6 from our garage – I mean, our couch – at this point?

It turns out a prototype is not a product. Most of what we see on YouTube that was created by the dude, who never touched a line of code before, between two cups of coffee is not even a prototype; it's nothing. If you are generous, you can call it a demo, a draft, maybe?

A real product is hard to build. I'm not saying there aren't people out there creating useful stuff in record time. What I am saying is that you shouldn't be impressed by everything you see online. Don't feel bad if you don't have anything to show up with all the free intelligence available nowadays. Almost nobody has. 

A real product has real users, a real market and solves real problems.

When I think about most of the products we use daily, like X.com or Google, I wonder why nobody has a real competitor of these things before. It was not a lack of intelligence or know-how. Many companies were created with this goal in mind, but none succeeded because a product is more than the parts that compound it. 

I could prompt a basic Instagram feature in a few hours, maybe a few days, but would it mean I created a product? If nobody uses it or cares, is it still a product? What makes a product is its users. If nobody is using the thing you built, you don't have a product, you have a toy. Have fun playing with it. 

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com