Michael

Or maybe the end game is this. When you need an app you just build what you need and leave it at that. PWA Kill the app stores.

@feioustudio Its going to be interesting to see how all this plays out.

@Root_Kit_ the review filter is a lagging indicator. the real filter is attention. you can't vibe your way to distribution. 100,000 apps launch this month, 3 of them get talked about online. that's the actual bottleneck

Another problem that needs solved. Vibe coding is going to create a new problem nobody is really talking about. If distribution doesn’t get solved, app stores are going to get flooded. And when that happens, expect way more “spam” rejections. A lot of people think those rejections are random, but they’re not. Sometimes it’s legit, low-effort, duplicate apps getting filtered out. But other times, it’s just the system trying to control quality at scale. As more apps get generated faster, the bar is going to rise. Not because of competition alone, but because platforms need to protect user experience. We’re heading into a phase where: •Building is easy •Shipping is easy •Getting approved and discovered is the hard part I wouldn’t be surprised if review teams start rejecting way more apps labeled as “spam” simply because there’s too much supply. The next question isn’t “how do I build an app?” It’s: how do you build something that can’t be seen as replaceable?

When I talk about distribution, I’m mainly referring to app stores. Right now, I can definitely vibe code my way into the store. Yes the much more harder part of distribution is where the traffic actually comes from and that hasn’t changed. That’s always been the challenge. I can have all the vision and creativity in the world, but if I don’t have marketing and sales skills, my app is just code sitting there. This is why I see the whole market could or needs to shift. Localized apps, not global.

The numbers make sense but I think they point to something slightly different. If 200k products can be created daily and most make <$1k/month, that’s not just a distribution gap, it’s a signal problem. Distribution only works if there’s something worth distributing. Otherwise, we’re just getting faster at producing things no one needed. And as this scales, gatekeepers will tighten. The more noise, the stricter the filters. Distribution isn’t just hard, it’s about to become a much more serious constraint.

Lovable creates 200,000 new products every single day. Someone tracked 500 Product Hunt launches from 2024. 487 of them make less than $1,000/month The build has never been easier. The distribution gap has never been wider. What nobody tells you about what comes after you ship🧵

Bootstrappers ❤️ Vibe coding could eventually reduce the need for VC. Because what founders need money for is changing. For a long time, building was expensive: you needed engineers, time to develop capital just to get something live. Now, AI + vibe coding flips that. A small team or even one person can: build real products launch quickly and test ideas with almost no upfront cost So the role of VC shifts. It used to be: “Raise money to build something” Now it’s becoming: “Build something first, then raise if it works” That changes everything. We’ll likely see: fewer idea-stage rounds more founders reaching traction before funding more profitable, small-scale businesses that never raise less dependence on capital to get started But unfortunately VC still matter distribution is still hard scaling still takes money large, ambitious bets still need capital top VCs still provide access, talent, and leverage It’s a reset. Capital is no longer the starting point. It’s fuel for what’s already working.

I like this! People say AI will take jobs and it will. But that doesn’t mean it’s the end. It means gaps open. New opportunities. New jobs. That’s how every shift works. People just have to adapt. Or they’ll end up like the brick-and-mortar businesses that bet against the internet during the dot-com boom.

@Root_Kit_ this is the gap. founders build something cool with Lovable then hit a wall going to production. the "now what?" moment is real. we see it all the time at AppStuck.com

Building apps is still fragmented. Lovable to build. Vercel to deploy. AWS to run. Apple decides who gets distribution. And none of it is one system. So you end up here: “I built an app… now what?” I’m building the loop: Build → Deploy → Distribute → Monetize All in one place. If that works, the moat isn’t the builder. It’s everything around it. And if the gate stays closed… we build our own gate. #fundme

Yes! build time is collapsing. Attention isn’t. That gap is where the opportunity. In 2023, it took me 10 months to build a native app. Six months ago, I started vibe coding. Wasn’t fully sold on hybrids, good for MVPs, but complex builds were still a struggle. Last month, I went back to 20 app ideas I had shelved… …and built all of them. Some got rejected and need work. A couple are live. The rest are in TestFlight. 20 apps. One month. That’s the shift.

@Root_Kit_ The bottleneck is shifting from building to distribution. AI coding compresses time-to-product, but time-to-attention barely moves. The winners won't just ship faster. They'll learn distribution as aggressively as they learn product.

The next problem for vibe coding: We’re about to massively increase the number of apps in the world. But distribution hasn’t changed. So what happens? Maybe less than 1% of apps actually survive. Maybe we’re heading toward a bubble. Maybe it doesn’t “pop” it just gets ignored. (And if no one solves distribution… that’s when I’d short the whole thing.) Either way, something breaks. We’re not short on apps. We’re short on attention. So what needs to change? Maybe distribution gets rebuilt. Maybe attention gets redistributed. Maybe the future isn’t global apps at all. Maybe it’s more local: local apps local marketplaces even local social networks Smaller ecosystems people actually care about. Not saying this is the answer. But these are the directions that start to show up when supply explodes. Still thinking this through.

@elonmusk Go big or go home. Back me. Building apps is still fragmented. Lovable to build. Vercel to deploy. AWS to run. Apple decides who gets distribution. And none of it is one system. So you end up here: “I built an app… now what?” I’m building the loop: Build → Deploy → Distribute → Monetize All in one place. If that works, the moat isn’t the builder. It’s everything around it. And if the gate stays closed… we build our own gate.

I’m building a Lovable competitor. Using Lovable. Let’s see how this goes. Standby.. @Lovable @daniellot_theo @antonosika

@Codie_Sanchez My therapist nodded off twice in one session and again the next. I’d say we’re getting close.

I'm pretty convinced talk therapy is a complete waste of time.

Algorithms don’t show us reality, they show us what gets the most reaction. And that’s usually the extremes, not the everyday people in the middle who make up the majority. So each side ends up seeing the worst of the other. The loudest voices. The most unhinged takes. And over time, that creates a distorted picture of reality, one where it feels like everyone is more extreme than they actually are. That’s how polarization grows. Not just from disagreement, but from misperception. It’s not that people suddenly became more divided, it’s that we’re constantly being shown the most divisive versions of each other. And when you only see extremes, it becomes easy to fear the other side… and harder to understand them. We to code friction into social apps

Predictions are easy. It’s all based on patterns and collective human emotions on a macro scale and if you’re non linear you can even vision culture shifts before others even realize them. You ever wonder how day traders predict when to buy and when to sell? Past collective human behavior…

@Root_Kit_ @paleochristcon As predicted

As predicted.

@paleochristcon Curious to know what your prediction was based on

In 2026, Grandpa the quiz master, the human encyclopedia isn’t worth his weight in gold anymore. We’ve transitioned. My math teacher once told me I wouldn’t be able to carry a calculator everywhere when I grew up. Really? Now I have a device in my pocket that can literally code an app in hours hell, even seconds, depending on how simple it is. We no longer need to spend time memorizing things the way we used to, because information is always at our fingertips. That’s how we make room for innovation. Less energy spent on memorization means more energy for creating, building, and solving new problems. That’s how we evolved from hunter-gatherers to a fully modern, AI-driven world. Don’t be afraid of it. Adapt to it. Find the gaps, and create new ideas and new jobs from them.

@paleochristcon Data also proves that GenZ is the dumbest generation in 100 years. As predicted.

The idea that Gen Z and Gen Alpha are “getting dumber” is misguided. What’s actually changing is how intelligence works and is valued. In the past, intelligence was tied to memorization and stored knowledge (crystallized intelligence), because information was scarce. Today, with instant access to information, memorization matters less. Instead, modern environments reward fluid intelligence, the ability to think critically, adapt, recognize patterns, and solve new problems. Younger generations are developing these skills because they’re growing up in a fast-changing, information-rich world. Criticizing them for not knowing traditional skills misses the point, they’re optimized for a different environment. This shift isn’t intellectual decline, but a reallocation of cognitive skills. The real danger isn’t technology, it’s refusing to adapt to new definitions of intelligence. Intelligence isn’t shrinking; it’s evolving. Summarized from an article I wrote.