Things we've learned about building products

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Perception of PostHog and Positioning

  • Mixed reactions on whether PostHog counts as “successful,” especially among readers unfamiliar with the product or analytics space.
  • Some praise its usability and integrated toolset; others find the homepage messaging vague or overblown (e.g., “The single platform…”).
  • Several note the blog/newsletter as unusually strong, but the brand name and some titles (“Technical Content Marketer,” “PostHog” itself) strike others as cringe or unserious.
  • Skepticism that advice from a successful SaaS in the 2008–2016 “greenfield” era generalizes well to today.

Ideas vs Problems and Customers

  • Strong agreement with the notion: don’t start from an idea, start from a problem and customer; “ideal customer profile” should drive product.
  • Emphasis that markets, not founders, validate products; you learn what works after shipping and iterating, not from abstract validation.

A/B Testing, Data, and Product Vision

  • Extensive critique of A/B testing culture:
    • Very expensive in engineering time, statistics, and operational complexity.
    • Often misapplied at low-traffic companies or with weak experimental design, yielding misleading or useless results.
    • Can become a way to avoid having opinions or vision, and a political shield (“it was just an experiment”).
  • Multiple commenters argue usability testing and direct user observation are often far more informative and cheaper.
  • Concerns that “data-driven” can lead to local optima and a false sense of rigor; products still need taste and vision.

Process, Trust, and Organizational Dynamics

  • Some pushback on “rely on trust and feedback, not process”: cross-team work still needs minimal process and clear handoff standards.
  • Transparency and working in public can reduce politics, but only if leadership actively defends the “commons” from derailers and ego conflicts.
  • Psychological safety is seen as a core ingredient of effective teams.

Hiring, SuperDay, and Interview Philosophy

  • The “900 applicants → 10 SuperDay → 4 hires” funnel sparks debate:
    • Supporters like the paid, realistic-work format and see it as high-signal for “product engineers.”
    • Critics see it as overkill for a startup, converging on the “most desperate engineers,” and burdensome when candidates are interviewing at many places.
  • Broader frustration with FAANG-style or puzzle-heavy interviews that don’t resemble day-to-day “e‑plumbing” work.
  • Some argue you don’t need elite geniuses for most SaaS; average but solid developers plus good focus, sales, and willingness to pivot matter more than hyper-selective hiring.