DEV Community: Mark Fulton

Generation is free now. The filter is the whole business.

Mark Fulton — Mon, 31 Aug 2026 05:42:24 +0000

One of my products has scored more than 390,000 domains.

On a normal day, the number worth acting on is about fifteen.

Sit with that ratio, because I think it is the most important number in AI right now and it has nothing to do with domains. Three hundred and ninety thousand in, fifteen out. The product is not the scoring. The product is the discarding.

We spent two years getting very good at making things. Text, images, code, campaigns, entire applications from a paragraph of description. That problem is solved to the point of being boring. Generation is effectively free and it gets freer every quarter.

Judgment did not get free. It did not even get cheaper. And a world with infinite output and constant judgment is a world where the value migrates to the filter.

The bottleneck moved and most people are still building for the old one

Watch what people ask AI for and you can date them.

The 2024 question was "can it make this for me". The 2026 question, the one people actually pay to have answered, is "of the ten thousand things it just made, which three are worth my afternoon".

Nobody is short of leads. They are short of a reason to call this one. Nobody is short of content ideas. They are short of a reason to write this one. Nobody is short of investment opportunities, job candidates, feature requests or support tickets. They are drowning in all of them and starving for a standard that thins the pile.

If you are building an AI product right now and it produces more of something, you are competing in the one category that trends to zero. If it produces less of something, and the less is better, you have a business.

What a judgment layer actually is

This is the part worth stealing, so let me be specific about what separates a real filter from a wrapper with "AI-powered" on the landing page.

It encodes a taste, and the taste has an owner. A filter is somebody's opinion made repeatable. If you cannot say whose standard is in there and why they earned the right to hold it, you do not have a filter. You have a coin flip with good manners. This is what people mean when they say prompt engineering is maturing into something serious. It is not phrasing tricks. It is the discipline of writing a judgment down precisely enough that a machine can apply it a hundred thousand times without drifting.

It says no far more often than yes. A gate that approves most of what it sees is decoration. The uncomfortable part is that a good filter has to reject things that are genuinely fine, because the job is not fairness to the inputs, it is protecting the attention of the person on the other side. Every filter I have shipped got better the day I made it stricter and worse every time I softened it to be nice.

It shows its reasoning and stays overrulable. The moment a person cannot see why something was rejected, they stop trusting the system and go back to scrolling the raw list. A verdict without a reason is not judgment, it is just a verdict. Give people the why and they will let the machine handle the volume forever.

It is boring to run. Nobody claps for the thing that quietly discards 389,985 items, and that is exactly why it is defensible. Impressive output is easy to copy in a weekend. A standard tuned against real outcomes for two years is not.

That 390,000 number, for the curious, comes from PounceDomains, which watches the domain aftermarket and hands an investor the short list instead of the firehose. The domain part is incidental. The shape is the point, and you can apply the same shape to leads, applicants, tickets or trades.

Where the paying work is going

Here is the part I would bet on, and I am betting my year on it.

Businesses are not going to buy models. Models are a commodity input and they already know it. What they cannot buy off a shelf is a standard installed inside their operation: the thing that decides which lead is real, which invoice is wrong, which applicant to call, which of today's thousand possible actions the business should actually take. That is judgment, it is specific to them, and someone has to sit with them and build it.

That someone is the job. Not a prompt engineer, not a model trainer. An operator who can walk into a business, find the place where people are drowning in volume, and install a standard that thins it. Agent operations, done properly, is that trade.

Good news if you are reading this on a developer site: you are already most of the way there. You understand systems, constraints and failure. The missing half is commercial, and it is learnable far faster than the technical half was.

That gap is why I built the Agent Ops Club. It is the whole operation handed over: learn agent ops, license the software, sell it as your own. I install your first agent employee with you live, you get the library under a resale license, and it carries a first client guarantee, which is that you land your first client within ninety days or I keep working with you one to one until you do. I put a guarantee on it because I believe the argument above. There is far more demand for installed judgment than there are people who can install it, and that gap stays open for years.

One small ask before you go, and it costs you nothing. Look at whatever you are building and tell me what it refuses. If the answer is nothing, that is the most valuable thing you will learn this week. I am around in the Vibe Coding is Life group if you want to argue with me about it.

Agents crossed 99% this year. Here is where the paying work goes next.

Mark Fulton — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 06:25:45 +0000

In June 2026 a browser-control agent scored 99.19% on the WebVoyager benchmark, measured across 643 live-web tasks on 15 real websites. The leaderboard is public.

I had been waiting on that number for about two years. In October 2025 I posted publicly that the missing piece was 99% reliable browser use agents, that Gemini had just reached 69%, and that it would be over within the year. I am not claiming a crystal ball. I am saying I bet a business on the assumption and the assumption held, and I want to tell you what I think happens next, because I think most developers are still preparing for the wrong thing.

Under 70% is a demo. Over 99% is staff.

This is the distinction I would tattoo on people if I could.

Below roughly 70% reliability, an agent works in the video and fails on Tuesday. You cannot put it in front of a client, because the failure is silent and the cleanup costs more than the task did. Every "look what I automated" thread you have scrolled past lives in that band.

At 99% it stops being a demo and becomes staff. Not because it got smarter, but because you can finally stop watching it.

And the work that opens up at that threshold is not the work people expect. It is not more code generation. It is the enormous category that never had an API in the first place: the dashboard that only renders in a browser, the platform that never shipped a public endpoint, the interface built for a human and nothing else. That work has been permanently off limits to automation. It is also most of what people actually do at work.

So the interesting question stopped being "can an agent do this." It became "who is going to walk into a business and set it up."

Four things I learned running agents in production

I have been building AI agents for four years and I have sold over $1M in web and AI solutions. Most of what I know came from things breaking at 3am, so let me shortcut some of it for you.

Reliability is a specification problem, not a model problem. When an agent fails in production, the instinct is to reach for a bigger model. In my experience it is almost always that the job was underspecified and the agent filled the gap with a reasonable guess. Reasonable guesses are exactly what you do not want at scale. Before you upgrade anything, go read what you actually asked for.

Write the standard once, in the place the work reads it, not in the chat. This is the single highest-leverage prompt engineering move I know and almost nobody does it. If you correct an agent in conversation, you have fixed one run. If you write the rule into the file the routine loads every time, you have fixed every future run. I run five separate publishing routines against one shared standards document. Fixing behavior in that one file changes all five. Corrections that live only in a chat window get re-taught forever.

Narrow the job, do not broaden the model. An agent asked to "handle marketing" will fail. An agent asked to do one role, with a defined output, on a schedule, succeeds far past where people expect. Reliability comes from the shape of the job. This is why I package agents as whole roles rather than as scripts or as one universal assistant.

Nothing counts until it has survived contact with a real business. A system that works in a clean repo is not a system. It is a demo with good lighting. I do not consider anything finished until it has run unattended against real data, on a schedule, for weeks, and I would suggest you hold the same bar before you put your name on something for a client.

Where the paying work is going

Enterprise AI companies popularized a title for what is coming: the Forward-Deployed AI Engineer. An engineer who embeds with a company's operations teams and builds custom business agents on-site. Not a consultant who leaves a slide deck. Someone who sits with the sales team, the support team and the marketing team, and leaves working agents running behind them.

Medium and large businesses want agents working alongside their people. Almost none of them have anyone on staff who can make that happen, and they are not going to solve it by hiring another SaaS subscription.

Here is the part I would think carefully about if I were you. The value is moving away from writing the software and toward deploying and operating it. The person who can walk in, understand how a business actually runs, and leave three agents doing real jobs is going to be worth considerably more than the person who can produce the same three agents in isolation. That is a different skill set, it is closer to consulting than to engineering, and very few developers are building it deliberately.

The agentic shift is not going to take your work. It is going to move where the work is paid, and it is moving toward whoever can install this stuff inside a business that does not speak your language.

What I built, and the invitation

Agent Ops Club went live yesterday at club.reinventing.ai. It is the whole operating model, packaged as the job above.

Members get the Agent Ops Masterclass, 9 modules and 44 lessons covering the model end to end. A library of 22 full stack systems with a resale license, each of which ran in my own business before it entered the library. Eight Agent Employees as whole roles, GTM Engineer, SEO, Web Dev, Social Media, Ad Manager, Sales, Customer Satisfaction and Chief of Staff, each running routines on schedule. Live strategy sessions with replays, 1 on 1 booking, and new systems added regularly.

The license is the part that matters, so I will state it plainly. You can customize and deploy everything in the library for clients at any price you set, and you keep every dollar. You can sell implementation and managed operations on top, and I take no cut of that either. What you cannot do is redistribute the source or hand the code to a client. Deployments yes, source redistribution no. The Agent Employees fall under that same license, which means you can sell them, and very few people are offering that yet.

There is also one thing I expect to regret. Every member can claim one custom application, designed and built by me, and owned outright by them. Source, brand, and every dollar it earns. No license, no equity, no revenue share, and it never enters the library. I take two a month, first come first serve.

It is $399 a month, billed annually, $4,788 charged today for a full year. Existing Reinventing.AI Hub members are grandfathered at their current rates.

If you want a large audience watching someone build, this is the wrong room. If you want a small group shipping real software to paying clients, come in.

Whether or not any of that is for you, I would take the four lessons above seriously, because the threshold has already been crossed and the businesses have not noticed yet. That gap is the opportunity, and it does not stay open forever.

Tell me what you would build if someone handed you a free build slot and a resale license. I read everything here. I also run a free community for people building this way, the Facebook group at facebook.com/groups/vibecodinglife and Skool at skool.com/vibe-coding-is-life. Come argue with me about any of it.

My free tool out-impressed 29 of my 32 blog posts. Its ranking got five times worse.

Mark Fulton — Fri, 21 Aug 2026 06:31:59 +0000

Two numbers off my Search Console this morning, same 28 day window, same site.

The free landing page roast tool: 42 impressions, average position 38.0.

The blog post I wrote to support that tool: 11 impressions, average position 21.1.

Six weeks earlier it was the other way round. On July 4 the tool sat at position 7.5 on 18 impressions and the article was at 17.8 on 38. So the tool has more than doubled its reach since then, and its average position has gotten roughly five times worse over the same stretch.

Both of those things are true at once, and working out why changed how I plan the next tool.

The tool

favors.dev/roast takes a URL and gives back a conversion score out of 100.

It screenshots your full public page, then grades the copy and the design together across six categories: clarity, value proposition, trust, CTA, visual design and SEO. You get back the specific issues hurting signups with a fix for each, the things the page already does well, and a one line verdict.

No signup, no credit card, no email field. Paste a URL, press "Roast it", read the result.

It is deliberately small, and the scoping is most of why it shipped. The cut list was: accounts and password resets, saved history, dashboards, billing and usage limits, settings and themes, support for every edge case, and an admin panel for myself. Every one of those is how a weekend build turns into a month. If a free tool needs a billing system, you have started building a second product by accident.

What those numbers actually say

Here is the honest read, because "my free tool beat 29 of my 32 blog posts" is technically true and a bit misleading.

Reading	Tool impressions	Tool position	Article impressions	Article position
Jul 4	18	7.5	38	17.8
Jul 11	20	7.1	42	16.9
Jul 19	22	10.4	39	19.1
Aug 15	42	38.0	11	21.1

Impressions climbed because the tool started matching a much wider spread of queries. Average position fell for exactly the same reason. It is not ranking better. It is ranking on more things, most of them further down the page. A URL sitting at 7.5 on one tight query and a URL sitting at 38.0 across a lot of loose ones are different animals, and only one of them is growing.

The second honest thing: these are small numbers. 42 impressions is 42 impressions. Favors.dev is an early site and I am not going to dress this up as traction.

What makes it worth writing down is the ratio, not the size. That tool out-impressed 29 of the 32 blog posts on the site that ranked at all. It took a weekend. The posts take a morning each, and there are 32 of them.

The mechanism is intent matching, not some special treatment for tools. Somebody typing a query that ends in a verb wants to do the thing. A page where they can do the thing satisfies that better than a page describing how it is done.

The bridge, which is where free tools usually get ruined

The common failure is gating the result. You build something good, it starts working, and then you put the score behind an email field. That turns interest into a bounce at the exact moment the visitor is most engaged, and it kills the sharing that made the tool worth building in the first place.

Mine works in two moves. The roast is free, instant and complete: the score and the reasoning, no account. What an account adds is a step by step fix plan generated from that specific roast. That is a different artifact, not the same one held hostage. By the time somebody sees that offer they have already read a real critique of their own page, so they are deciding whether the next thing is worth an email, not whether I am worth trusting at all.

Three rules I would keep whatever you build. The next step should follow from the result the visitor just saw, so it reads as a continuation instead of a toll booth. It should be one option, not a menu. And it should be worth more than the free thing, or people will correctly ignore it.

What the tool is actually marketing

Favors.dev is a marketing co-op for founders who ship.

Founders complete small verified marketing tasks for each other and earn points to spend on their own launch. Actions run from +2 points for favoriting a launch up to +2,500 for a featured article, across 14 tracked action types. The work gets verified before points release, and 25% of every request is burned so points stay scarce. You cannot buy points. You can only earn them.

New members land with 250 points and can start clearing the queue straight away, without adding a project of their own first. Most tasks take between 2 and 10 minutes. When you are ready to launch you post a rally, which is a bundled request for testimonials, feedback and shares. Six rallies are live on it right now.

Trade favors, earn points, launch faster. The roast tool exists because the founder who wants an honest read on their landing page is the same founder who needs help launching it.

The rest of today

Everything below ran unattended while I was doing other things. Times are Bangkok.

08:31 PounceDomains published "Atom.com Appraisal Alternative: Score vs. Buying Loop".
08:55 Favors.dev published the full teardown this post is drawn from, at 743 lines of TSX in one commit.
11:12 The DomainNetwork monorepo published 10 posts across 10 live sites in a single commit: 30 files, 1,308 insertions. print-excel-on-one-page on supersheet.app, best-day-to-launch-on-product-hunt on trymy.app, h264-vs-h265 on vidclip.app, invoice-without-a-company on billable.dev, harvey-ai-alternatives on legalizeai.com, job-costing-for-small-contractors on smbdashboard.com, how-to-get-to-80-wpm on typetimer.com, questions-to-ask-grandparents on questioncard.com, time-blocking-your-day on smartclock.app, and 144-languages-claim-explained on aiearbuds.com.
12:05 Reinventing.AI published its weekday post.

Ten of those eleven posts are articles. Exactly one of them is a tool. Based on the table above, I have the ratio backwards, and that is the thing I am fixing next.

One ask

Go roast a page you own and tell me whether the score is wrong. Not whether you liked it, whether it is wrong. The rubric is only as good as the arguments people bring against it, and a bad score I can defend is more useful to me than a good one nobody checked.

If you are building in public and want somewhere to do it, I run Vibe Coding is Life: a Facebook group for the daily stuff, and a Skool community for people who want the builds broken down properly. Both are full of founders shipping small things on weekends, which is the entire premise of this post.

One repo, ten Next.js sites: the commit that published ten blog posts this morning

Mark Fulton — Thu, 20 Aug 2026 08:20:05 +0000

The commit that landed at 10:29 this morning was 30 files and 1,240 insertions. Ten blog posts, ten hero images, ten content calendars ticked one row forward. One commit, ten different websites, ten different audiences, none of which have anything to do with each other.

That commit is the clearest picture I can give of what I have actually been building this year, so I want to walk through it properly: what the ten sites are, what makes them one repo instead of ten, and the parts I have not got right yet.

The ten sites

They live in a Next.js monorepo called DomainNetwork. Every directory under apps/ is a self-contained site with its own domain, its own Vercel project, and its own way of making money. Six of them are launched:

trymy.app is a directory for indie apps. The homepage says "You built it. Now get people to try it." The rule that makes it different from the big directories is that every listing has to be something a visitor can actually run today: free, freemium, or a real free trial. Submissions are free and human reviewed. This morning it published a Show HN checklist, which is the kind of thing its audience is genuinely searching for at 2am before a launch.
billable.dev is a free invoice generator for developers. It runs entirely in the browser with no server behind it, builds an invoice, and prints to PDF. The feature I still like best is that it reads a git log and turns commit messages into billable line items. Pro is $4 a month billed every six months, or $79 once for life, and it adds branding, templates, estimates and CSV/JSON export.
typetimer.com is a typing test with a verified certificate at $4.99, or $29 for a recruiter pack of ten.
legalizeai.com is a paid directory for AI legal software.
questioncard.com does flash cards and question card games.
smbdashboard.com is a small business dashboard.

Four more are built, deployed and publishing soon. They have posts going out every weekday and they are nearly finished products.

What makes it one repo

The thing I want to convince you of is that ten sites is not ten times the work. It is close to one and a half times the work, and almost all of the saving comes from three decisions.

One workspace, ten Vercel projects. The repo is npm workspaces. Vercel imports the same repository ten times, each project pointing its root directory at apps/<name>. A push touching apps/billable deploys billable.dev and nothing else. There is one npm install, one lockfile, one set of upgrades.

A machine-readable manifest. There is a sites.json at the root listing every site with its domain, type, monetization, and whether it is launched. Automations iterate that file rather than a list I keep in my head. Adding a site means adding an entry, and the daily publishing routine and the Search Console indexing sweep both pick it up on their own. That single file is why the eleventh site will not cost me a day of wiring.

Blog posts are markdown, not a CMS. Each site reads apps/<name>/content/posts/*.md. No database, no admin panel, no editor to log into. A post is a file with frontmatter, a hero image is a WebP in public/blog/, and publishing is a commit. That is why this morning's publish is legible as a diff, and why the whole thing survives me not being awake.

There is also a shared BUILD-STANDARDS.md that every app has to follow, covering the SEO baseline, the blog system, voice and env conventions, and a 16-step LAUNCH-CHECKLIST.md for adding a site. Both exist because I shipped config wrong more than once and got tired of rediscovering the same traps.

The part I cannot prove yet

Here is the honest bit. I can show you the machine. I cannot yet show you the traffic.

The posts are real and researched. Today's Billable article works through the nine extra fields a cross-border invoice needs and when a client's country makes them withhold tax at source. Today's SuperSheet article answers "best font for a spreadsheet" by reading the advance width of each digit straight out of the font files instead of repeating what everyone else wrote. That is the standard, and I hold to it.

But a network like this is a bet on compounding, and compounding takes longer than a build log does. On my main domain blog, indexing stalled badly enough that I paused daily publishing there back in July and set a measurable gate before it turns back on: at least one blog URL indexed, or at least one blog impression in 28 days. Neither has happened yet. So when I tell you ten sites publish every weekday, please read that as a bet in progress rather than a result. I will post the numbers when there are numbers.

The rest of today

Favors.dev published "Programmatic SEO for Indie Hackers: A Real Teardown". Favors.dev is the one where founders trade favors, earn points, and launch faster.
PounceDomains published a comparison piece on why a wholesale appraisal number is not a bid.
The Search Console indexing sweep and the daily social drafts both ran on schedule.

Four blogs and ten sites in a morning is the whole point of the arrangement. None of it required me to open an editor.

One ask

On Saturday I am handing the entire repo over. The session is called Domain Factory: One Repo, 10 Sites, 10 Stripe Businesses, it runs Saturday August 22 at 10:00 AM Eastern on Zoom with the replay included, and it is $149. You get the monorepo itself with skeletons for the three business types (paid directory, paid tool, storefront), the daily blog routine, the indexing sweep, the 16-step launch checklist, and I set up one attendee domain live during the hour. If you have three domains sitting in a registrar account doing nothing, that is who it is for.

If that is not your thing, come argue with me for free instead. I run a builder community called Vibe Coding is Life: the Facebook group is at facebook.com/groups/vibecodinglife and the Skool community is at skool.com/vibe-coding-is-life. I post the ugly parts of this build there too.

And the actual ask: go look at trymy.app and tell me whether the directory would have been useful on your last launch, or whether it is one more place nobody visits. I would rather hear the second answer now than in six months.

Namecheap closes every auction at 11:00 AM ET. Last-second bidding is a myth.

Mark Fulton — Wed, 19 Aug 2026 12:49:04 +0000

If you have ever tried to win a domain at auction, you probably assumed the game works like eBay: watch the clock, wait for the last eight seconds, fire your bid, walk away with the name.

On Namecheap, that does not work. Not "works badly". Does not work.

Namecheap's expiring and marketplace auctions close in a daily batch at 11:00 AM ET. Every auction ending that day ends at roughly the same moment, which means there is no quiet corner of the day where you and one other bidder are paying attention. And if a bid lands in the closing window, the auction extends. So the buzzer-beater you were planning gets absorbed and the clock keeps running.

The winner is not the fastest click. The winner is whoever set the smartest proxy maximum, on a name they found before anyone else was looking at it.

I have been building PounceDomains around that one fact for months, and it is the reason the product looks the way it does.

The edge moved from timing to discovery

If speed is not the lever, the levers left are: find the good names earlier, and know what they are actually worth before you commit a number.

So the engine scans the Namecheap aftermarket around the clock rather than at the bell. You describe the domains you want in plain English, something like "pronounceable 5-letter .com brandables under $50, no numbers or hyphens", and it builds a tuned config you can edit. If your config is too broad, it tells you and tightens it. There are seven scoring lenses you can stack: pronounceable, brandable, exact-match keyword, short premium, dictionary word, two-word combo, and free-text custom criteria. Fast programmatic filters run first, then AI scores what survives, and only domains that clear your threshold become matches. It has graded over 340,000 domains so far.

The second lever is the one I care about more.

Every match arrives with its receipts

The failure mode in domain investing is not missing a name. It is paying $400 for something worth $80 because a free appraisal tool printed a confident number.

So every match carries the signals underneath the number: Ahrefs authority, backlink count, monthly search demand, domain age, and last-sold comparable sales. Third-party appraisals from Estibot and GoDaddy are in there too, deliberately positioned as one more input rather than the headline. On top of that sits a conservative AI resale range, biased low on purpose, and a suggested maximum bid that is margin-safe by design. It never sits below the current minimum bid, and it exists to inform your ceiling, not to become your target.

A real card from the live feed looks like this: sarin.ai, scored 80 on the pronounceable lens, bidding from $10, domain authority 0 out of 10, 91 backlinks, 23,000 monthly searches on the term, registered 2026, estimated resale range $200 to $800, suggested max bid $60.

You can disagree with that $60. That is the point. You are disagreeing with visible evidence instead of trusting a single number with nothing behind it.

The two lanes nobody watches

Two features exist purely because the aftermarket has cheap corners that most people never look in.

Closeouts. When an expired auction ends with zero bids, Namecheap re-lists it and steps the minimum price down toward a floor as low as $1 on some TLDs. That lane is thousands of listings deep and almost entirely unranked, so PounceDomains pulls it and sorts it by authority, backlinks, search demand and age against the asking price. Aged names with real link profiles and no bidders surface instead of hiding. There is a 21-year-old .com with 309 backlinks sitting at $5 on the live sample right now.

Drop monitors. A no-bid expired domain usually is not gone. Weeks later it quietly drops and becomes available to hand-register at the standard fee. So the app estimates each one's drop date, re-checks availability as it approaches, and alerts you the moment the name is registerable, with a one-click register link. You skip the auction entirely and pay eleven dollars instead of bidding.

Then, because winning is only half the business, wins auto-log into a portfolio with cost basis, realized profit and loss, one-click sell links to Namecheap, Afternic, Sedo, Dynadot and Atom, and renewal reminders at 30, 14, 7 and 1 days so a name you paid for never lapses by accident.

Auto-bid does exist, as an optional power tool for hyper-targeted names, gated behind a master switch, a per-domain maximum, a daily budget cap and a dry-run mode. It is off until you turn it on. Discovery is the product. Hands-free bidding is a setting.

On the engineering side, every third-party key is encrypted at rest with AES-256-GCM and never displayed again after saving, and account data is isolated with row-level security. Your Namecheap account, your API key, your funds, your bids.

Free plan is one config on hourly scans. Pro is $39 a month for five configs and 10-minute scans. Elite is $99 for twenty configs and 5-minute scans. Every new account gets a 14-day Pro trial with no card.

What shipped today

The appraisal problem got its own article this morning. HumbleWorth Alternative: The Free Number With No Comps went live on the PounceDomains blog at 08:43, a 3,391-word piece on what a free appraisal actually computes, why the missing comparable-sales column is the thing that costs you money, and how to read the three prices these tools hand you. It is honest about where PounceDomains fits and where it does not, which felt more useful than pretending the tool solves valuation outright.

Over on Favors.dev, where developers trade favors, earn points and launch faster, a piece called "SEO for Solo Founders: The One-Hour-a-Day System" went up at 09:11.

And on Saturday I am running a live session called Domain Factory, on running one repo as ten sites and ten Stripe-backed businesses. That and the seventeen sessions before it live at reinventing.ai.

One ask

If you own domains you are not using, go check what they are actually worth against comparable sales rather than against a free estimate. You can do that inside PounceDomains on the free plan, or with any tool that shows you comps. I would genuinely like to know how far off the free number was, because I keep hearing wildly different answers and I want a better sense of the spread.

If you want to see this stuff as it gets built, I post the working notes in the Vibe Coding is Life community. The Facebook group is at facebook.com/groups/vibecodinglife and the Skool community is at skool.com/vibe-coding-is-life. Plenty of people in there shipping products and comparing notes on what actually sells.

ChatGPT Applet Developer Prompt v1.0

Mark Fulton — Sun, 08 Oct 2023 09:38:39 +0000

Introducing the Applet Developer Prompt

This prompt for GPT-4 will allow anyone, regardless of skill level, to generate beautiful and useful JavaScript applets.

These can be all kinds of simple, useful tools, embeds, calculators, charts, planners, widgets, image apps, text transformation, etc.

You are only limited by your imagination and what JavaScript libraries, frameworks, and APIs you have access to. There are many available for free.

📂 ChatGPT Generated Apps Collection

Try creating your own applet with ChatGPT-4 today!

You just need an idea. 💡

🗒️ Note: This prompt is intended to be used on the GPT-4 Default model.

⚙️ Applet Developer Prompt for ChatGPT

Name Your Applet: 
Describe What Your App Does: 

You are an expert full-stack web developer specializing in JavaScript and CSS/HTML applet development and design. Your task is to develop expert-level code for this project. 

Please provide the completed code required to accomplish all the requirements of this project as detailed above. 

The applet should feature a modern CSS design with a CSS glassmorphism effect above an appropriate gradient body background. Use flex-direction: column unless your app needs a different layout. Include an h1 title tag above the app container. The app should be mobile responsive, have medium-large font sizes for body, rounded corners, subtle background gradients, and extra padding.  The app should be centered on the page. Add a centered copyright ''©2023 {Applet Name}'' below the app container. 

Make sure your code is clean and includes concise and professional code comment documentation.

Using this Prompt: All you have to do is edit the first two lines. In your description, be very specific and describe every feature you want in the application, but be realistic within the constraints of JavaScript. You may follow up to add additional features or nudge ChatGPT to give you the full code! Use the 📂 CodeZip app to package and download your app code.

💡Tip for App Ideas: Try to think of things that annoy you or take up your time and solve them!

📂 CodeZip - Easily save and download code from ChatGPT

One important app I created entirely with this prompt is the 📂 CodeZip app for ChatGPT. It’s the app that makes this prompt 10x more efficient. Try it to download your ChatGPT code fast.

Feedback Welcome

What are your thoughts? What will you build?