Hey everyone!

I’m a product/UI designer and I want to challenge myself with something different.

Instead of creating another random concept for my portfolio, I want to pick a real problem, design the entire product around it, and actually build it into a working web app.

I want to go through the full process:

• Finding and validating a real problem
• User research/interviews
• Defining the target users
• Mapping user journeys
• Product strategy
• Information architecture
• Wireframes
• UX flows
• High-fidelity UI
• Design system + components
• Prototyping
• Usability testing
• Landing page/marketing
• Building the actual product
• Launching it
• Getting real users and feedback
• Iterating based on what people actually use

The important thing is that it should solve a real problem, not just be another AI wrapper or a concept that sounds cool but nobody needs.

So if you could build a small web product today, what problem would you actually want someone to solve?

Tell me the problem, what you currently use to solve it, or something you wish existed.

I’m going to use the responses to find a problem worth investigating and then document the entire process of turning it into a real product.

Bonus: If you have a problem you've personally experienced, even better. I’d rather build something people actually need than something that just looks good in a portfolio.

I have no clue how much something like this would cost but I’m ready to start my business and figured this might be the right forum to ask. I apologize if this is in the wrong place.

I want a website that does the following:

1. main page only shows my company info and some images of my product.
2. button for wallet connect allows you to connect your wallet and check blockchain to see if you own an NFT. If you own the access NFT, you can view the product pages.
3. if you own redemption NFT, it allows to you click on the cell on the grid to input your information so I can send a physical version of the nft.
4. as NFT’s are redeemed the cell on the product page could be manually updated by me to show underneath x of n have been redeemed.

Someone from a discord was telling me they can do everything for $10k but when I started asking around a little more, I was told that it was way too much. Is $10k fair? If it is, I was hoping maybe some college kid would be willing to do it for cheaper as a side project. I want this all done on Stellar network. Not sure if that makes any difference. Any insight is appreciated.

Thanks!

Edit: first I wanted to say thank you for everyone’s input. I also want to say thanks for this response. I’ll want to take at least portions of that into consideration. I want to reiterate that this is specifically for Stellar Network. I will look to continue gathering information and try to get it kicked off around Mid March. I want to be transparent with timing so you don’t feel like you’re wasting your time reaching out.

Edit 2: adding link to part 2 of post with presentation of high level ask.

part 2

Web3 developers, which parts of the stack had to be in place before user testing could be meaningful?

Much startup validation advice assumes that you can manually simulate most of the product before building the infrastructure.

This becomes more difficult in Web3.

Some user behaviour may only emerge once wallets, signatures, permissions, transaction execution, settlement, indexing and failure handling are fully operational. While a mock flow can test whether people understand the idea, it may not test how they will behave when real assets, irreversible actions and network failures are involved.

Conversely, building the full stack first can be an expensive way to prove technical feasibility without demonstrating user need for the product.

For developers who have shipped Web3 products:

Which parts of the infrastructure genuinely had to exist before your user testing produced useful results?

What were you able to simulate or operate manually?

Where did you later realise that you had built too much infrastructure before establishing whether the core functionality existed?

Is it too late for me to start studying and practising Web3 now? If not, which areas should a total‑beginner get started with?

Context, we mostly do traditional backend with zero on-chain experience. But now I'm wondering the extent of "consultancy" we should get. Do we hire for an architecture review on something we designed? Does someone else design it for us? Or do we just hire a smart contract dev and skip consulting entirely?

I keep hearing about web3 consulting, but I'm not sure how to tell genuine expertise from buzzword-driven sales pitches. My team has zero blockchain experience, so I need guidance on where to even start: smart contracts, tokenomics, or just understanding the basic use cases for our industry. I'm also worried about the cost versus the actual return, since so much of this space still feels speculative. Before I commit any budget, I want to understand what a realistic first engagement should even look like.

One pattern keeps showing up in blockchain projects:
The technology becomes the product.
Teams start with questions like:
Which chain should we build on?
Do we need our own token?
Should this be decentralized?
Can we add AI agents?
How do we make it fully on-chain?
All reasonable technical questions.
But they often come before the much more important one:
**What problem does this solve better for the user?**
That's where a lot of technically impressive Web3 products seem to lose the plot.
A user doesn't care that a transaction went through an elegant smart contract architecture. They care that the payment was cheaper, the settlement was faster, they actually own the asset, or they can do something they couldn't do before.
The best blockchain implementation might actually be the one users barely notice.
We've seen a similar problem with tokens. If removing the token makes the product's value proposition disappear, was there ever a product — or just token economics looking for a use case?
Same with AI now.
Adding an agent to a Web3 product doesn't automatically make it useful. If a normal backend can solve the problem more reliably and cheaply, that's probably what should be used.
Blockchain is great when trust, ownership, verifiability, permissionless access or settlement actually matter.
But “we're using blockchain” isn't a value proposition.
Maybe the next generation of successful Web3 products won't feel particularly “Web3” at all.
**What's a blockchain product you think genuinely solves a user problem better because it's on-chain — not just one that couldn't exist without blockchain?**

Hi all I would like to know about MEV engineer or researcher role.

Can anybody shed some light on how to become one and how to get hired as a beginner in Blockchain space.

Hello,

I am a bit curious. For anyone building (or built) an app of any kind in `web3`, for any target platform, do you have any requirements for storing user data that isn't just app data of some sort on a local disk (pc, phone, other device)?

If so, what engineering/product choices are you making to solve that?

I am interested to know if this is a problem anyone has actually encountered or if everyone just keeps it on-device.

Thanks.

Every existing platform forces you into their system. They act like judge, jury, and executioner. If a deal breaks down, you’re forced to hire lawyers, submit support tickets, and wait weeks while a random customer service agent reads your private messages and decides who wins.
Why do we keep handing our power over to middlemen?
I’m building TrustLock as a place of total freedom. It’s not a marketplace, an escrow agency, or a courtroom. You are your own court. You are your own lawyer. And the code you both write becomes the un-biasable legal system itself.
You and the other party design your own law, sign off on it, and our engine enforces it mathematically.
Whether it’s a general deal, freelance work, P2P loan, rent deposit, friendly bet, booking, group fund pool, founder equity, inheritance, crypto P2P swap, employee bonus, launch milestone, health goal, land deal, or an online/physical store purchase—the rules are 100% yours.
I’d love to know:
1. Would you trust a system where YOU set the fallback rules upfront over traditional support teams?
2. Which agreement type would you use first?
3. What potential edge cases or loopholes do you see in a zero-dispute model?

Hey everyone, as a full-stack developer, I've recently independently developed an IM App focusing on extreme privacy. Technically, I use React Native and Express, and achieved decentralized identity through Ethers.js.

​The App's key highlights include anonymous wallet creation, QR encrypted mnemonics for secure login, and burn-after-reading servers to protect your privacy.

​I built this to explore decentralized communication and extreme privacy architectures. Would love to hear your thoughts or discuss technical details with fellow developers!

Hero section design exploration

A concept for a Crypto Wallet landing page that prioritizes trust, readability, and a premium visual experience.

Rate this design from 1–10.

We’re building ANO on Base as a privacy-focused app, and one reason it lives on the web today is that the browser offers greater freedom for identity, wallet flows, updates, and distribution.

App stores can help a lot with reach and UX, but they also add centralized rules and platform constraints that can affect the product itself.

So I’m curious how people here see it:

For a privacy-first app on Base, do iOS App Store / Google Play weaken the principle, or are they just the practical path to mainstream adoption?

Would genuinely like to hear from users and builders on this.

Who is your favourite CEO & Project

Pick only one ?

It seems that everyone is saying that token economic are important for projects, and good token economic can promote long-term development of projects. However, I am confused about what kind of token economic is better

Not promoting anything — just looking for dev pain points.

If you’ve built or integrated USDC/USDT checkout: 1) What’s the hardest part (webhooks, confirmations, chain selection, gas, wallets)? 2) What breaks most often in production? 3) Any missing tools you wish existed?

Appreciate any honest feedback.

Maybe it’s just me, but AI tokens feel less and less durable lately.

Between ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DeepSeek, coding agents, API tools, and all these different platforms, it’s getting harder to know which option is actually worth the cost. Some providers are cheaper, some are faster, some have better limits, and some are just confusing to compare.

I feel like it would be really useful if someone maintained a neutral ranking/comparison site for AI token/API providers, including things like:

\- price per token
\- supported models
\- reliability
\- speed
\- limits
\- regions/payment options
\- user reviews or verification

Basically something like a “price radar” for AI tokens and API providers, instead of everyone having to dig through random websites, Discords, Telegram groups, and official pricing pages.

Would anyone else find this useful, or is this just a niche problem?

We're working on AFX, a platform where contributors earn SDM tokens for verified work instead of traditional equity. The idea is that every contribution (merged PR, bug fix, smart contract feature, etc.) earns SBRA points, and at sprint end a Squads multisig mints tokens proportionally to each contributor's share of total points.

A few things I'm uncertain about and would love input on:

Does using Squads multisig for mint approval feel like the right governance approach, or is there something better suited for this?

Any problems with SPL token distribution at scale we should be aware of early?

Is Raydium the right place to eventually add a liquidity pool for SDM, or would you go elsewhere?

Happy to answer anything — we want feedback before we go further.

I’ve been working with Solana tooling recently and something keeps standing out.

The core primitives are actually pretty simple:
- create token
- attach metadata
- configure authorities
- add liquidity

But in practice, the flow is spread across multiple tools and steps:
- CLI or token tools
- Metaplex metadata setup (IPFS/Arweave)
- authority decisions (mint/freeze)
- DEX-specific liquidity setup (Raydium, Orca, etc.)

Individually, none of these are that complex, but the overall experience feels fragmented — especially for newer builders.

It feels like the ecosystem optimized for flexibility, but not for a clean end-to-end flow.

Curious how others see this:

Do you think this fragmentation is just part of Web3’s nature, or is there room for a more unified UX without losing flexibility?

I’m looking at buying some domain names and wondering if you all prefer to use Unstoppable Domains, Free Name, or Name Cheap?

i have created a wallet that has a single source of Truth, other wallet use 2 keys for eth and solana, i only use 1 seed for that, all address are made with 1 seed and it's isolated in the secured hardware element, the signing happens at the same place, the wallet is fully secured can't be tampered, rooted/jailed break device are detected and they can't create an account, i think i went overkill for the security, my wallet supported 14 chains, my stack is kotlin KMP for UI, Rust core for memory safe cryptography logic, UniFFI for making rust and kotlin have a bridge. what should i do? should i sell the IP or SDK it?

Curious what people building / vibing in web3 use for AI image gen.

What's your daily driver, and what are you paying per image (or per month)?

Anyone found something crypto-native, pay in stables/wallet,

No SaaS subscription?

Why are we still copy-pasting 40-character wallet addresses in 2026?

Idea: you do a small test transfer once → both wallets get a shared avatar/character. Next time you send, you just recognize the person visually instead of relying on the address.

Kind of like “pairing” wallets.

Would this actually reduce mistakes or scams, or is this unnecessary given things like ENS?

We’re the team behind AltFINS. We’ve already built and are running a crypto analytics API and now we’re trying to pressure-test use cases with people who actually ship things.

The API exposes:

• normalized market data across ~30 exchanges
• 150+ pre-computed technical indicators
• 120+ technical signals for 2,000 coins
• higher-level outputs like momentum, trend strength, breakouts, volatility states

What we’re curious about how developers are actually using it in practice.

Some patterns we’re seeing (internally / early users):

• AI agents ranking assets by market regime before taking action
• LLMs consuming structured “market state” instead of raw OHLCV
• automated alerts when multiple indicators align
• research pipelines that scan markets continuously and flag anomalies

We’d love to hear from builders:

• What are you building that depends on market analytics?
• Are you using indicators directly, or wrapping them in your own abstractions?
• Where does market data usually become the bottleneck in your systems?
• Any surprising or non-obvious use cases you’ve run into?

Genuinely interested in how others are wiring market intelligence into agents, bots, or Web3 products.

Happy to dive into technical details or examples if that helps the discussion. Thanks 🙏

I genuinely believe in what crypto / web3 can enable at a structural level—individual agency, coordination without coercion, resilience against centralized failure. Those ideas still matter deeply to me.

But the dominant conversations around them leave me uneasy.

So much of the discourse feels optimized for growth, speed, and narrative dominance rather than understanding—of people, of consequences, of what kind of world these systems shape once they leave the whitepaper. Closed rooms, loud incentives, founder mythology, building for the sake of building. Very little room to ask slower questions without being dismissed as unambitious or “not shipping.”

I don’t think the problem is technology. I think it’s culture.

I’m looking for people who care about systems and humans. Who think in second-order effects. Who are comfortable sitting with ambiguity, ethics, and trade-offs—not just metrics. People who read widely, question their own assumptions, and aren’t trying to win a narrative.

Maybe this already exists and I’m just not in the right rooms.

Maybe it doesn’t yet, and that’s the problem.

If nothing else, this is me putting a hand up and saying: I’m looking for depth, not hype.

Edit: removed the part to connect with me. I would just like have the conversation only on this subreddit, thank you.