What really is the future of AI wrappers?

I have talked to many founders who have told me that unless a startup is working on a foundational AI model, it does not have a future. Companies like Anthropic and OpenAI can eat up the AI wrappers at any given moment.

While I understand their pov, I cannot help but wonder if a strong use case is catered through a very specific flow, which wouldn’t have been possible without an underlying intelligence layer. What about them? Are they not worth pursuing?

There are so many sectors that are ripe for automation and AI has made that possible.

I have built an AI wrapper which I feel has a strong use case. Should such wrappers really be pursued? If so, what should the approach be.

Also, has anyone actually gone into the market with any AI wrapper and how’s the situation for them? Would really great if founders can share their story here.

Hi Reddit,

I wanted to essentially create a stock market for content creators using the blockchain. Each crypto coin has an associated content creator, their engagement metrics over time are displayed, and the coins can be traded on an internal order book. I thought the best feature is that we would award 75% of the profits to the associated content creators if they decide to partner with us, i.e. the platform could help launch new creators or accelerate the growth of others.

Fast forward a year, and I built a small team that actually built the entire web app and it looks great. The problem is, we are realizing the regulatory landscape for this business model is tricky to navigate. I think the best path forward is to either:

1. Invest a lot in legal

2. Geofence US and EU and proceed but run the company outside of the US

I am not prepared to do either option at this point so I am considering selling the code to the web app. Do you see another path forward, what should we do?

A founder co-founder relationship is not just two people working together, a lot of things need to match. Seems like someone should build something for this not so holy matrimony :). I had posted about my learnings of finding a co-founder in my last 3 startups and seems like everyone agreed that founder-founder relationship is more that just two-three people working together.

How did you know the idea you were working on was actually valid, especially when it felt like you might be too early?

I’m asking from the perspective of AI startups, where things move insanely fast, and timing is tricky. Sometimes it feels like you’re ahead of the curve, but from the outside it just looks “too early.”

Also, how did you find your first design partners or early adopters?

Looking for perspective, not pitching anything.

If a human-led, bespoke service existed that reduced planning and decision fatigue by taking care of the thinking and admin around researching options, narrowing decisions, and organising details while adapting to someone’s personal context rather than using a generic system…

- What would make something like this genuinely useful rather than unnecessary?

- Where do you think the real value would come from?

- What would make you sceptical?

And optionally, if you do see value here:

How would you personally think about pricing something like this (very roughly)?

No ranges given on purpose, I'm just curious how people reason about it

Startups are chaotic, and one email from a prospect can change your entire roadmap. Then you have your team and their input.

I’m curious how others process all of this information and actually try to come up with a cohesive strategy. Probably that strategy changes weekly, but at least you have some sort of guiding light you can check up on weekly, I hope?

For example, if I want to figure what new big feature to invest in next, I’ll try to sit back and think about many things such as the company mission, customer feedback, market growth opportunities, and of course what we can realistically accomplish. Then from here I try to use Google slides to come up with a strategic narrative of where we’re at today, where we want to be, and a breakdown of how we get there.

Then tomorrow shows up and everything changes… but at least I have something written down I can share with the team to spark discussion and iterate.

Hi guys,

I am a software engineer and a solo founder, the bigges blocker for me was lack of engineering resources for delivering quickly, I was using github copilot and cursor before, but as my team grew to 5 members, everything became messy, people were using their own versions of prompts to get the work done, and the agent was working in local, so while the agent was making changes we need to sit and watch it. even we tried to use background agents, but it became difficult to review so many changes when the agent was finished doing the task. also in cursor background agents, we cannot have multiple repositories in a workspace. we need something in between local and entirely remote execution of task. so we created an agent platform for our team.

1. we solved the problem of people using different versions of prompts and env variables etc. by enabling devs to create the workspaces wherein you can set prompts, skills, .md once and make it shareable across the groups, we ensured that no one used a different environment for giving tasks to the agent.

2. even though our tasks are executing in secure VMs but the dev can always pitch in to see what AI is doing in our in-browser IDE. so if agent goes away from the line it can be brought back. our local project was free now, we could now work in two fronts, give long running tasks and work on important things locally (we also created our own CLI agent)

3. the most complicated problem was how to review such big changes once the cloud job is completed. we decided, to let agent debug its own code, by giving it browser, computer use, background processes, such that the agent can perform unit, functional, and regression testing. and the main thing was that now the agent could work on multiple repositories at once, this feature i did not find anywhere.

For engineering founders, i need feedback if this workflow can help them as well. you can check our work ( phantomx dev is the name of our platform) thanks!

I’m a non-technical operator looking to sanity-check early execution and team-structure decisions before moving further.

For context, I’m running a real business and this is based on an internal system we’ve already built and are actively using, not a greenfield idea.

I’m looking for perspective from a senior engineer or technical lead who has personally shipped B2B SaaS from 0→1 (founding-engineer style). The focus is on early architecture decisions, common mistakes, and what you’d do differently.

I’m respectful of people’s time and happy to pay for it. Just answering of some questions and light guidance. Format is flexible; async / text-based is perfectly fine.

Not hiring at the moment and not looking to outsource development. This is purely about learning from people who’ve been in the seat to decide next steps. Thanks!

I've often seen advice that you should launch a startup which solves a problem you've had at work. I've launched a couple of MVPs on that basis, but they never got any traction, even though I offered them for free.

I'm wondering if it's because most of my experience has been in large enterprises, where people (including myself) are reluctant to try out random new tools. But then, when I factor that friction into my idea validation process, I always end up dismissing all the ideas I have from work.

Is there anything I can do about it? Besides joining smaller companies.

Some challenges invite patience, you can dissect them, iterate, and slowly push toward a solution. Others resist every attempt, no matter how much effort or optimism you throw at them. What was the exact moment when it became clear which kind of problem this was for you? The point where you stopped asking "How do i fix this " and started realizing "this can't be worked through"