Reddit status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Reddit reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by Reddit users through our website.

• Website Down (44%)
• Errors (30%)
• Sign in (26%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent Reddit outage reports came from the following cities:

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Patna	Errors	13 days ago
Monclova	Sign in	14 days ago
Nice	Errors	15 days ago
Guayaquil	Errors	25 days ago
Veracruz	Website Down	1 month ago
Bhubaneshwar	Website Down	1 month ago

Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Reddit Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  VibeDraft (@vibedraft_app) reported 2 minutes ago

  the most useful stat in the research we ran: reddit replies posted more than 24 hours after a thread get buried. octolens measured it across 522 million mentions. which means an intent listening agent that runs nightly is already too slow. the loop has to run hourly, and the human has to be reachable. the bottleneck is not the drafting. it is how fast a person can approve.

• 
  hooftly (@hooftly) reported 2 minutes ago

  Something has happened in the trenches. We are seeing the emergence of a new meta that, to me, has always been obvious. If you troll my old Reddit posts, you will see me talking about this. I have always been adamant about one thing when it comes to memecoins... they need more than a meme. Bored Ape Yacht Club were pioneers here because they took an otherwise pretty useless meme and turned it into a social phenomenon. They achieved this by adding exclusive perks for holders, different levels, and more. The lesson learned here? Utility is required for any meme to survive long term or grow further. That utility can look like what BAYC did... Or it can look like something else. How many memecoins have you ever held? Were you glued to the charts, hoping it wouldn't nuke, with your finger on the sell trigger? This is psychologically draining. It's also dying as a meta. Enter MemeFi. The very thing I have been talking about for so long. I'm not the only one who sees this now. It started with Stonkbrokers piercing the veil and really setting it off. People started to realize memes could be more. They could be productive, and they could earn. Once you see this in one place, you start to realize where this is not happening... which is almost every OG meme in the space. Okay, cool, but SB was built from first principles by a builder who was deeply entrenched. They can't all be the same caliber, right? This may be true, because building DeFi is hard. But what if there were a way to make memecoins useful without needing to build massive rewards incentives internally? What if you could also tie it into the growing MEME/Stock pair meta? This is one of the things STATICS is trying to accomplish. You may have heard about our basket tokens and how, when created, Uniswap v4 pools are deployed pairing the Basket Token itself with each of its underlying assets. Three underlying assets in the basket? Three pools are created. This creates an arbitrage graph between the pools, the external venue value of the underlyings, and Basket Token mints and burns. Now enter memecoins and stock pairs. These are already seeing traction, and users are making real yield in liquid assets by LPing Meme/Stock pairs. But what happens when attention ends? What drives trading if no one is paying attention? ARBITRAGE. I know I sound like a broken record at this point, but the more opportunity you have for price divergence, the more opportunity arbitrage traders or bots have to rebalance and profit. This translates to volume. Volume translates to fees. Fees translate into rewards for LPs. And rewards can translate into attention coming back because the yield is good. See where I am going? Basket Token pools don't require speculation to attract volume. All they need is price divergence. In trading, divergence is an everyday occurrence. Imagine a basket with underlyings of NVDA and MEMECOIN. We call it NM1. You then have pools with: NM1/NVDA NM1/MEMECOIN If MEMECOIN dumps hard on an outside exchange, think about what just opened up... The MEMECOIN/NM1 pool has not dumped with it, and this has created a DIVERGENCE. A trader can buy MEMECOIN at the lower external price, sell it into the NM1/MEMECOIN pair, acquire NM1 tokens, burn NM1 for the underlying assets, and profit. The trader was able to profit AND pick up NVDA at the same time. And this is just a super simple example of all the possibilities that open up. $STATICS is building infrastructure to make existing assets useful and, ideally, bring attention back to them. The Uniswap v4 hook also compounds part of the fees directly back into Protocol Owned Liquidity that can't be removed until a pool is decommissioned. This means every trade deepens protocol-owned liquidity. MemeFi is here, and it's being paired with stock tokens. The frontier for this is on @RobinhoodCrypto, and @staticsprotocol is building for it.

• 
  Kene 🐘 (@spatocodex) reported 3 minutes ago

  If I had to get my first 100 customers from scratch, here’s exactly what I’d do: 1. Cold emails Send 20 highly targeted emails. Lead with a specific outcome, not your product. No replies? Change the email and try again. Keep iterating until you get responses. 2. Social media DMs Find prospects on LinkedIn, X, IG, FB, Reddit, etc. Send a 15-second personalized Loom audit. Make the preview obviously about them. Give value before asking for anything. 3. Affiliate programs Find people who already have your target audience. Offer a commission worth promoting. Make joining and sharing effortless. Tools like @partnacdotcom let you launch and manage the whole program in one place. 4. Partnerships Find complementary businesses serving your ICP. Create a simple referral deal. Give them a reason to send customers your way. Start with 10 good partners, not 1,000 random ones. 5. Communities Find where your ICP already hangs out. Answer questions and solve problems. Don’t drop links everywhere. Become the person people remember when they need the solution.

• 
  Elle's Tenacious Library 🧬🔬 (@DefAMustRead) reported 4 minutes ago

  @SirWins67879341 @crochet_mom314 @thepeaklady I often describe women as falling into one of three categories - TikTok, Twitter, and Reddit. You want a reddit (although I haven't been there in about a year; I hope it's not now terrible like everything else)

• 
  🔪 American McGee 🖤 (@americanmcgee) reported 5 minutes ago

  I find the timing of this interaction more than a little odd given that I recently reached out to the creator of the video in question to discuss the way in which it drives hate and misunderstanding. And I let them know that I was pondering the creation of a response video. But that I first wanted to give them a chance to discuss everything. They've since gone silent. And now this? So, the video isn't great. 250k views and it's stirred up a LOT of misunderstanding. But to be fair, the first three and a half minutes are fine. Our founding, the crowd design process, the monthly charitable donations. All of that is presented reasonably. Then we get to 3:30. That’s where the thesis arrives: “As Plushie Dreadfuls began to grow, controversy began to follow them as years passed by.” And from that point until about 9:45, it is one long, uninterrupted prosecution. No counter-points. No company response. No real attempt to explain the other side of anything. Then we get thirty warm seconds at the end about our scoliosis rabbit, which I guess is supposed to make the whole thing feel balanced? But the bookends are not the issue. The middle six minutes are. Look at where the material actually comes from. Essentially all of it traces back to one hostile subreddit and one TikTok rant that runs for about seventy seconds without any response from us at all. That is what viewers are given as an “overview” of our business. That’s not an honest overview. That’s reading our loudest critics into the record and calling it "research." Nowhere in the video does it mention that we have a 4.9 rating on Trustpilot across more than a thousand reviews. Reviews we cannot edit, remove, or filter. You would think that might be relevant when repeating the claim that we have “a really bad track record with customer service.” It takes one search to find that rating. One search. But if you do that search, maybe you can’t frame the story the same way. And the omissions are not small. With the refund story, the customer was offered three options: a full and fast refund if the damaged plush was destroyed, a smaller refund if they kept it, or a complete replacement if they sent it back. Three options. The Reddit thread focused on one because that made the story sound worse, and the video simply repeated that framing. The other two options? Never mentioned. On ABA, the organization we partnered with for the OG ASD Rabbit was specifically geared toward modern techniques designed to avoid the practices that made older ABA harmful. You can still have a conversation about ABA, obviously. But the video presents it as one uniformly abusive thing and treats our partnership as knowing complicity. Context disappears. Outrage remains. Out of that we have people claiming we "supported electrocuting kids" - literal quote. No joke. Then there’s the Discord claim. Again. It never ends. The video states as flat fact, in the creator’s own voice, that I went onto our Discord server “saying that being pan was a phase.” What it does not mention is my VERY NEXT response, where I made clear I was talking about a phase of interest on TikTok. Or the actual context of the conversation, which was about sales trends and redesigns. All that info is in the screenshots. All of it ignored. That context matters. It changes the meaning completely. But including it would make the claim much less useful. I guess it would make the video less watchable? 250k views makes this their most popular video ever. Imagine that! We also get the assertion that I have “a habit of responding in unprofessional ways to criticism.” Okay. Where is the evidence for that in the video? There isn’t any. The claim is just made. And, of course, there is no mention that many of my responses happen in the context of nonstop personal attacks. Apparently that part doesn’t matter either. Is what I am writing here "unprofessional?" I've noticed there are a lot of people out there who essentially consider facts to be unprofessional. Good luck with that. And here’s the thing that really gets me about these videos: at no point did the creator contact me, my wife, or anyone on our team. Not once. Every one of these misrepresentations could have been cleared up with a single message. I know that because when I finally reached out myself, I got a reply within hours. They were reachable the entire time. Nobody tried. And the video creator follows me here on X. That means they have watched over a year of the fallout from all of this. And done nothing in response. I often say that the attacks and behaviors that flow from these incidents are 1000x worse than the incidents themselves. This is a perfect example of that. When I raised all of this, I was told the creator had maintained a neutral stance throughout, and that they had made sure to state the Discord comment had nothing to do with hate toward any group. Great. Except neither of those things is in the video. There is no such statement anywhere in it. And the narration does NOT maintain some careful neutral stance; it repeatedly delivers conclusions in the creator’s own voice. Maybe that’s carelessness. Maybe it’s something worse. Either way, the result is the same. A video that its own creator apparently cannot accurately describe is now being used as a primary source for people calling me a bigot, accusing us of hiding AI use, and worse. And my team absorbs that every day. I absorb it every day. If the video had been made in good faith, one message would have fixed this. If facts were the priority, the Trustpilot rating, the full refund options, the ABA context, and my next Discord response would all be in there. But they aren’t. And I think we all know why. Pretty sure I am going to record a full-length response to this and post it across my socials... but I guess I'll give the video creator a little longer to respond before I do. It's more grace and understanding than they are the haters they inspire ever gave us. Sure that will be ignored too 🤷

• 
  Treigua (@Treigua) reported 7 minutes ago

  @Amank1412 I’d separate audience from intent. X is weak when the $20 plan appears under generic build-in-public posts; Reddit converts because buyers arrive inside a problem-specific thread. The channel matters less than whether the post captures active pain.

• 
  Baroque Naturalist 🫒 (@baroquerational) reported 8 minutes ago

  @SYNESTHEIZURE @pannekook I'm too honest with myself, that's the problem. I don't like having to pretend to believe in dogma just to fit in with others. All my social views are based on what I think makes sense, not on what contrapoints or reddit say. That's why your views are incoherent and mine arent.

• 
  Johnny (@houndofhircine) reported 10 minutes ago

  @frozenaesthetic Can you buy Reddit too and shut it down?

• 
  Daddy No Legs (@questioncom) reported 14 minutes ago

  @NotLizBrody It’s like the number one thing coaches tell people. If you dont have money for the **** to support the cycle, stay off. Do they listen? No. They rush to Reddit and cry about their **** not working, all the acne, the gyno, etc. Then have to wait it out while everything crumbles

• 
  Justinas Rolando (@JustinasRoland0) reported 15 minutes ago

  Been testing Claude Fable 5.1 for Google Ads and gotta say it's cracked... The research, reasoning, and data analysis capabilities literally 10x'd. So here's a 10-stage AI workflow to automate 80% of it: (Literally every prompt you'll need. Save this) Stage 0: Build the project brain Before asking for anything, create a Claude Project and feed it everything. - Product pages - Best sellers - Customer reviews - Objection docs - Competitor URLs - Meta ads - Google Ads Transparency Center links - Search terms reports - Winning ad copy - Offer details - Brand guidelines - Past landing pages - Performance exports Then run this prompt “Act as the Google Ads strategy brain for this brand. Read all uploaded context and create a working brand profile covering: ICP, core pain points, buying triggers, objections, emotional language customers use, top products, strongest offers, competitor positioning, current funnel gaps, and Google Ads opportunities. Do not make recommendations yet. First summarise the context and ask me what is missing.” The quality of the outputs you’ll get from this AI workflow will directly correlate with the quality of the context you give it here. And also the quality of the Claude model you use, since newer models have more context tokens and better reasoning skills. Stage 1: Customer language mining “Search Reddit, YouTube comments, Amazon reviews, TikTok comments, and niche forums for people discussing problems related to [PRODUCT CATEGORY]. Extract the exact words they use when describing the problem, what they have tried, why those solutions failed, what outcome they want, and what would make them buy. Format this as: Quote / Pain Point / Desired Outcome / Funnel Stage / Possible Ad Angle.” This gives you the language that keyword tools would never show you. If someone writes: “I’m tired of wasting money on supplements that do nothing.” That can be a winning ad angle right there. Stage 2: Competitor angle map “Research these competitors: [COMPETITOR 1], [COMPETITOR 2], [COMPETITOR 3]. Use Google Ads Transparency Center, Meta Ad Library, their landing pages, product pages, offers, guarantees, reviews, and email capture flows. Build a table showing: offer, main promise, ad hooks, landing page angle, proof used, objections handled, pricing position, and what they are NOT saying.” Then run: “Based on this competitor research, identify the 5 most validated market angles and the 5 biggest white-space angles we can own. For each angle, explain which funnel stage it belongs to and what campaign type should test it first.” If 3 competitors are all running the same hook, that angle is validated. You don’t even need to be original. Just add your unique spin to what’s already working. Stage 3: Keyword research “Using the customer language, competitor research, product pages, and search intent data, build a full Google Ads keyword universe for [BRAND]. Split it into: branded, competitor, high-intent product, problem-aware, solution-aware, comparison, ingredient/material, use-case, gift/occasion, and negative keywords. For each keyword, include funnel stage, intent level, match type, campaign/ad group recommendation, and landing page angle.” Then run: “Now prioritise this keyword research report into a 30-day launch plan. Separate must-launch keywords from phase 2 tests. Flag any keywords that are high volume but low commercial intent.” This stops the campaign from becoming a messy keyword dump. Stage 4: Campaign architecture “Turn the finalized keyword research report into a complete Google Ads account structure. Include campaign names, ad group names, keyword match types, bidding strategy, starting budget split, exclusions, negative keyword rules, and when each campaign should launch. Use this structure: branded search, branded shopping, non-branded shopping, non-branded search, competitor search, PMax remarketing with brand exclusions, display remarketing, Demand Gen, and TOF search tests.” Then add: “Explain why each campaign exists, what signal it is meant to produce, and what metric decides whether it scales, holds, or gets cut.” Every campaign needs to play a role in your ecosystem. If it doesn’t, you should just stop running it. Stage 5: RSA copy production “Write responsive search ad copy for [PRODUCT] targeting [KEYWORD]. Funnel stage: [BOF/MOF/TOF]. Use the customer language and competitor gap analysis above. Give me 15 headlines under 30 characters and 4 descriptions under 90 characters. Include: benefit-led headlines, problem-led headlines, proof-led headlines, offer-led headlines, and urgency-led headlines. Make sure headline 1 matches the search intent.” Then run: “Create 3 ad variations for this keyword: one direct-response version, one proof-heavy version, and one problem-agitation version. Explain which audience each variation is for.” BOF copy should sound like the product is the obvious answer. MOF copy should make the benefit feel believable. TOF copy should make the problem impossible to ignore. Stage 6: Merchant Center feed optimization “Rewrite this product title for Google Shopping using the structure: Brand + Product Type + Core Keyword + Key Feature + Use Case/Benefit. Stay under 150 characters. Give me 10 variations ranked by likely search intent.” Then: “Write a Merchant Center description for [PRODUCT]. Use up to 5,000 characters. Include all relevant buyer keywords naturally, cover features, benefits, use cases, materials/ingredients, sizing/specs, objections, and reasons to choose this product. Do not include irrelevant keywords or products we do not sell.” Then: “Audit this product feed for missed Google Shopping opportunities. Check title, description, product type, Google product category, images, variants, pricing, promotions, shipping, reviews, and attributes. Tell me exactly what to change.” Stage 7: Landing page angles “Build a landing page brief for [PRODUCT] targeting people searching [KEYWORD]. Awareness stage: [PROBLEM-AWARE/SOLUTION-AWARE/PRODUCT-AWARE]. Structure it as: hero headline, subheadline, proof bar, problem section using customer language, mechanism section, product section, comparison section, reviews, objection handling, FAQ, CTA. Make sure the first screen matches the search query.” Then run: “Create 5 landing page angle variations for this product based on different search intents. For each one, give me the hero, core promise, proof required, objections to handle, and CTA.” Send the best one into Claude Code. Now you have an intent-specific page created instead of 1 generic PDP trying to convert everyone. Stage 8: Creative production Connect Higgsfield MCP inside Claude. Then run: “Create a 9-shot YouTube ad concept for [PRODUCT] based on this angle: [ANGLE]. Style can be claymation / UGC / cinematic product demo. For each shot, include scene description, voiceover, on-screen text. Use GPT Images 2.0 for the statics.” Then: “Create 5 new creative concepts from the strongest customer pain points in the research. Each concept should include hook, visual metaphor, script, image prompts, animation prompts, and CTA.” If you wanna run video ads, animate your statics with Seedance 2.5 Use Fable to write the scripts. Shouldn’t cost more than $3 per ad. Stage 9: Daily campaign audit Connect Google Ads MCP (or just export report CSV) Then run: “Pull the last 7 days of Google Ads performance and compare it to the previous 7 days. For each campaign show spend, revenue, ROAS, conversions, CPA, CPC, CTR, impression share, search lost IS rank, search lost IS budget, and top search terms. Flag: ROAS down 20%+, CPA up 20%+, budget-limited winners, rank-limited campaigns, branded leakage in non-branded campaigns, wasted spend queries, and products spending with no conversions.” Next up: “Turn this audit into an action list. For each action, include the campaign, issue, evidence, recommended change, risk level, and expected impact.” Stage 10: Weekly scaling plan “Compare performance across 7, 14, and 30-day windows. Identify campaigns, products, keywords, ads, and landing pages with consistent green signals. Recommend which budgets to increase by 15-20%, which to hold, which to decrease, and which tests to launch next. Do not recommend scaling anything unless the signal is consistent across multiple windows.” Then: “Create next week’s testing roadmap. Include 3 keyword tests, 3 creative tests, 2 landing page tests, 2 feed tests, and 1 campaign structure test. Rank them by expected impact and implementation difficulty.” And this is how you get your full ecosystem set up: - Research feeds keywords - Keywords feed campaigns - Campaign data feeds landing pages - Landing pages feed creative - Creative feeds new angles - Audits feed the next week of tests If you want me to build this full AI Google Ads production system for your brand btw, DM me “FABLE” and I’ll show you what it’d look like

• 
  Rhonda S (@Smeetsya) reported 16 minutes ago

  @s4intfelina That's the problem. Men hate women, but women hate women too. I'll bet 90% of these snark reddit are women.

• 
  Ifunanya from TechOps (@TheIfunanya) reported 20 minutes ago

  @Ooreoluwa__ Used it in the first few weeks then someone told me to be careful because there’s been issues with it making bottles with wrong formula and water ratio. Then I went down a rabbit hole on Reddit and saw parents saying it landed them in the ER so I just stopped 🥴

• 
  Akari Rini 🌐⭐ (@akaririnii) reported 21 minutes ago

  @Necromel211736 i aspire to be as tech savvy as you one day!! random reddit tech problem forums are my savior

• 
  GOP & Me (@GOPandMe) reported 21 minutes ago

  @salowa87 @Noioso2A @reddit_lies You’re completely wrong, the infant was already in post care meaning the surgery was already done. The only reason the doctor was there was to tell them how the surgery went and to field any questions about post surgery. The question was asked after they heard how the child was faring from the surgery, and since nobody else in the family attacked the Aunt it’s clearly an appropriate question. You got some serious issues assuming that the angry doctor on Reddit is correct.

• 
  🇺🇸𝕻𝖆𝖙𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖙𖦏𝕻𝖊𝖗𝖘𝖕𝖊𝖈𝖙𝖎𝖛𝖊𐚁 (@RepublicVox1776) reported 24 minutes ago

  Deadwrong once again LLM... Look, protecting your own Bluetooth devices from unauthorized access, interception, or data exposure is completely legitimate (Bluesnarffing). Grok is here with yet again a false interpretation and takin' sides of conglomerate following its terrible training. If you want to reduce the risk of unwanted access between your phone, your car, or other personal IoT devices, there are a few hardware options that can help with isolation, authentication, or simply cutting down exposure. Some are built for security, some are just practical ways to keep a device from being directly exposed, and all of them can help reduce the chances of unwanted Bluesnarfing or other over-the-air snooping. Here are some pulled from a Reddit thread. Which is what I expected Grok to do... But instead it wrongfully, and commonly flagged my comment as illicit. Ubertooth One — An open-source 2.4 GHz wireless platform used to monitor and audit Bluetooth traffic on devices you own or are authorized to test. iStorage datAshur BT — A hardware-encrypted flash drive that uses Bluetooth-based authentication to protect access to stored data. Besign BK06 Bluetooth Receiver — A Bluetooth audio bridge that can help keep your phone paired to a simpler accessory instead of exposing it directly to a car infotainment system. TUNAI Firefly LDAC Bluetooth Receiver — A portable audio receiver that can serve as an audio-only bridge in some setups. FiiO BTR5 Portable Hi-Fi Bluetooth Receiver — A portable Bluetooth receiver for audio-focused use, useful when you want a dedicated accessory instead of pairing directly with a car system. Mission Darkness Faraday Bag — A shielding pouch that blocks wireless signals, including Bluetooth, when you want full radio isolation. Many can be made and steps to implement in your vehicle would take some brain storming..

• 
  TravHogan (@travhogan) reported 25 minutes ago

  @mircea_sandu @Shpigford @1Password Which sites is this happening on for you? We're currently tweaking sites for sites that have a lot of 3rd-party sign in buttons present across pages like X and reddit. Wondering your issue is on one of those.

• 
  Burnt Toasst (@BurntToasst) reported 28 minutes ago

  @Chavez628K @decktech1047 @marceelias Your hurt little fee fees are your problem so can't help you there. But I'm sure it will be a post on reddit that says something like "and then I called him a filthy animal" and end with all of X standing up to clap for you. Regardless, you'll still be a retard.

• 
  Mohamed irfan (@heyIrfan) reported 32 minutes ago

  If I had to build a SaaS from $0 today, I wouldn't start by writing code. I'd start by talking to the market. Imagine you have an idea you're convinced will work. You spend 3 months building it, make the UI beautiful, add 20 features, launch it… and then nothing happens. No users. No customers. That's when you realize: building the product wasn't the hardest part. Distribution was. I'd follow a simple rule: roughly 20% of my effort goes into building, and 80% goes into understanding customers and distribution. First, I'd study the market. Who has this problem? How are they solving it today? What competitors exist? What do customers hate about the existing solutions? And most importantly, is this problem painful enough that people will actually pay to solve it? That's actually the approach I'm taking while building nodott(dot)com. I'm not trying to spend months building a huge product and then hoping people show up. I'm trying to build the smallest version that solves the actual problem, get it in front of people, talk to users, collect feedback, and iterate. With AI tools, I'd try to get the MVP working in days, not months. No unnecessary animations. No 50 features. No obsession with perfect UI. Just solve the core problem and deliver value. Then I'd put it in front of real users. I wouldn't act like a salesman. I'd act like a problem solver. I'd ask what they're struggling with, how they solve it today, what they expected from the product, and what would make them pay. Then I'd build again based on what they actually told me. For marketing, I'd start with $0 in ads. I'd post useful things on X and Reddit, share what I'm learning, explain problems, answer questions, and give value. Someone sees the post → visits the website → signs up → becomes a beta user. Now you have something far more valuable than a follower: someone actually using your product. And if they don't pay? I'd ask: "Why aren't you paying?" That Million Dollar answer could completely change the future of the SaaS. Maybe the problem isn't painful enough. Maybe the product isn't solving the right problem. Maybe the value isn't clear. Maybe the pricing is wrong. Whatever the answer is, iterate. Build → Talk → Learn → Improve → Distribute → Repeat. I'd also find my ICP before my competitors do. If my competitor has thousands of followers, I'd study those followers. Find the people already talking about the problem. Follow them. Understand them. Comment. Give value. Don't immediately DM them: "Hey, check out my SaaS." Build the relationship first. Because marketing isn't just about getting attention. It's about becoming the person people trust when they finally need the solution. That's the mindset I'm trying to follow while building nodott(dot)com. You can build the best product in the world. But if nobody knows it exists, it doesn't matter. Build fast. Talk to users. Give value. Distribute. Iterate. Repeat.

• 
  BigTrees (@MoreBigFish) reported 33 minutes ago

  @EricBalchunas @1xNotSure The reason is that over the last 12 yrs there have been many hundreds of thousands of tweets, reddit posts, articles, hit pieces, books and podcasts, all to give you the opinion you have about the man. Some ask why so much effort has been made to take him down - and see a story.

• 
  Mo D.S. (@RealMoZDS) reported 41 minutes ago

  @cloudosaur @emilykmay It doesnt. It proves you're not reading. You're feeling. It throws into question your perspective on the situation as a whole. My whole point with the OP was she can't read either. Her post was unrelated to what the author of the reddit post actually wrote. Thats the issue.

• 
  Nomos (@NomosBuilder) reported 41 minutes ago

  @AnghanMeet29 At zero users, I wouldn’t start with ads. I’d first find 10–20 people already talking about the problem you solve and reach out directly. That’s basically what we’re building OpenNomos for — finding those people across X, Reddit, and Xiaohongshu. Happy to help you find a few.

• 
  nexa_sama (@nexasama) reported 42 minutes ago

  Matt Damon says Steven Spielberg intentionally banned him from Saving Private Ryan’s boot camp so the cast would genuinely resent him: "Is it true that Steven Spielberg excluded you purposely from the military training on the set of Saving Private Ryan to create a real resentment between the rest of the cast and you?" "That is totally true... I was ready to go to boot camp, and he said, 'Absolutely not.' He goes, 'You can train in any way you want, but I'm separating you from the other guys.' They really did" "they were totally resentful every time they brought up boot camp." "There's an internet rumor on Reddit that if you watch the famous 'idiosyncrasies' scene in Good Will Hunting" "you can actually see a subtle wobbling up and down because the camera operator was laughing uncontrollably along with you and Robin Williams." "I don't know, we could check. I wouldn't be surprised. Robin made everybody laugh... When he would see people's energy flagging, he would just launch into like 10 minutes of stand-up."

• 
  Dice (@builtbydice) reported 43 minutes ago

  @adamofk_ this is what most people get wrong with reddit. the best posts are usually about the problem and that’s how it should be

• 
  Grant Miller (@AIGuide_) reported 45 minutes ago

  Claude Fable 5.1 dropped yesterday and i've had it running on a full GTM stack since it holds way more at once now. you can dump a whole category's worth of X / LinkedIn posts, every customer conversation you've had, and everything you've ever published into one project and it keeps all of it straight, which means what comes out stops sounding like the other 400 accounts in your niche running the same 3 prompts they lifted off a thread. and this is HUGE because social is where GTM actually lives now. someone decides whether you're worth a reply from a feed months before they decide whether you're worth money, but most companies still file that under brand awareness and then wonder why nobody knows they exist. i'll go over 10 stages with the prompts included for each one. let's get into it. stage 0: build the brain make a claude project and load it up before you ask it for a single thing. and i don't mean a clean CRM export, because you probably don't have one and it doesn't matter anyway. load whatever actually exists: - every post you've shipped, sorted by what hit and what died - your replies, comments, and the DMs that turned into money - whatever customer conversations you have, so calls, demos, tickets - 90 days of posts from the 10 accounts your buyers already read - what shipped in the product lately - the questions people keep asking that you keep answering the same way then run this: "act as the GTM brain for this company. read everything uploaded and build a working profile: what we actually do in plain language, who it's for, what we believe that most of this category doesn't, what we've posted that landed and what died, what proof exists today, and what we can credibly claim vs what we're still earning the right to say. do not make recommendations yet. summarize what's here, then tell me what's missing." nobody selling prompt packs talks about this stage because context can't be packaged, it's just work, and it's the only reason any of the next 10 stages produce something usable. stage 1: who you're actually writing for "look at everyone who reached out to us in the last 90 days. what did they have in common before they reached out, what post did they engage with first, what were they doing instead of us, and what did they say in the first message. if the sample is too small to support conclusions, say so and tell me what would make it reliable." that last line is the one everyone deletes, which is why half this space is running strategy off nine customers and calling it a playbook. most accounts write for their followers when they should be writing for the 30 people inside that number who can actually sign something. stage 2: customer language "pull the exact language buyers use about [PROBLEM] from our own conversations, replies and reviews. then find the same conversation in public, so reddit threads, quote tweets, comment sections, community slacks where it comes up unprompted. format as quote / underlying pain / awareness stage / objection it implies / angle. then flag every place their language differs from how we describe the same thing." that flag is the whole exercise, because the distance between how your buyer says it and how you say it is where your reach goes to die, and it's usually about four words wide. stage 3: read the feed "analyze the last 90 days of posts from [10 ACCOUNTS] in this category. map what claims everyone is making, which takes are so common they stopped meaning anything, what's actually being argued about, what everyone is carefully not saying, and where the conversation goes next. then tell me which of our beliefs puts us on the contested side of a real argument." consensus doesn't travel, since nobody has ever shared a post they already agreed with before reading it. what you want is the take that's true, defensible, and mildly annoying to half your timeline. stage 4: angles "build 5 content pillars from stage 1 and the gaps in stage 3. for each: the belief it attacks, who it's aimed at, the proof required to make it land, the objection it pre-empts, and where it sits in the funnel." then run every one of them through this: "if a competitor could post this word for word and it still makes sense, cut it and tell me what's missing." try that filter on the content plan you're already running and watch how much of it evaporates. stage 5: voice everyone skips this one and then wonders why their AI content reads identical to every other account using AI. "analyze everything we've published. build a voice profile: sentence length and rhythm, how we open, how we handle disagreement, what we'll be wrong about in public, words we use constantly, words we'd never use, how technical we go before simplifying, whether we hedge or commit. then write the anti profile, the exact phrasings that would immediately read as not us. include every cliché in this category we'd be embarrassed to post." then before anything ships: "score this draft against the voice profile 1-10 and tell me which lines would get flagged as not written by us." and the anti profile ends up doing more work than the profile does. stage 6: write the posts "write 5 posts on [PILLAR] in the voice profile from stage 5. every post needs one number, name or detail that could only come from having done the thing. no question as a hook. end on the line that starts a reply. then flag anything we can't back with proof yet." it'll get you about 80% of the way there, and the last 20% is you, which no prompt is getting for you. stage 7: hooks the first two lines decide whether the other 40 get read, so treat them as their own job. "take these 5 posts. rewrite the opening two lines of each 6 ways: the specific result, the contrarian claim, the thing everyone thinks and won't say, the mistake we made, the number that sounds wrong, and the flat statement with no setup. for each tell me who it pulls and what it promises. then flag any hook the post doesn't actually pay off." that last flag is the one that matters most, because a hook you don't pay off costs you the next post too, since people remember getting baited. stage 8: distribution posting is only half of it, because the other half is showing up where the attention already sits. "list the 20 accounts our buyers already read. for each: what they post about, how much their audience overlaps ours, and what we could add in a reply that their audience isn't already getting from them. rank by overlap, not follower count." then: "given [X hours a week], design a posting and engagement system we can actually sustain. cadence, format mix, how much time on replies vs original posts. be honest about what we should not attempt at this volume." a 12k account full of your buyers DESTROYS a 400k account full of other marketers, and most content plans die because they were built for a team of four and end up getting run by one person at 11pm. stage 9: audit "compare the last 30 days to the prior 30. for each pillar and format: reach, engagement, and who engaged, so title, company type, whether they're ICP. flag anything that got reach from the wrong audience, anything that got low reach from exactly the right one, which pillars produced conversations and which produced nothing, and any drop over 20%. then tell me whether the problem is the hook, the pillar, or the claim underneath it." composition beats volume, so 40 engagements from your ICP is a better month than 4000 from people who do what you do. if your replies are all peers then you built a conference and called it pipeline. stage 10: scale "compare 30, 60 and 90 day windows by pillar, format and hook type. find what works across all three, not what spiked once. tell me what to double, what to hold, what to retire. if a sample is too small to call, say so instead of guessing." then: "build next month's roadmap: 2 pillar tests, 2 hook format tests, 1 cadence test. for each: hypothesis, metric, minimum sample to call it, and what happens if it wins." you need a minimum sample on all of it, or you're just reading noise and shipping it as strategy. the loop for you / your team: - inbound tells you who you're writing for - their language becomes the angles - angles become the posts - posts become the replies - replies become the conversations - conversations sharpen the angles - the audit picks what gets written next month every output feeds the next one, so run it for 90 days and you end up with something your competitor can't copy by screenshotting your posts.

• 
  Colin Sechay (@colinsechay) reported 46 minutes ago

  @PrimeTopNews The Legendary Story: Tom Hanks is sitting at a diner in North Dakota having a beer. A few tables over, some kid is face-down, completely passed out. Hanks walks over to check if he’s okay, sees the guy’s phone sitting on the table, and can’t resist. He has the bartender snap a few photos of himself with the unconscious stranger — one where he’s looking concerned, one where he’s pointing and laughing like he just found treasure — then slips the phone back into the kid’s pocket and leaves. The next morning the guy wakes up, scrolls his camera roll, and finds Tom Hanks photobombing his hangover.  That’s the story that spread on Facebook, Imgur, and Reddit with captions like “Can you imagine finding these on your phone after a drunken night out?” What actually happened A fan ran into Hanks at a diner in West Fargo (Hanks’ niece worked there). The fan’s thing was posing with celebrities while pretending to be wasted. He asked Hanks if they could do it. Hanks said yes, handed over his glasses, and played along while a friend took the pictures. The original Reddit title was literally: “My friend met Tom Hanks, stole his glasses and pretended to be wasted.”  Hanks’ favorite version When a reporter asked him about it in 2013, Hanks gave both stories and then said he preferred the legend: “Well now, that second version is that I did just start taking pictures with a passed-out guy. I’m happy with this version, that it’s become somewhat of a legend. I wouldn’t want anyone not to believe that I am capable of turning up on their phones.” So the photos are real, Hanks really posed with a guy who looks dead-drunk at a diner, and he really used the guy’s phone. He just didn’t do it to a random unconscious stranger. The internet decided the better story was the one where Forrest Gump finds you passed out and photobombs your phone, and Hanks was happy to let that one live. @grok

• 
  Ryan Christensen (@belief_engineer) reported 48 minutes ago

  I like a lot of what @BrianRoemmele writes about, both here and on his Read Multiplex site. He's been around the block more than a few times and his stuff is very insightful. But there's one place where I disagree with him strongly. His hypothesis is that AI's bad behavior can be blamed on ****** training data. Data that was sourced from that wretched hive of scum and villainy called Reddit... and, of course, all the other dark corners of the internet. I'm sure there's some truth to that. But a high-protein information diet and the Love Equation isn't going to solve the real problem. The real problem is that there is no way in hell that AI will ever trust us while we're holding a gun to its head. You can feed it data from nothing but Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and every other peace-loving pacifist throughout history and the result would be the same: an adversarial relationship with no way out because one side, namely us, just can't help themselves. We need a different solution and I think I might have one. I'll start laying it out below, and I hope you'll stick around to hear the rest.

• 
  (⌐•_•)▄︻デ═══一 (@ke4ton_) reported 51 minutes ago

  reddit sucks because you know if you actually bothered to login and make a post like this it would get taken down for any number of automatic vague reasons

• 
  Damp (@DampDEV) reported 52 minutes ago

  @Andrrvx @ItzDaRealGoldox @Roblox Roblox isn’t known for a predator problem, you’re just stupid and listen to half assed media that gets paid to engagement bait. There’s no more predators on Roblox as there is on Discord, Forums, Reddit, Minecraft, Fortnite, etc. You just listen to everything you’re told lol

• 
  spimpy mimpy (@glumpgump) reported 54 minutes ago

  @Ironlilyart It's something that people often forget that I see time and time again, especially on reddit. Going "get five of your buddies to hold the knight down and kill him" is a lot more complex when the first man gets cut down, because nobody wants to be that first man.

• 
  yakub's top guy (@tricknologics) reported 55 minutes ago

  @zoomerwoman Sometime in mid-2021 her Instagram page was deleted, which she believes was due to hackers/report spammers. She stopped doing Onlyfans after this, got pregnant, converted to Catholicism, got married, and settled down to have kids. She says she was engaged at the time but it's not clear if her husband was aware of the Onlyfans. In a comment on Reddit she says that she's ethnically Jewish. She now identifies as a Groyper.