[morgante]

> Most of the IH audience will read this, care very little about the "secrets" behind the trading strategy, and instead focus on what you call "trite lessons".

I'd like to think I'm part of the core IH audience. I come for interesting stories of people building software from scratch and generating revenue from it.

Someone who got lucky gambling their money for a few months is just not an interesting story. It's way outside the mold of what you usually publish.

> My minimum cutoff nowadays is $100/mo, but in the past I've done interviews where the revenue was $0 or not shared. Although it's fun celebrating big revenue wins, that's not the point of the site.

It's good that you have a cutoff, but I think the issue is that this project doesn't necessarily meet that. With your typical interviews, you know they're making revenue from actual customers and that revenue is a meaningful metric. He happens to have generated profit so far, but I also happen to have generated profit on my gambling trip: it's not a meaningful metric, and in fact, might as well be 0.

He could easily have all his revenue wiped out next month (and, in fact, almost did). I'm really not sure what we have to learn from someone who has successfully gambled for a few months.

[csallen]

Yes, ultimately the stock market is gambling, and thus the durability of his product is quite low, but this is an arbitrary distinction from the rest of the interviews on the site. I could point out unique distinctions for a dozen other interviews on the site, e.g. the popup t-shirt company whose product was temporary, the company making $0, the company doing entirely consulting revenue, the pure hardware company, the paperback book author, etc.

What I keep pointing out are the undeniably valuable lessons that can still be learned from what Sebastian did, as well as why a typical indie hacker might find them inspiring and educational, and why they wouldn't apply to your gambling analogy.

I'm not sure why you're ignoring these parts of my responses. Maybe it's because you've already launched many non-trivial side projects, so you aren't intimidated by that particular hurdle, thus you don't find it inspiring, and as a result you feel compelled to focus entirely on the efficacy of his product. Which is fine! But you are not everyone.

[morgante]

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing what exactly is so inspiring about what Sebastian did, and why it's any different from my gambling "product." He's very far from being the first developer to play stocks. What sets him apart? It's not like he has customers, a marketable product, or anything more than some (unverified) gains.

For my gambling, I too read books. I too wrote scripts and models to assess things. I too have practiced.

At the end of the day, I don't delude myself into thinking those lessons are applicable to my actual business.

[csallen]

Doing research, writing code, testing your product, and ultimately launching it are lessons that are applicable to actual business. Of course, they can be misapplied to what essentially amounts to gambling, but so can any other valuable skill. (e.g. If Sebastian put on his selling hat, started taking on investors, and charging them a fee.)

The fact remains that many people never develop these skills, never get over these hurdles, and oftentimes don't even realize that these hurdles exist. They find it motivational to read about people who did. Especially a teenager like Sebastian.

And ofc you're right: Sebastian is no different than others who came before. But that's never been a criteria for being on Indie Hackers. I find it somewhat telling that the people who are up-in-arms about this interview consist almost exclusively of those working in finance or who've experimented with algorithmic trading.