3 ms·

I think using the name Memex for "a tool for vibe coding" is a big mistake, especially if you have more general ambitions. Vannevar Bush says in As We May Think

I think using the name Memex for "a tool for vibe coding" is a big mistake, especially if you have more general ambitions. Vannevar Bush says in As We May Think: “Consider a future device … in which an individual stores all his books, records, and communications, and which is mechanized so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility. It is an enlarged intimate supplement to his memory.” The word memex is from memory expansion - "mem" and "ex". Do you want to confuse an intimate, personal memory tool with vibe coding? Do you think closed source freemium SaaS with cloud hosted models is suitable for intimate personal mind expanding cognitive augmentation?

davidvgilmore 1y ago
Your comment is fair. I don't love vibe coding as a category name. And somehow using vibe coding to describe something whose namesake, the Memex, had such virtuous ambitions feels cheap. But I ALSO want people to understand what our product does. I want to make something that truly empowers people. Many of our users are tech savvy, but not coders. We decided to make a GUI because it allowed them to one-click install. And we are closed source freemium right now because we're trying to find a revenue model that we can sustain ourselves with without being wholly dependent on VCs. We plan to open source components of Memex so it's more extensible in the future and to give back. We were never going to have something that is worthy of the name memex on the first release. But our ambition is that with time and hard work, we have a chance.
- luke-stanley 1y ago
  Vibe coding is fine but right now it dominates the pitch, and it's a stark contrast to Vannevar Bush's grand vision of memory expansion. Even if you want it to be more, the pitch makes the name hard to justify and could harm trust building. I understand your dilemma with open-source licensing, but being closed source is not the core issue. Bush described a Memex as a private and personal tool. But right now, your tool depends on cloud-hosted LLMs, and the cloud is not private. With nothing to prevent mandated access, an intimate mind mirror is problematic. In some places, people can get into serious legal trouble for visiting a doctor, favouring a political cause, who they're attracted to... Not having a solution could scare potential users away. The name raises expectations that conflict with the product pitch, which is confusing and makes it harder to trust the product. That said, you could still launch with API support for private local LLM endpoints, like Ollama and other OpenAI-style APIs. Do you have support for that already? If so, pointing that out could help. The name has serious weight, and if people don't see it as living up to it, don't you think that you might be better off avoiding the expectations it invites? You could adjust the branding, or change the pitch, and work on building trust. I would suggest considering doing all 3!

davidvgilmore 1y ago

Your comment is fair. I don't love vibe coding as a category name. And somehow using vibe coding to describe something whose namesake, the Memex, had such virtuous ambitions feels cheap. But I ALSO want people to understand what our product does. I want to make something that truly empowers people. Many of our users are tech savvy, but not coders. We decided to make a GUI because it allowed them to one-click install. And we are closed source freemium right now because we're trying to find a revenue model that we can sustain ourselves with without being wholly dependent on VCs. We plan to open source components of Memex so it's more extensible in the future and to give back. We were never going to have something that is worthy of the name memex on the first release. But our ambition is that with time and hard work, we have a chance.

luke-stanley 1y ago
Vibe coding is fine but right now it dominates the pitch, and it's a stark contrast to Vannevar Bush's grand vision of memory expansion. Even if you want it to be more, the pitch makes the name hard to justify and could harm trust building. I understand your dilemma with open-source licensing, but being closed source is not the core issue. Bush described a Memex as a private and personal tool. But right now, your tool depends on cloud-hosted LLMs, and the cloud is not private. With nothing to prevent mandated access, an intimate mind mirror is problematic. In some places, people can get into serious legal trouble for visiting a doctor, favouring a political cause, who they're attracted to... Not having a solution could scare potential users away. The name raises expectations that conflict with the product pitch, which is confusing and makes it harder to trust the product. That said, you could still launch with API support for private local LLM endpoints, like Ollama and other OpenAI-style APIs. Do you have support for that already? If so, pointing that out could help. The name has serious weight, and if people don't see it as living up to it, don't you think that you might be better off avoiding the expectations it invites? You could adjust the branding, or change the pitch, and work on building trust. I would suggest considering doing all 3!