Customer Interview

A couple of days ago, I had one of those encounters that forces you to take a long, hard look at what you’re building. After investing countless hours into my project, nothing quite jolts you out of the comfort zone like hearing your hard work dismissed or, worse, misunderstood. In today’s post, I’m diving deep into the reflections from that customer interview—exploring technical and social dynamics, personal discomfort, and a whole lot of unexpected insights.

1. Understanding the Project Vision: Noisy Interfaces, LLM Conversations, and the Branching Dilemma

When I pitched the point of MuDG, I outlined its mission as a response to the pitfalls of modern, noisy, addictive interfaces—think Discord, Slack, and Twitter. The idea was to offer an antidote to fleeting, surface-level interactions by promoting deeper, more meaningful engagement. After stumbling through initial confusion, the customer had a “click” moment roughly 20 minutes in. They realized:

  • LLM conversations are easily abandoned. Why commit to a conversation when starting anew is just that simple?
  • Following branching discussions is a real headache. Imagine trying to track a philosopher’s debate without a clear map!

Yet, with ideas as revolutionary as these, objections naturally emerged. Questions like “Why not use Obsidian, LLM, or even Wikipedia?” rattled around. It was a harsh reminder: when you challenge the status quo, even the promise of depth isn’t immune to skepticism.

2. The Demo Debate: Are You Really Showing What You Think You’re Showing?

In the world of tech interviews, nothing is as persuasive as a good demo—provided it lands well. I ran through three specific examples during the session. Even then, it wasn’t until the third iteration that things began to resonate with the customer. This raises a pressing concern:

  • Are you truly demoing the value you believe you’re demonstrating?

The entire exercise underscored a paradox: the more automated and “frictionless” the system, the risk of passivitisation increases. There’s a fine line between easing the process for users and inadvertently dimming their active engagement. One suggestion was to replace open-ended queries with buttons proposing potential questions. An interesting trade-off emerges here: Should our tools ease the burden of thought, or rather, augment and enrich it? After all, easier doesn’t necessarily mean better.

3. Ownership, Privacy, and the Social Dilemma

Any conversation about modern digital tools is incomplete without touching on themes of ownership and privacy. My vision is for people to truly “own” their graphs, their data—something that, historically, platforms like Mozilla and Wikipedia have struggled with due to centralized control. A couple of key takeaways from this segment of the interview were:

  • The concept of ownership can be easily hijacked by a small cadre of power players.
  • Privacy isn’t just a value; it’s a commodity. The trade-off becomes clear: Do you pay to share, or pay to keep things private?

This discussion inevitably led back to the core challenge of virality.

4. The Lack of Virality Challenge

In an era dominated by quick, flashy responses, my project deliberately swims against a powerful current. The customer pointed out the fundamental challenge: how can a tool focused on depth compete in a world optimized for viral, bite-sized content?

One example they mentioned was WikiTok, a “TikTok for Wikipedia” that transforms encyclopedic knowledge into easily digestible, shareable videos. It’s immediately apparent why such a platform gains traction—it caters to our diminishing attention spans and desire for instant gratification.

This raises an important question about the trade-off between:

  • The ease of sharing quick, flashy answers
  • The deeper educational value that comes from sustained engagement

While I understand the appeal of platforms like WikiTok, I remain skeptical about their long-lasting educational impact. The project’s core mission is to challenge users, to deepen understanding rather than simplify it. Perhaps the true innovation lies not in conforming to viral mechanics but in creating a compelling alternative that prioritizes depth over reach.

Personal Reflections: Lessons from a Customer Interview

Reflecting on the interview, I’m struck by the uncomfortable tension between innovation and market readiness. It’s one thing to have grand ideas about deep, thoughtful engagement; it’s another entirely to explain that vision without losing the listener in the process. Yes, it’s painful when someone misinterprets your passion, but it’s in these moments of discomfort that real learning happens.

I’m reminded that this journey is not just technical—it’s deeply social and personal. It involves listening to obstruction and resistance, then translating that into actionable insights. Sometimes, the raw honesty of a customer’s reproach is more valuable than a meticulously crafted pitch. And sure, while the continual push for automation might make life easier, real progress may well depend on the friction that forces us to think harder and act more thoughtfully.

In wrapping up, the conversation was a potent mix of frustration, enlightenment, and humor. It wasn’t just a customer interview—it was a mirror held up to both my project’s promise and its very human challenges. Here’s to many more uncomfortable, yet deeply educational encounters on this wild journey of creation and innovation.