Modus
AI Co-founder for Startups
A few months ago, Modus was just a messy idea and a single file on my laptop.
I'm a first-time founder, and I started building it the way most people probably shouldn't, by figuring things out as I went. I taught myself what I needed step by step, leaned on AI tools heavily, and slowly turned a rough prototype into something real, with accounts, memory, and answers that actually understand the Greek and EU startup world.
Along the way, Modus quietly became my own co-founder. I'd test ideas on it, let it poke holes in my thinking, and use it to stay honest with myself. At some point I realised that was exactly the thing I'd been missing when I started, and probably the thing a lot of other founders are missing too.
So I kept going. I shaped the product around one principle: be honest, not a cheerleader. Tell founders the hard truth early, in their own language, with real knowledge of their market.
It's now live in beta. It's far from perfect, and I'm learning something new every week from the people trying it. But for the first time, it feels real, and that keeps me going.
This is just the beginning, and I'm building it in the open, one honest step at a time.
5 Comments
One thing that jumped out at me is that "tell founders the hard truth" sounds simple, but it can mean very different things in practice.
The answer to that ends up shaping who trusts the product, when they use it, and what they expect from it.
I'd be curious whether the beta users are converging on the same interpretation you have in mind.
Really good point, and honestly something I think about a lot.
For me, "hard truth" doesn't mean being harsh or discouraging. It means not pretending. So instead of "great idea, go for it," it's more like "here's the part that doesn't add up yet, and here's what you'd need to believe for it to work." Honest about the weak spots, but always paired with a way forward, not just criticism for its own sake.
The line I'm trying to walk is: challenging enough to be useful, but not so blunt that it just demoralises someone who's already taking a big risk.
And you're right that the users are the real test here. So far the early feedback suggests they read it the way I intended, one user said they liked that it showed the shortcomings and then a plan to resolve them, which is exactly the balance I'm aiming for. But it's early, and I'm watching closely to see if that holds as more people use it. If they start expecting either pure cheerleading or pure brutal critique, that tells me something I need to fix.
Genuinely appreciate you framing it this way, it's the kind of question that's easy to gloss over.
That's exactly where I'd be careful.
The challenge isn't whether users understand the output today.
It's what conclusion deserves confidence if they keep responding positively.
Those sound similar, but they can lead to very different decisions about trust, positioning, and what the product is actually becoming.
I wouldn't try to unpack that properly in a thread.
If you're curious, drop your email and I'll put together the tighter version.
I might not position it correctly, by "hard truth" I mean honestly, modus gives you honest responses with risks you might face, not judging your decisions, I'll appreciate if you give a try and tell me your thoughts
That's exactly why I'd be careful.
The challenge isn't whether the responses are honest.
It's what conclusion deserves confidence if users keep responding positively to them.
That's one of those decisions that can quietly shape who trusts the product, what they expect from it, and how future feedback gets interpreted.
I wouldn't try to unpack that properly in a thread.
If you're curious, drop your email and I'll send over the tighter version.