I would like to chip in because I know exactly the feeling of the author. The failure is normal and what makes the difference is the ability to continue trying after one failed and having a believe in yourself, but let’s cut the support bullshit and point out the obvious. The author is a one man army at least from the story that I read. Meaning, the projects that you have done were done individually without much help or partnerships, and such projects for the most part will find failure. Why do people sell shit load of material about building in public, building an audience, connecting and being social? Because this matters for success. Those that teach this approach understood that success of tech startup is in people (and not only tech), inside the venture and outside (customers) and that is also why we are writing such articles, for recognition and visibility. Imagine the number of products that are out there without proper audience? Why do we spent hours and hours writing bullshit engagement posts in Twitter when in reality you could build a product instead? Because without that engagement and community, an internet project will have a hard time for recognition and success. Tech oriented founders usually have a block when it comes to social aspect of the business, we are introverts, the thought of writing pitty tweets and liking other’s comments makes as sick, and that is fine as if you have chosen a path of solo enterpreneur, you need to learn to upgrade other skills. I have failed in more that 20 startups in my life and only when I took a step and overcame my dislike of communication I’ve became successful. The key to big changes is your network, the world is this way and now that you made it to the first page of hacker news, you finally understood how to move your products. Good luck.