Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes.

Technologies: Model quantization (PTQ, QAT, mixed-precision INT8/INT16), edge inference, NPU deployment, PyTorch, ONNX, Transformer + CNN compression, rotation-based outlier suppression, NPU compiler/SDK toolchains.

Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aggdHWbtqGimZg5TXpllK7XcGlR...

Email: johnzakkam2509@gmail.com

AI engineer, ~3 yrs @ (NXP, OnePlus). Edge inference and model optimization for NPU deployment. Publications at ICPR, ACCV.

I built Don’t Ask Me — an AI chat app that does the opposite of what most AIs do. Instead of giving you instant answers, it helps you reason things out, reflect, and build your own conclusions.

The idea came from noticing how easy it’s become to outsource thinking to LLMs. I wanted to experiment with a tool that doesn’t take over your thinking — but guides it.

How it works:

You ask a question or describe a problem.

Instead of replying with a final answer, the AI asks you questions back.

It helps you unpack assumptions, find contradictions, and explore perspectives.

The goal isn’t to “get an answer” — it’s to think better.

Why: I wanted something between journaling, Socratic dialogue, and ChatGPT — something that builds resilience of thought instead of dependency.

Note: This is very much an MVP — just the first working version of the concept. There’s still rough edges, limited depth, and no fancy onboarding yet. I’m more interested in validating whether this type of AI interaction feels valuable at all before polishing it.

I’d genuinely like your thoughts on:

Whether the “refuse to answer” approach feels helpful or just frustrating

The UX of being challenged instead of spoon-fed

Any ideas for making the reasoning scaffolding smarter or less repetitive

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45659223

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

I'm thinking the tool might be more useful in the prep phase, before you even reach out to that first investor on your list. The goal wouldn't be to replace your process, but maybe help founders feel more confident before that first real conversation? Especially founders who don't have experienced networks to practice with initially.

Does that positioning make more sense, or do you think even that prep stage isn't worth the effort vs just jumping straight into real conversations?

Just checked out your profile, you probably had access to other experienced founders who'd been through similar fundraising experiences. Were they more difficult because of that direct experience, or just naturally more critical in their review style?

I'm thinking most early founders don't have that kind of network though, maybe that's why they're getting much softer feedback.

Did you find the VC questions predictable after getting grilled by fellow founders, or were there still surprises?

Thinking about building a tool that generates realistic VC questions based on your pitch deck - the skeptical stuff like "Your TAM math doesn't add up" or "Why can't BigCorp clone this?"

Is this actually a problem other founders face? How do you currently get honest pitch feedback before investor meetings?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44231249

Points: 3

# Comments: 8