Show HN: Build with Python – a beginner course where your code draws
Build with Python is a new visual beginner course where learners write code that draws shapes.
skippable The site text is unavailable and the launch faced heavy criticism from commenters for being overpriced AI-generated content.
The article could not be read automatically; this analysis is based on the title and discussion.
summary
An author launched Build with Python, a visual beginner programming course designed to teach coding through drawing. The community responded with heavy criticism, calling the materials overpriced AI-generated content and pointing out initial bugs in the exercises. The creator defended the core concepts while acknowledging heavy AI involvement in producing the site. Alternative free visual resources like CMU CS Academy were also recommended in the thread.
key points
- The course teaches Python fundamentals through visual drawing exercises and animations.
- Commenters criticized the $49 pricing and accused the site of being AI-generated slop.
- The creator stated the curriculum grew from prior teaching experience and views the price as an experiment.
who should read it
Beginners exploring visual Python courses and developers interested in product pricing feedback.
discussion skeptical
consensus
Commenters were largely critical of the site, arguing that its quality and pricing reflect low-effort AI generation.
pushback
A minority view argued that $49 is already a very low one-time price and low willingness to pay indicates a lack of product-market fit rather than a pricing error.
I dislike AI slop too, but we shouldn't be taking pricing feedback from anyone that isn't a potential customer, unless they are saying, "I wouldn't buy this at 49$, but I would buy it at 19$", it goes straight into /dev /null.
Also fwiw, 49$ one time is on the very low end for about any product except mass produced (not common on early startups). It would only miss the mark for $/mo in B2C
If I can't get a customer to shell out 50$, I'd rather mark the idea as lacking pmf than trying it out at lower price points.
It offers a sharp startup-focused perspective on validation, arguing that sub-$50 pricing should not be lowered further to find customers.
Generated by an LLM from the article and thread. Check the sources before relying on it.