What is Real Problem AI?

Real Problem AI is a curated directory of 100 real problems worth building an AI startup around. Each problem is scored honestly on severity, AI feasibility, market signal, and competition gap. We're for builders looking for what to build, not for ethics debates about AI.

What is the difference between Real Problem AI and AI ethics or AI risks indexes?

Real Problem AI catalogues problems AI can solve — productive, commercial opportunities for builders. AI ethics indexes catalogue problems with AI itself (bias, environmental cost, copyright, consciousness). Different intent, different audience: founders and indie hackers vs researchers and policy folks.

What should I build with AI in 2026?

Look for problems with high severity (it costs people hours, sleep, or revenue every week), high AI feasibility (LLMs, vision or voice are great at this today), strong market signal (Reddit threads + willingness to pay), and a clear competition gap (incumbents miss the same obvious thing). Real Problem AI scores 100 such problems for you on those four axes.

Where do Real Problem AI's startup ideas come from?

From three sources, scanned each cycle: 1) Reddit threads where people describe a real friction in their own words, 2) podcasts and talks of founders young builders trust (Nikhil Kamath, Aman Gupta, Ankur Warikoo, Raj Shamani, Andrej Karpathy, Greg Isenberg), and 3) a continuous 1,000+ source scan covering forums, app store reviews, regulator filings, and field interviews.

Is Real Problem AI free?

Yes. Browsing every problem, opening every score breakdown, raising your hand on a co-founder match, and the founder vault are all free. There is no paywall.

How is each problem scored?

Four axes, each 1-10, weighted: Problem Severity (30%), AI Feasibility (25%), Market Signal (25%), Competition Gap (20%). Weighted average is the Opportunity Score on each card. Only problems clearing 7.0+ make the live list.

Why do I have to read 60 pages of TOS to know if I can use this AI tool with client data?

Vendors bury data-use, training-on-your-data, and indemnity terms; SMBs sign blind.

Category: LegalTech & Compliance · Trend: LLM · Opportunity score: 8.1 / 10

What is the “Why do I have to read 60 pages of TOS to know if I can use this AI tool with client data?” problem in 2026?

Vendors bury data-use, training-on-your-data, and indemnity terms; SMBs sign blind.

Who has this problem?

Agencies, consultancies, in-house ops/security at SMBs.

Recorded source context

Dataset source note: Spent an hour combing OpenAI/Anthropic/Google enterprise terms to compare data retention. Each says it differently.

This note may summarize the referenced material rather than quote it verbatim. Source label: r/legaltech, HN "AI vendor TOS" threads..

Existing players in this space

TLDRLegal (defunct)
DoNotPay
internal Notion vendor sheets

What existing players are missing

Vertical "AI vendor risk" tool that ingests TOS/DPA/SOC2 of any SaaS and outputs a comparable scorecard, answer "can I put PHI in this?" in one click.

How Real Problem AI scores this opportunity

Aggregate score: 8.1 / 10. Four-axis rubric:

Problem severity: 7 / 10
AI feasibility today: 9 / 10
Market signal: 7 / 10
Competition gap: 8 / 10

How to build a solution: stack hints

LLM with legal jargon prompts
Standard 30-question risk framework
Vendor library cache (shared)
Slack integration for "is this safe to use?"

Why this problem is archived

Swapped out in AI-tool-builder content refresh (2026-08-26): generic vertical problem replaced by a more current, builder-relevant one.