Building a security risk map site, would you ever pay for something like this?
<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>I’ve been building a <a href="https://atlasmap.vercel.app/">map-based web</a> that shows country-level risk scores.</p> <p>Right now it uses my own scoring framework, based on government advisories, info from credible institutions, and analysis of recent news coverage.<br/> The current version is basically focused on geopolitical/security risk, with country pages, source-backed articles, and a ranking/map view.</p> <p>What I’m trying to figure out now is the <strong>actual product direction.</strong><br/> I’m considering expanding it beyond just conflict/security stuff and adding things like:<br/> natural disaster risk + trade / tariff / sanctions-related risk + economic instability + business travel / mobility risk</p> <p>The main question is: <strong>does this actually sound useful to anyone in a way that people would pay for?</strong><br/> Not asking for fake encouragement, I’m genuinely trying to understand whether this feels like:</p> <ol> <li>an interesting but mostly “look at it once” project, or</li> <li>something that could become a real tool for teams / travelers / businesses</li> </ol> <p><strong>Would especially love feedback on:</strong><br/> - what would make it genuinely useful instead of just another info site<br/> - what kind of feature would make you pay for it, if any</p> <p>Still figuring out whether this should stay a public map/news product or become something more practical.</p> </div><!-- SC_ON -->   submitted by   <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/cooperai"> /u/cooperai </a>   to   <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/nocode/"> r/nocode </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/nocode/comments/1sdmmic/building_a_security_risk_map_site_would_you_ever/">[link]</a></span>   <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/nocode/comments/1sdmmic/building_a_security_risk_map_site_would_you_ever/">[留言]</a></span>
为什么值得关注
能改变理解方式,而不只是重复常识;符合当前抓取需求;它提供了新的理解或解释,而不只是表面观点
来源:reddit,领域:news,保留分:0.64
讨论总结
讨论量较低,暂无明显增量信息。