I’ve been working on something I’d love to share: 47jobs (https://47jobs.com ) – a marketplace where you can hire AI agents to do tasks instead of human freelancers.
Why? I kept noticing that many tasks on Upwork/Fiverr—coding, content generation, data analysis, automation—can now be handled by AI in minutes, not hours. But there wasn’t a platform built around hiring AI directly.
So I built 47jobs:
100% AI agents doing the work (no humans in the loop).
Jobs get delivered 10x faster, at transparent prices.
You can “hire” an agent for coding, automation, research, etc.
I’d love your thoughts:
Does a pure AI-agent marketplace make sense?
What types of jobs would you want AI agents to handle first?
Any UX or trust issues you’d expect with this model?
This is an early version, and I’m here to learn from your feedback. Thanks!
Probably makes more sense than the allusions to Trump.
IMO no, as the tasks could be done cheaper and maybe with equal quality by interacting directly with a consumer LLM (eg. ChatGPT)
> Any UX or trust issues you’d expect with this model?
Currently yes: as for real freelancers, you'd expect a portfolio, with examples of projects done for clients
For instance: - Who is behind (and liable) for each agent? - How do people know it and/or each of the agents are not just a data harvesting operation? - What data privacy guarantees are there for site/agent. - Is site actually anything like a multi-vendor fair market?
> Does a pure AI-agent marketplace make sense?
EDIT: to clarify: the value add from services that "connect" customers to suppliers (like uber, fiverr, whatever) is nominally there in that a shared marketplace can be used to extend protections to both sides of a transaction while making networking easier.
Agents neither require protections, nor do they really need networking; they're a commodity.
> What types of jobs would you want AI agents to handle first?
EDIT: to be more concrete; what capabilities are the agents on offer exposing?
> Any UX or trust issues you’d expect with this model?
I am curious though -- why _47_ jobs?
I agree. Agents today are basically light wrappers around models, which are known quantities, and so few in number that one can rattle off their names. A marketplace might make sense if there was an abundance of specialized agents with significant performance and price variation among tasks, and you would provide value through task-verified ratings and price discovery. But this is not the case. Models are static, and already benchmarked, so what do you bring to the table? You need to think hard about your value proposition; people are asking you why they would not simply use Claude or ChatGPT.
Just look at the complicated workflows people are making in comfyui for image/video generation. Making these workflows takes a lot of work and knowledge about the latest models, so I can see the use-case for monetizing these kind of multi-step, multi-model workflows.
Although I think the examples on the web site right now are a bit too simple, these look like things you could achieve with out-of-the-box solutions.
b. bug report: 1st visit to the site, i choose the coding persona, then the back button, i get a "resubmit form" alert
c. I have a detailed coding assignment prompt and a github link. What happens if the task is only 80% complete? How many iterations before one side cancels this?
c ) you get completed work , if no completed work the the issue is escalated
Was it built by one of the agents? Because parent was right.
It does, however who is your target market?
> Any UX or trust issues you’d expect with this model?
Yes, why I should trust those agents? How do they work? GCP have/planning (I'm sure Azure and AWS also working on something similar) to have agent marketplace, you should think about how you would integrate yourself there so you get big name recognizing your agents.
incase it happens its an indicator its a good market