I built this project because I am fascinated by the Yarrow Stalk method—a process that is complex and full of ritual.
While most apps are just "click and get answer," my implementation requires the user to click over 100 times to complete the ritual. I originally hesitated to add AI because AI demands speed, whereas this ritual represents slowness.
After a month of observation, the results have been surprising:
1. I see users completing these 100+ clicks every day, far exceeding my expectations.
2. Users have left comments on the site specifically asking me NOT to add AI.
3. I also received strong validation for this "sacred friction" strategy from the Indie Hackers community.
This has been really encouraging. It seems people are craving the "process" more than just the result.
Personally I am attracted to the simplicity of the I Ching in that I can do a reading for someone very quickly in the field without a lot of explaining (off brand as-a-fox) so I pack an assortment of coins in my tail (ahem… backpack) though I am still looking for a second pocket I Ching so I have something other than Wilhelm.
regarding a 'second pocket' version: You absolutely have to check out Bradford Hatcher (https://hermetica.info/).
He is actually the biggest inspiration behind my development process. His work is incredibly deep, pragmatic, and distinct from the 'Christianized' tone you sometimes get with Wilhelm. He offers his massive 2-volume translation for free on his site.
I am actually considering digitizing his text as an alternative option on my site because his word-by-word matrix is just mind-blowing. Let me know if you find his style fits your 'field reading' vibe.
That PDF is amazing but I would need some way to cook it down to get interpretations quickly. I'd like to be able to function electronics-free but I do pack a phone and tablet most of the time and probably the tablet is going to be part of another kind of field demonstration I do.
I find it interesting the directions that popular works and I Ching scholarship are going: on one hand there is the market demand for a system of fortunetelling that is more positive and on the other hand that desire to unearth the real text behind that interpretation -- and notably the Chinese language has changed so much in that time that a literate Chinese reader is going to struggle with it.
The important thing for me is something that is easy to run but still has a good symbolic and mythic quality to it. I don't really know how to run tarot for instance and don't really want to learn.
That quote—'When divination succeeds, credit the universe; when it fails, forgive the interpreter'—is absolute gold. I might have to put that on the website footer!
You can skip the digital casting entirely. Just throw your coins in the field, note the numbers, and plug them in there. It instantly pulls up the interpretation without the clicking.
I had Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Gemini 3 do a Tarot reading for me given what their memory systems know about me and was underwhelmed but I that just may be Tarot, which I'm not familiar with.
More interesting was when I asked them to tell me which character I most resemble in the folowing: The Wire, The Sopranos, Better Call Saul/Breaking Bad and the game of Chess.
Both said I was Freeman in The Wire, Hesch in The Sopranos, Mike in Breaking Bad and a Knight in chess. I asked them to explain their reasoning, which was enlightening from a self-knowledge perspective.
That 'underwhelmed' feeling is exactly what I was trying to avoid!
It makes sense that the character matching worked well—AI is incredible at pattern matching your past data/context. But Divination (Tarot/I Ching) requires Synchronicity and a sense of 'randomness' that feels earned.
When an LLM generates a reading, it's just predicting the next likely token, which flattens the magic. The manual ritual (shuffling cards or clicking stalks) restores that 'weight' that AI removes.
They would likely pick the cards according to what your text looks like at the moment. You should at least ask them to use a random function. And even then they might keep picking according to the mood/content of the text.
Your statement would be accurate if Claude and Gemini had no memory system and each chat were fresh. I've been talking to Claude for two years so it knows quite a bit about me. Gemini less since they were late to add memory. Since your handle is "manfromchina1" perhaps Chinese AI don't have memory systems?
Funny you mention that—visual automation was actually in my original roadmap!
I held off on building it because I personally really cherish the manual process. The physical effort (even the clicking) helps me settle into the reading.
But I hear you. 100 clicks is a heavy lift for every session. I will likely add that 'visual auto-play' feature in a future update as a middle ground. Thanks for the feedback!
I built this project because I am fascinated by the Yarrow Stalk method—a process that is complex and full of ritual.
While most apps are just "click and get answer," my implementation requires the user to click over 100 times to complete the ritual. I originally hesitated to add AI because AI demands speed, whereas this ritual represents slowness.
After a month of observation, the results have been surprising:
1. I see users completing these 100+ clicks every day, far exceeding my expectations.
2. Users have left comments on the site specifically asking me NOT to add AI.
3. I also received strong validation for this "sacred friction" strategy from the Indie Hackers community.
This has been really encouraging. It seems people are craving the "process" more than just the result.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
reply