You can always decide not to take the grant if you're accepted. At the very least, the application process will serve as a potential way to validate your idea.
Not just the idea, but a large chunk of personal data via the quizzes.
In fact, coming right after the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica "Personality test" news, I wouldn't be surprised if this just a large Honeypot/social engineering demonstration to demonstrate how the HN crowd isn't immune to the same tactics "Take this short quiz and win $XXX".
I, for one, am a believer that ideas are a dime a dozen.
I actually had my idea stolen, by a better funded company (yes it involved AI). But that made me even more of a believer.
Even though this other company had far more engineers & was able to replicate a seemingly copycat product after I refused their buyout offer, their execution sucked(which was a key reason I refused, rather die broke than work for a company that think engineers need daily beatings to be exploited properly by great “business” minds)
However, they were VC backed & their board made them shut the product down and we ended up getting all the customers they brought on in the copycat product.
The people behind AIGrant.org have solid geek creds & given their backgrounds can probably come up with more creative ideas than trying to scrape ideas off the web the offering large bounties.
What’s really awesome to witness is that here’s a coupe of geeks actually “executing” on their vision. I’m a little jealous because I should’ve stared something like this, but instead I’d rather just support AIGrant.org because building & executing even benevolent ideas take a ton of effort.
Shallow thinking. I personally believe the idea has value only in relation to how well it can be executed upon. If can be built easily, then it will be copied anyway.
I agree that it is shallow thinking, but this is some random application for the potential of a small amount of money. Some one else can validate the idea easily
