51–59 of 59 posts
Amazon is notorious for this kind of challenge. They offer tiny rewards for huge breakthroughs and then they own any IP submitted. The picking challenge is like this. "Each Entrant hereby grants Sponsor and its affiliates a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, and royalty-free license to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, export, license, exploit, promote, reproduce, make available, publ…
Amazon is notorious for this kind of challenge. They offer tiny rewards for huge breakthroughs and then they own any IP submitted. The picking challenge is like this. "Each Entrant hereby grants Sponsor and its affiliates a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, and royalty-free license to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, export, license, exploit, promote, reproduce, make available, publ…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> Amazon will award the winning team $500,000. >This is hugely under-paid for a worthy winner. AI startups are sold way more these days; Amazon would benefit tremendously from a novel technique in that domain. They're not paying for a startup with developed tech, established PhD researchers, and a business plan; they're paying students to do research for a year. Assuming a team of 5, $100K/year is very competitive i…
Divide that $100k/year by the number of entrants and you have the expected payout per student. I'm fairly sure there are going to be more than three entrants.
Amazon is notorious for this kind of challenge. They offer tiny rewards for huge breakthroughs and then they own any IP submitted. The picking challenge is like this. "Each Entrant hereby grants Sponsor and its affiliates a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, and royalty-free license to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, export, license, exploit, promote, reproduce, make available, publ…
This is a better than most employee deals where the employee has no rights to the developed tech. Even most contract work gives the company exclusive rights as a "work for hire".
It's more like an MIT license between the developer and Amazon rather than a proprietary license just for Amazon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From their FAQ: >Will this competition be judged like a Turing Test? >No. The goal of the Alexa Prize is to create socialbots that engage in interesting, human-like conversations, not to make them indistinguishable from a human when compared side-by-side. While the socialbots built for the Alexa Prize will be human-like in some respects, they will be very different in others, and could easily reveal themselves in a T…
Ooh, so they expect the bots to fail a Turing Test because they're super human? That makes it easier. /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ooh, so they expect the bots to fail a Turing Test because they're super human? That makes it easier. /s
No they didn't say that. A socialbot should fail a Turing test because no human could Google an answer in 1 second or know the exact temperature, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No they didn't say that. A socialbot should fail a Turing test because no human could Google an answer in 1 second or know the exact temperature, etc.
A human plus a googlebot could do it though! Have the bot scan the incoming messages, provide possible facts related instantly. Then the human writes the response. The Turing test would say Robot but it would not be entirely right.