[axegon_]

I mean, this is hardly surprising. Who takes the most points is an accumulative score from subjective opinions(judges, audience, etc.). We didn't win the one in Amsterdam but got second: Around 50 teams began, 20 managed to deliver something, even if the winner is picked at random, that's a 5% chance, which is a very high random chance. When you toss in several senior developers(who at the time worked together in the same company and team), a dedicated frontend developer, ux designer and a few others, second place no longer sounds that impressive, but we all had fun. But to my mind, the value of hackathons is(or rather 'was', given what I said above) forcing people to push their mental abilities to the limits. If being able to write coherent text is good enough to make you the top performer, then we clearly have a problem.

[plopilop]

My point is that flashy presentations already were an issue before the rise of LLMs. The evaluation of a hackathon relies on presentations and subjective opinions rather than pure benchmark of technical assets, there is nothing new under the sun here.

You can now win with 20 skills.md files now, you could win with "it would be great to use this sexy tech" 10 years ago.