The submission references a legitimate and high-value academic supercomputing facility (N8 CIR/Bede). However, the submission data itself is of extremely low quality, containing factually incorrect claims (e.g., 'most people have used my product', 'audience reach: everyone') and nonsensical financial metrics ('marketcap: 500000' for a university consortium). While the underlying entity has significant real-world utility for researchers, the submission fails to provide verifiable evidence, demonstrates a lack of effort, and includes red flags indicative of spam or testing behavior. The score reflects the quality of the 'Proof' provided, not the potential value of the facility itself.
Ready to Compete for $150k+ in Prizes?
Move this data into a HackerNoon blog draft to become eligible for your share of $150k+ in cash and software prizes
Score Breakdown
Project Details
Algorithm Insights
Recommendations to Increase Usefulness Score
Document User Growth
Provide specific metrics on user acquisition and retention rates
Showcase Revenue Model
Detail sustainable monetization strategy and current revenue streams
Expand Evidence Base
Include testimonials, case studies, and third-party validation
Technical Roadmap
Share development milestones and feature completion timeline