Thanks, it renders a bounding box around each word that is recognized, you can then click on the box to fill it. It's very accurate if you give it an image with visible structured text.
My PC from 2013 still has all of the components working except for the AMD GPU that got fried mainly due to a problem with my power supply.
The i7 is still going strong, brings back memories considering that at the time it was the latest generation of i7's and I was one of the first to buy it from my town according to the people working there.
What if the user who made the bounty suddenly changes his mind and decides not to reward someone who solved it and made a commit? how would you guys go on making sure that nobody does this, just curious seems like a cool idea though.
that's a great question, thank you Drunken_Founder! haven't experienced something like this. because everything is public, we think that acts as a deterrence for people to do what you described. in addition, we closely keep track of bounty activity, and so if we see that a bounty has been completed (per the spec/acceptance criteria) but not rewarded for a while, we'd reach out to the maintainers to check in. if we ever determine any foul play, it's only fair and reasonable to un-feature that org from bounty discovery on Algora and suspend their use of our app.
I hope this answers your question, thank you so much for your feedback! happy to follow-up here
I suppose that even covers a more intricate case: Somebody submits a PR, lots of discussions back and forth, lots of asks from the project, finally the submitter gives up since they don't want to keep spending time on things that start diverging from the original ask. After that, the code is there, the project eventually takes the code and integrates it themselves after little work. Or a lot of extra work.
What I'm trying to say is: The line could be blurry. The PR code quality could be crap and the project really needs to invest a lot of time to make this fit for merge, in which case they rightfully refuse the bounty. But it could be that the code quality is great and they are just trying to misuse this to make people do more than they originally wanted. And the difference between those scenarios could be hard to see for somebody external. Or even for the parties involved: The project could legitimately think that the code is not of sufficient quality while the submitter could legitimately think that they satisfied the request.
Who is the arbitter? Will people tend to accept the PR anyway (silently clean up and spend time afterwords), not wanting to risk their reputation? Or will submitters tend to accept major changes, possibly beyond the original ask, not wanting to risk their reputation? Seems a bit to me like a problem also faced by Airbnb and similar services.
As a consumer, within some definition of reason, I would be ok with taking "good enough" for $200 and then just doing another $200 for more work to improve on that, as it's own new distinct job.
At these levels it's not such a concern about getting stuck with a bad job. You just don't use that developer again and the $200 didn't wipe out your company.
I've commissioned jobs like that on freelancer sites for a lot more and pretty much did the same thing. Paid someone else to rework it or reworked it myself. I wouldn't use them again, but I did still get enough of what I needed and the job got done.
I guess it goes the other way too. Let's say I'm uncommonly generous and most other consumers will be much more demanding and try to get away with whatever they can. So the same thing as a provider. You get burned by one buyer for $200, you just don't service them any more but otherwise don't worry about the chance too much.
I see. How do you prevent them from submitting another bounty though? Should you warn them that next time you will not accept a PR? I mean, the wheel otherwise just turns one more time and you are back in the same seat.
that being said, we have only had a handful of projects using OSS bounties so far so we haven't seen everything under the sun. I acknowledge what you mean by blurry lines and how/when they might occur. but as I said before, when specs/scope/acceptance-criteria are in place, it's really hard to go wrong
This reminds me of college, I remember when when I was in my freshman year and I had many classmates who had failed Real Analysis and Linear Algebra, now while it was fine in my opinion to fail two courses that are considered hard for someone new to college, the next year I had realized they had also failed all the courses for the first year.
While I don't think they should have dropped out right away, however if I were in their place, I would have certainly dropped out but maybe that's just me.
When I was teaching, there were often a few students who rarely showed up to class, didn't turn in much homework, and when they did, it was only the first few questions. One such student asked me for a huge favor: erase his record for the semester and grade him purely on the final. I kinda stared at him for a minute, and asked him why I should do that. He said something about everybody deserving a second chance. I ultimately made a deal with him, because I wanted him to be motivated to try. He didn't show up to the final.
The thing about math and science is that you need to show up, you need to put effort in, you need to keep trying until you get the correct answer. And then you need to keep doing that. In my experience, nobody keeps trying if they think they can't do it. I have come to believe that pretty much everybody is capable of doing the calculations. But not everybody is willing to subject themselves to the grindstone.
I've seen novelists, songwriters, musicians, painters, etc say the same. The lesson I take from this is not that people need to learn when to quit, they need to learn to stop half-assing it with the expectation that things will eventually get easy.
Yours is a good point, but I can't leave this without comment. The sociological structure in which the actions are taken matter too. This student might have been fine in another educational structure (such as an apprenticeship, or however it was people learned in paleo- and neolithic times).
After dropping out a couple of times I found college was a lot easier as an adult. Not because I had grown, I don't think. But possibly because I had learned elsewhere, which made the courses easier, and definitely because I stopped caring as much.
I dropped out of college and returned as an adult as well. It wasn't until I took life seriously, and saw math as a necessary skill to achieve my goals, that I became willing to put the effort in.
