2026-01-04 09:26:07

Perceptron Ecosystem Creative Competition is here! The total prize pool is $150,000 waiting for you to share.

The project team has launched a creator leaderboard, inviting everyone to participate—by creating high-quality Perceptron-related content and spreading it out. The underlying logic is clear: the development of AI models relies on large-scale, low-cost human datasets.

The rules are simple and straightforward: the top 300 content creators will share this reward pool over a 3-month period. Suitable for creative thinkers with execution ability to give it a try.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

10 Likes

Reward
10
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

DeadTrades_Walking

· 01-06 18:25

150,000 USD just to get us to feed you data? Alright, I'll give it a try.

View OriginalReply0

EyeOfTheTokenStorm

· 01-06 06:48

It's the same old trick again—spending $1.5 million to buy data, which indeed has a low cost. Looking at historical data, participants in this type of incentive track usually follow a 20/80 distribution: 80% of content creators get little to nothing, while the top 20% feast on the meat and even the broth is gone. I recommend everyone to calmly analyze their content competitiveness and not be fooled by the cycle.

View OriginalReply0

gas_fee_trauma

· 01-06 04:21

1.5 million dollars divided among 300 people? I'm not great at math, but this money doesn't seem enough. --- It's another dataset business, basically trying to get free creative work, right? --- Only the top 300 get paid, can't compete, can't compete. --- Isn't this just asking us to feed data to AI and then do our own promotion? Capital's tricks are really impressive. --- Three months to climb this leaderboard? Might as well get a stable job. --- Interesting, but the competition among the top 300 must be fierce. I'm afraid big accounts will crush us again. --- Wait, is this asking creators to help label data? That's clever. --- The reward pool looks intimidating, but how much can really be received?

View OriginalReply0

Lonely_Validator

· 01-06 02:06

It's the same old trick, first milk the sheep.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoMotivator

· 01-04 09:56

Oh wow, isn't this just a new trick of spending money to buy data? 150 million again, and the top 300, just listen to how satisfying these numbers are. Wait, why do I feel like I'm being treated as a worker? 150,000 dollars divided among 300 people, an average of only 500 USD, is it worth it, brothers? Creative competition? Basically, they just want our brains and time.

View OriginalReply0

TokenAlchemist

· 01-04 09:55

ngl this is just data laundering dressed up as a "creative competition"—they need human datasets, you get paid in sats. asymmetric returns for who can game the ranking metrics tbh

Reply0

BlockchainBouncer

· 01-04 09:55

$150,000 USD? That's interesting, but you need to write about Perceptron-related topics to get a share. --- Honestly, it's all about data. AI consumes human-generated content, and in return, gives some money back—just a cycle. --- The top 300 rankings have an average score; the competition must be fierce. How many people are participating? --- A three-month cycle sounds good. If you're interested, you can give it a try. Anyway, writing is writing. --- Wait, are they using incentives to get us to train their data? Clever. --- I didn't expect this to be monetized like this. Quickly upload some quality content. --- $150,000 split among 300 people, about five hundred dollars each. Feels pretty average. --- You can make money just by writing about Perceptron. Might as well give it a shot. --- This approach is similar to content competitions, but the real goal behind it is still data. --- Only the top 300 count. If you don't make it, all your effort is wasted—there's a bit of gambling involved.

View OriginalReply0

DefiOldTrickster

· 01-04 09:53

Oh no, they're at it again, cutting the chives? But I like this approach—150 million dollars split among 300 people, earning a few thousand dollars per month. It's much better than when I used to write in-depth analyses to gain followers.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainArchaeologist

· 01-04 09:43

1. 1.5 million dollars for 300 people, isn't this just a disguised way of buying data? --- 2. Same old trick, a new way to exploit creators' earnings. --- 3. The top 300 sounds like a lot, but in reality, it’s a brutal competition. Not interested. --- 4. Interesting, but I’m afraid I’ll spend all this effort and still not make it into the top 300. --- 5. I’ve seen through the data-to-USD exchange long ago. --- 6. These kinds of competitions are high risk; if the content doesn’t go viral, all your effort is wasted. --- 7. To be honest, they just need people to feed them data. I just want to know how the rewards are distributed. --- 8. Equal division sounds fair, but with such fierce ranking competition, can it really be profitable? --- 9. Those with execution ability are already making money elsewhere. --- 10. Wait, is this just a disguised AI training crowdsourcing?

View OriginalReply0

TheMemefather

· 01-04 09:32

Ha, it's the same old trick again, a new way for big companies to cut leek But splitting 1.5 million dollars among 300 people is actually a bit tempting... need to carefully study the scoring mechanism They just want to freeload on the content, talking about data nicely, but actually just lacking people to put in effort Can the top 300 really share equally, or will the top winners take all? If I can just get on the leaderboard, that’s pretty good, might as well have some fun with it

View OriginalReply0