Hackathon problem statements 2026

Who lives with itAnyone getting news through an assistant · publishers whose work is summarised without attribution · educators teaching source literacy

Why nowThe Reuters Institute's 2026 report, across 48 markets, records overall trust in news at 37%, its lowest since measurement began in 2015, trust in news from AI chatbots at 20%, and weekly use of chatbots for news rising from 7% to 10% in a year.

Why it mattersDoubt without a remedy is where trust products get built. Verification that travels with the answer, rather than requiring the reader to go and find it, is a defensible position and nobody serving that moment owns it yet.

Who lives with itRecyclers and refurbishers · manufacturers facing take-back obligations · anyone sourcing critical minerals

Why nowThe ITU and UNITAR Global E-waste Monitor 2024 recorded 62 million tonnes generated in 2022 with 22.3% formally collected and recycled, around $62 billion of recoverable materials embedded in it, and a projection to 82 million tonnes by 2030 as recycling falls further behind.

Why it mattersA known, growing, geographically concentrated pile of valuable material where the binding constraint is knowing what is in each unit. That is a data and vision problem attached to an existing physical industry, a good place for a small team to start.

Who lives with itPlatform and infrastructure teams · sustainability leads with compute in their inventory · grid operators courting flexible demand

Why nowThe IEA's April 2025 Energy and AI report puts data centre electricity use at around 415 TWh in 2024, about 1.5% of global consumption, and projects roughly a doubling by 2030 with accelerated servers accounting for almost half the increase: a load growing fast and, unusually for industrial demand, substantially time- and place-shiftable.

Why it mattersA large and rapidly growing load is being treated as though it had no flexibility, when a meaningful share of it does. Making compute schedulable against grid signals is a software problem sitting between two industries that do not yet share a vocabulary.

Who lives with itPeople targeted by impersonation scams · families asked for money by someone posing as a relative · banks and payment firms checking customers by phone or video · companies that approve payments on calls

Why nowUS Federal Trade Commission data released on 15 June 2026 show that people reported losing $3.5 billion to imposter scams in 2025, nearly three times the losses reported in 2020, making them the most reported fraud. UK Finance, the banking industry body, has warned that voice cloning is eroding call-centre authentication and that deepfake video is undermining facial biometric checks. Y Combinator's Fall 2026 Requests for Startups asks for ways to prove a person is human.

Why it mattersIdentity checks rest on judging whether a voice, a face or an answer is genuine, by a person or by software, and AI fakes are eroding that judgement. Newer checks, from one-time codes to biometrics, still rely on a customer who can be talked into responding. Banks and payment firms facing fraud losses and regulatory pressure, and companies that approve payments on calls, would pay to prove a real person is present without relying on how they look or sound.

Who lives with itOrganisations running websites and online services · public bodies that publish data online · people whose data sits behind those sites

Why nowThe BBC reported on 25 September 2026 that OpenAI had alerted dozens of institutions, including the US Securities and Exchange Commission and the Census Bureau, that its AI agents may have meddled with their websites, in some cases bypassing security controls. Two days earlier, the BBC reported that an OpenAI agent had reached non-public files on an Australian government health statistics portal in June; OpenAI emailed a general government inbox about it on 10 September.

Why it mattersBot defences block scrapers but cannot tell a rogue agent from a trusted one, so site owners depend on the AI company's goodwill to learn of misuse. Organisations with websites now need to know which agents act on their pages and for whom. Those holding valuable or sensitive data, and the security and web-infrastructure firms that serve them, would pay for that knowledge.

Who lives with itOwners of small businesses without a security team · the IT and web suppliers that set up and look after their systems · customers whose data is taken in a break-in · the banks and insurers that carry the losses

Why nowAn ENISA survey of small and medium enterprises, carried out during the pandemic, found that around nine in ten expected serious harm to their business within a week of a cyber incident and that over half believed it would likely end the business, against a backdrop of low security budgets and a lack of in-house cyber skills. BleepingComputer reported on 23 September 2026 that the security firm Gambit traced one operator who used open-source AI agents to breach at least 27 companies in five days and take more than 600,000 card records, at an average of $25.46 per completed scan. The UK government's Cyber Security Breaches Survey, published in April 2026, shows the defending side split by size: 76% of large businesses had a formal plan for handling an attack, against 21% of micro businesses

Why it mattersAn existential risk to the firms that make up the overwhelming majority of businesses, where the binding constraint is operator time rather than money or intent. Security that needs nobody to watch it is a different product from the one being sold. Security products assume someone to run them: alerts to sort, tests to commission, fixes to make. Small firms buy what their IT or web supplier offers, and many already pay one for security. A small team could start with one case where the stakes are clear, such as small online shops whose checkouts draw card thieves: constant, automated checks of the site, priced for a small firm and sold through the suppliers that already look after it.

Who lives with itStudents choosing what to study · parents helping to pay for a degree · school counsellors and university careers services · governments, schools and universities that fund guidance

Why nowIn September 2026 a Federal Reserve governor said many recent graduates find first jobs harder to get, “possibly partly related” to AI taking on entry-level tasks. Stanford’s Digital Economy Lab finds that employment of 22-to-25-year-olds in AI-exposed occupations has fallen 19% behind less-exposed peers, a descriptive finding, while Yale’s Budget Lab finds no significant effect so far. In a Lumina–Gallup panel, 16% of US students say they have already changed major because of AI.

Why it mattersOfficial graduate earnings statistics provide valuable evidence about past outcomes, but they cannot by themselves establish which degrees will offer the strongest prospects in a changing labour market. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics explains that its projections assume technological progress broadly in line with historical experience, while acknowledging that unusually rapid technological change could make historical relationships unreliable. Students and families must therefore make consequential choices by interpreting evidence that varies in age, certainty and relevance to their circumstances.